๐”– Bobbio Scriptorium
โœฆ   LIBER   โœฆ

Book review: Democracy and Authoritarianism in South Asia by A. Jalal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

โœ Scribed by Asad Sayeed


Book ID
101287806
Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
1998
Tongue
English
Weight
70 KB
Volume
10
Category
Article
ISSN
0954-1748

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

โœฆ Synopsis


Liberal Capitalism into a working synthesis which they term `conservative-liberal-socialism'. Using this working synthesis the second part of the book illustrates, in the context of forest use in particular, how resources can be equitably and sustainably used in the future.

The case which the authors make for conservative-liberal-socialism is compelling and is based on extensive documentary evidence as well as ยฎrst-hand experience of the environmental movement in India. The authors argue that local communities, with some technical support and supervision for their surrounding environment and illustrate how development, ecological security and equity can be combined in a system of decentralized resource management. In making their case the authors manage to transcend many of the cliches which have become characteristic of environmental ideologies and which have contributed to a stagnation in the vision of the future which they oer. For example, the authors argue that a distinction between rural communities and the elite minority does not capture the complexity of the socioeconomic structure, that both scientiยฎc knowledge and indigenous knowledge have important roles to play, and that whilst population growth is a problem, it is one that has economic and political solutions. Further, the authors recognize the need for a transfer of power and management over resources, and directly confront the issue of the conยฏict of interests which this will inevitably bring.

It is in the analysis and insight which the authors provide into the conยฏicts of interests which may arise that the book has some shortcomings. The authors suggest that the socio-ecological categories into which they group the population are an improvement on the conventional formulations based on interest groups and class. This claim has not been adequately demonstrated, for whilst the categories certainly oer a better description of how natural resources are used by dierent social groups, they do not provide a sucient explanation for the operation of political and economic power. This poses a problem in conceptualizing how the vision of decentralized resource management outlined can be turned into reality. For example: rural social activists, many of who are omnivores, work among ecosystem people and have directed a polemic against state management of forests. How can we interpret their ideological beliefs, the nature of their political power, and their economic role in the proposed system of decentralized resource use? When the authors introduce their categories at the beginning of the book they make clear that `like all attempts to classify and interpret complex phenomena, this one too will run into the inevitable boundary problems' (p. 4). The problem however is not one of ยฎnding categories ยฏexible enough to incorporate these boundary problems, but of understanding how and why these boundaries change. Incorporating interest group and class analysis more thoroughly into the new theoretical framework oered could provide such an understanding.


๐Ÿ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES