Sadly, this is not a joke - it's the truth. All large-scale projects see "environmental concerns" just as a nuisance they have to put up with it. Something that will eventually have to yield, because, well, you just can't stop "development", can you?
Why aren't existing trees part of "beautification drives"? Why does beautification always mean pouring massive amounts of concrete on the ground and building railings and felling of trees?
On that note, I would recommend 'Small is Beautiful: Economic as if People Mattered' by E.F. Schumacher as compulsory reading to everyone studying the pseudo-science of economics. And to everyone who thinks growth is good - perpetually.
nice book it is. In developing countries specially, this idea of "small is beautiful" can really be applied. Though I wonder how much government involvement will actually be there to maintain such economy. Too much of government involvement isn't good I think.
ReplyDelete@rohitj: Why does that require massive government involvement? It just requires proper government regulation and not being blinded by "growth is good" and simply looking at "economic indicators"
ReplyDeleteWell, in this concept government has to control the growth of industries, isn't it? Which basically means putting a cap on an industries growth.(Remember the pre-MRTP situation in India?) Or it means favoring local businesses by changing tax schemes or subsidies of some sort. As I am writing this comment, I think proper tax slabs can achieve that easily. (Of course, subsidies are not healthy) And it wouldn't require much government involvement. May be I need to think about it again.
ReplyDelete