SUMMARY

Ecology teaching in India and the developing world has to be drastically reoriented to keep in tune with the developments in ecological paradigms in a biophysical sense, and emerging paradigms towards a more holistic ecology that link-up ecological with social processes. The early beginnings made in India towards ecological holism, in the early 1970s, yet remains to be fully realized in our ecological curricula. Moving towards such an integrative approach in biology, should form the basis for developing a more meaningful ecological curriculum relevant to the region; such an approach will effectively integrate the rich socio-cultural traditions of the society in natural resource management, with concerns for economic development of the predominantly rural communities of the developing world, leading to a better quality of life for them. In doing this traditional ecological knowledge (TDK) developed both in space (sub-specific, species, ecosystem and landscape complexities), and time (to cope up with uncertainties in their immediate environment) will be an important connecting link. The paper discusses these issues, using appropriate examples from the Indian context.

 

Key words: ecological holism; traditional ecological knowledge; human dimensions of ecology; landscape ecology; sustainable development

Introduction

Ecology teaching in biological sciences in our University system has to undergo very drastic changes, if it has to keep pace with developments in ecological paradigms in a biophysical sense, and emerging paradigms towards a holistic ecology that link-up ecological with social processes, an area which is relevant to India and the developing world. The beginning towards holism in Indian ecology was made in the early 1970s, with the work on shifting agriculture linked land use systems and their management in north-eastern hill regions of India (Ramakrishnan, 1992a).

Unfortunately, much of our curricula are driven by traditional ecological paradigms developed in the western world starting with the classical work of Clements (1916) and subsequently elaborated through temperate world natural ecosystem analysis (Odum, 1971). Biophysical ecology itself has undergone distinct shifts in paradigm, during the last few decades, from a predator/consumer controlled ecosystem dynamics to one where disturbance is a key element integrated into ecosystem functioning. With emerging interest in the human dimensions of ecology, it is important that we, in the developing world, capitalize upon the initial advantage that we have had in linking up natural with social sciences. This is critical for us, since our natural ecosystems have been largely degraded, and what we have been left with are confined largely to upland areas where highly traditional societies live. Much of what we have in the more populated fertile plains of a country like India are natural forest ecosystems degraded into poorly managed grasslands or vast landscapes of human-managed agroecosystems. It is in this context the following discussions become relevant.

 

Traditional rural societies as part of ecosystem functions

If we look at a country like India, only about 25% of the humans live in urban situations. The remaining 75% are 'traditional' agriculture driven rural communities in the plains or more 'traditional' upland societies practicing traditional multi-species complex agroecosystems closely linked with the forest resources on which they depend for a variety of their needs (Ramakrishnan, 1992a, 1994, 1999). It is important to realize that all traditional societies have some common characteristics: (I) ecosystem and social systems function as a unified whole, (ii) with a two-way interaction between these two, traditional societies emphasize upon ecological prudence to cope up with uncertainties in the environment, and (iii) therefore, the emphasis is on diversification of their landscape rather than upon homogenization. One of the chief drivers of land use decisions for these rural societies often are a number of codified and not so often codified institutional arrangements, for sustainable use of their natural resources; biodiversity centred traditional ecological knowledge (TDK) often determine land use decisions. Therefore, socio-economic and socio-cultural dimensions have to be viewed as closely linked to ecological issues, institutions forming the connecting link.

Firstly, therefore, ecology teaching has to lay more emphasis on agroecosystem structure and functioning to illustrate many of the ecological principles; there are a few hundred typologies of traditional agroecosystems ranging between casually managed swidden agriculture on the one extreme, a variety of other agroforestry systems that are moderately managed, and the more intensely managed high energy input modern agriculture (Ramakrishnan, 1992a; Ramakrishnan et. al., 1998, 2000). Secondly, natural forest ecosystem analysis in our teaching curricula should emphasize upon our own forest ecosystems linked to a variety of agroecosystem types, as part of mountain landscape analysis (Ramakrishnan, 1992a,b; Ramakrishnan et. al., 1996a,b).

 

Linking ecological with social processes through TDK

Ethnobiology started off being descriptive, as an appendage to classical taxonomy and systematic biology essentially listing species collected from the wild and used by traditional societies. It is only in recent times that the scientists interested in ethnobiology have started looking at the dynamics of the relationships existing between individual species and populations, ecosystems and landscapes (Fig. 1). Further, it is only recently that the interest in TEK has moved in the direction of understanding the interconnections that often exist between ecological and social processes, determining the functional attributes of ecosystems/landscapes. The way in which traditional societies, (a) perceive and manipulate biodiversity around them in the landscape, both in space and time, to ensure ecosystem stability and resilience, and (b) have evolved sound eco-technologies to deal with land use management issues such as soil fertility and soil water regimes, to cite two examples, are now being seen as critical for managing natural resources sustainably, with peoples' participation, more importantly in the context of 'global change' (Ramakrishnan et. al., 1996a, b). Many of these ecological knowledge of traditional societies is often embedded in their belief system (Ramakrishnan et. al., 1998). At the rate at which 'global change' is occurring, a major proportion of all species on earth will be lost over the next century, and yet it is those species that we need to build a secure future. Therefore, the renewed interest in ethnobiology in its broadest sense. There is also an increasing realization that in many ecological/social situations, TDK should be an integral part of a holistic and cost-effective approach to sustainable development.

