The Political Ecology of Geographical Information in India

Graham Dudley
Department of Geography

University of Waterloo

E-mail: gdudley@inforamp.net

The primary goal of this paper is to examine whether geographical information technologies contribute to the domination and marginalization of both natural environments and human populations. Of concern are what Winner (1986 p. 22) calls "inherently political technologies" which are human-made systems that appear to require or to be strongly compatible with particular kinds of political relationships. Whether maps and other geographical information technologies can be characterized in such a way is considered.

In this paper it is hypothesized that geographical information collected and controlled by the state or other authority, in addition to, or in place of, the threat of military or other forceful response, often forms a primary means by which control over the access to and the utilization of particular land resources and territory is established and maintained. The political power inherent in this information is considerable. Understanding how geographical information is utilized is essential to gaining an understanding of how a state functions with respect to its land resources and to the populace that has a vested interest in these resources.

In order to demonstrate the socio-political power in geographical information technologies, this paper draws upon an example relating to India. There are a number of justifications for the selection of this geographic context. First, the introduction and use of surveying and mapping, essentially European technologies which had minimal cultural precedence in south Asia, played a significant role in the domination of India and its natural resources by imperial powers. Often, throughout the imperial period, the stated purpose of the introduction of a particular geographical information technology was for the betterment of the population. This could be through fairer land revenue assessment, better resource management, alleviation of poverty, or more efficient administration. Yet, these objectives were rarely achieved. Land revenue assessment remained unfair, resources continued to be poorly managed, poverty continued unabated, and administration remained inefficient.

Second, because of intense population pressures on the natural environment in contemporary India, the introduction of better geographic information handling capabilities is often promoted strongly as an important component in any sustainable development strategy. However, in promoting such technologically based approaches, the underlying assumptions and political biases of information technologies are rarely considered. These inherent assumptions and biases may be, in fact, incompatible with many objectives of sustainable development and may be influenced strongly by the imperial legacy of the land information technologies that have preceded them.

Various areas of knowledge can be drawn upon to support this assertion. These include recent work in political ecology and the history of cartography. Together, elements from these areas provide the perspective from which historical and contemporary aspects of the introduction of geographical information technologies in India can be examined. From political ecology comes the notion that ecological impacts, and human responses to these impacts, are, in a large part, influenced and defined by political factors. In India, historically, one of the most important of these factors has been British imperialism. One of the important means by which imperial ambitions were facilitated was the development and use of various forms of geographical information technologies. Recent work in the history of cartography, most notably that of Brian Harley (1988; 1989; 1990), has indicated that European surveying and map-making activities played an important role in achieving and maintaining control over foreign territory. Harley's work can be extended to provide a framework for assessing contemporary developments in geographical information technologies, most notably geographical information systems and remote sensing, and the way in which they are employed in an area such as India.

One example from contemporary India which can be considered with respect to the socio-political aspects of geographical information concerns the national programme of wasteland mapping and rehabilitation. The British introduced a notion of wastelands which was a category describing lands which did not yield revenue to the imperial administration (Shiva 1989, p. 85). These lands were further characterised as being either cultivable or non-cultivable, the difference being that the former were judged to have the potential for cultivation whereas the latter were not (e.g., bare rock, glaciers). No account was taken in the classification of suitability for cultivation (or other activity) nor was consideration given to ecological factors such as biological productivity. Here the political ecology of contemporary approach to wastelands is examined with particular emphasis upon the role of advanced geographical information technologies in their treatment. Specifically, the questions of whether recent wasteland mapping programmes are substantially different in focus from imperial surveying and mapping activities in terms of objectives, methods, and expected outcomes are examined.

In 1985, then Prime Minister of India, Rajiv Gandhi, established a national program with the object of bringing five million hectares of land every year under fuelwood and fodder plantations (NRSA 1986, p. 9). A significant component of this program was extensive mapping of the wastelands.

The first national wasteland mapping project undertaken by the National Remote Sensing Agency (NRSA) involved a national mapping project at the scale of 1:1 million. Using Landsat Multispectral Scanner (MSS) imagery from 1980-82 (80 metre spatial resolution), a standard classification scheme for the entire country was developed and area estimates of each wasteland category were made at both the state and the national levels. Using information from this initial mapping, 146 districts in the country deemed to be critically affected by wastelands were prioritized and mapping was carried out at the scale of 1:50,000 (NRSA 1991, pp. 25-27). The 1:50,000 scale wasteland maps produced by the National Remote Sensing Agency were prepared by visual interpretation of enlarged Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) False Colour Composite (FCC) imagery (1986-87 period - 30 metre resolution) generated from Bands 2, 3, and 4 (green, red, and near infra-red portions of the spectrum) (NRSA 1991, p. 3). Additional districts were later mapped using Indian Remote Sensing (IRS) satellite data (LISS-II - 36.5 metre resolution) instead of Landsat data. There is no other country which has undertaken such an effort to catalogue the extent of land degradation.

One definition of wastelands used by the National Remote Sensing Agency is:

...degraded land which can be brought under vegetative cover with reasonable effort, and which is currently under-utilised and land which is deteriorating for lack of appropriate water and soil management or on account of natural causes. Wastelands can result from inherent/imposed disabilities such as by location, environment, chemical and physical properties of the soil or financial or management constraints. (NRSA 1991, p. 2)

As with imperial definitions of wasteland, classification is generally in terms of agricultural activity. The two-level classification system used by the National Remote Sensing Agency for their wasteland maps is shown in Table 1. An important characteristic of the wasteland categorization utilized by the NRSA is that it has been standardized for the entire country. This was viewed as desirable as it would allow for national estimates of wastelands to be consistent. However, considering the incredible biodiversity of India (see, for example, Gadgil 1993), it is questionable whether such generalized categorizations will be useful for actual rehabilitation efforts on the ground, which is stated as the raison d'et'tre of the 1:50,000 scale wasteland maps.

TABLE 1. Wasteland Categories

LEVEL I

1. Culturable Wastes

LEVEL II

1.1. Gullied and/or ravinous land

1.2. Undulating plain with or without scrub

1.3. Surface water logged and marsh

1.4. Salt affected land

1.5. Shifting cultivation area

1.6. Degraded forest land

1.7. Degraded pastures/grazing land

1.8. Degraded non-forest plantation land

1.9. Strip lands

1.10 Sands

1.11. Mining/industrial wastelands

LEVEL I

2. Unculturable Wastes

LEVEL II

2.1. Barren rocky/stony wastes/sheet rock area

2.2. Steep sloping area

2.3. Snow covered and/or glacial area

Source: National Remote Sensing Agency 1986, p. 14

In the national wasteland mapping project, there is no assessment of capability nor suitability for agriculture or any other activity. This classification system is essentially a descriptive one with respect to land cover. Without consideration of the capability (whether an activity can be supported in a given location) or suitability (whether an activity should be done), it is unlikely that rehabilitation efforts based upon this information will be appropriate to local ecological conditions.

As elsewhere in the world, the explanations of environmental degradation in India are often contested. For example, many Indian government and forestry officials view deforestation as largely the result of increasing population pressures whereas Indian environmentalists and social activists contend that deforestation stems from increasing commercialization of Indian forestry (Haeuber 1993, p. 486). The wastelands mapping project by NRSA is an expert-driven, top-down initiative with very little local involvement. Such a structure does not readily admit a diversity of perceptions as to what constitutes degradation. As Blaikie and Brookfield (1987, p. 16) have argued,

There are competing social definitions of land degradation, and therefore the challenge of moving away from a single "scientific" definition and measurement must be taken up. This means we must put the land manager 'centre stage' in the explanation, and learn from the land managers' perceptions of their problems.

The wastelands mapping programme of the National Remote Sensing Agency does not do this. It also does not take into account local patterns of land use, nor the role of common lands for meeting the subsistence needs of the poor. As Indian ecologist Vandana Shiva (1989, p. 83) comments:

Recovering five million hectares of the commons in India each year could signal the end of rural poverty and a reversal of the ecological collapse of critical life-support systems like soil, water and vegetation. Yet the wasteland development programme, far from being a recovery of the commons project, will in fact, privatise the commons, accentuate rural poverty and increase ecological instability. In one stroke it will rob the poor of their remaining common resources, the only survival base to which they have access. The usurpation of the commons which began with the British will reach its final limit with the wasteland development programme as is.

Most geographical information technologies, by their nature, are biased in favour of the already powerful in society and are not readily conducive to the agendas of participatory local development or democratic governance, for instance, which are often cited as preconditions for sustainable and equitable development. This is particularly true of the new digital technologies, contrary to the views of many geographic information system and remote sensing practitioners. It seems certain that geographical information technologies will play a significant role in India's efforts towards sustainable development (as well as in other locales). The ways in which these technologies will be employed still remain uncertain.

Continuation down the present path of technological development will most likely help perpetuate the present socio-economic and political inequities which exist. The beneficial (however defined) use of these technologies will require much closer attention to the issues raised here than has previously be given.

References

Blaikie, P., and Brookfield, H., 1987, Defining and Debating the Problem. In Land Degradation and Society. Blaikie, P., Brookfield, H., eds. (London: Methuen) 1-27.

Gadgil, Madhav, 1993, Biodiversity and India's Degraded Lands. Ambio, 22, 167-172.

Haeuber, Richard, 1993, Development and Deforestation: Indian Forestry in Perspective. The Journal of Developing Areas, 27, 485-514.

Harley, J. B., 1988, Maps, Knowledge, and Power. In The Iconography of Landscape: Essays on the Symbolic Representation, Design and Use of Past Environments. Cosgrove, Denis, Daniels, Stephen, eds. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) 277-312.

Harley, J. B., 1989, Deconstructing the Map. Cartographica, 26, 1-20.

Harley, J. B., 1990, Cartography, Ethics and Social Theory. Cartographica, 27, 1-23.

National Remote Sensing Agency (NRSA), 1986, Manual of Procedure for Wastelands Mapping Using Remote Sensing Techniques. (Hyderabad, India: National Remote Sensing Agency, Department of Space).

National Remote Sensing Agency (NRSA), 1991, Guidelines to Use Wasteland Maps. (Hyderabad, India: National Remote Sensing Agency, Department of Space).

Shiva, Vandana, 1989, Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development (London: Zed Books).

Winner, Langdon, 1986, The Whale and the Reactor: A Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).