The important point in all this effort is to build up linkages between system level research with process level understanding, with a view to evolve strategies for better management of natural resources. The schematic diagram (Fig. 2) developed for soil fertility management through internal strengthening of soil biological processes, rather than depending upon external energy subsidies alone, as part of the Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility programme (TSBF) is an effective approach to teach ecology, with adequate concerns for the human dimensions of the subject. Whilst doing this, it is equally important to look at the interconnections that exist between ecological and social systems, using traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) as the connecting link for sustainable management of natural resources with livelihood concerns of societies involved (Fig. 3).

 

Landscape ecology: the appropriate basis for linking ecological with social processes

A landscape unit in the a developing country context such as India has two important components - (a) human-managed agroecosystems, plantation forests, etc. and (b) natural ecosystems, such as forests, mangroves, water bodies, etc. If sustainable livelihood/development of the predominantly rural societies in a developing country context is to be the basis for teaching ecology, as it should be, then, a set of interconnected ecosystem types in a landscape has to be the basic unit for any meaningful ecological or socio-economic analysis and evaluation.

Agroecosystems

Agriculture, forestry and fisheries are traditional activities in the rural environment of the Asian tropics. Forest conversion has been accelerated by activities associated with rapid industrialization. Much conversion is due primarily to the extraction of timber for industrial uses, and some to meet the needs of the rural poor, for food, fodder, and firewood. The result is extensive degraded systems (Ramakrishnan et.al., 1994b), which now represents over 1/3^rd of the irrigated agricultural land, about 1/2 of the rain-fed agricultural land, and almost 3/4 of the pastoral land.

Inspite of this scenario, agriculture is an important economic activity for a large population of the developing tropics. However, a large proportion of the farming community still operate at low levels of productivity and management. Even where 'green revolution' has contributed towards increased food production and has lead to national level self-sufficiency as in India, it still is confined to a small section of the society (Ramakrishnan, 1993; Ramakrishnan,1999) and has had its negative environmental impacts as well. These negative impacts are both biophysical, such as organic carbon depletion, increased soil salinity, drastic changes in soil water regimes, chemical pollution due to fertilizer and pesticidal applications, and social disruptions leading to marginalization of a large segment of the farming communities due to limited access to energy inputs that sustain modern agriculture.

Thus, on the one hand we have a monoculture production system, that is market driven, using genetically engineered uniformity in organisms of a few crop species that could be manipulated under ecological conditions that maximizes output. On the other hand, are over 1.4 billion people (Wolf, 1986) in the developing world are involved in a whole variety of low input multi-species complex agroecosystems, operating under difficult ecological and/or socio-economic circumstances (Fig. 4). Essentially based on traditional technologies developed on the basis of empirical knowledge accumulated over a long period of time, the traditional societies involved have learnt to use crop and associated biodiversity in a variety of ways to strengthen the internal processes that determine stability and resilience of these systems. The emphasis here is not so much on high production but more towards coping with uncertainties in the environment (system resilience), under not so favourable ecological situations in which they operate.

With ‘global change’, such as large-scale deforestation for meeting industrial needs, over-exploitation of land for agriculture by ever increasing population, the associated decline in biodiversity, soil erosion and nutrient losses, and site desertification on a scale that is unprecedented, impacting upon these systems in a variety of different ways affecting ecosystem complexity (Sala et. al., 1999), two questions become critical. How do we reconcile the productivity concerns with agricultural system resilience? How do we handle our concern for sustainable agriculture in the context of 'global change' (climate change, biodiversity depletion, biological invasion by exotic species, land degradation and desertification)? These are the kind of concerns with which we in India are trying to grapple, on the basis of many initiatives (Ramakrishnan et. al., 1996b).

 

Forest ecosystems

Tropical forests, an important natural resource used traditionally on a sustainable basis by the local communities, are currently under serious threat due to over-exploitation. Ironically, deforestation carried out in the name of 'development' has led to a steady erosion of the very life support base of the vast majority of the people in the tropics, causing social disruption. Conservation and management represent two sides of the same coin and need to be tackled through a broadly-based interdisciplinary approach with interacting components; sylvicultural, ecological, social and economic (Ramakrishnan, 1992b). Only such a strategy would ensure people's participation and ecologically sustainable management of this valuable resource.

Ecological inputs are important for determining management decisions. Knowledge from areas such as tree biology and architecture, patch dynamics, ecophysiology of developing forest communities, reproductive biology and nutrient cycling processes could all be integrated into the current management process and future management options. In such an integrated approach to management, the socio-economic and socio-cultural issues and TDK coming from the local communities need to be reconciled. This is seen from our north-east Indian case study, where the sustainability criterion was the touchstone for designing management strategies (Ramakrishnan, 1992a). Mobilizing the local community in model studies on forest restoration and catchment protection, rainwater harvesting and its distribution, and in a variety of related eco-developmental work arising out of watershed management (e.g. agriculture, agroforestry, horticulture, animal husbandry, bamboo plantation and bamboo-based artisanal activities) have been done in the Himalayan and sub-Himalayan tracts of India by the present author and his colleagues. Local involvement was made possible on the basis of a value system that they understand and appreciate, through direct interaction with villagers, through NGOs or through organized village-level societies.

Landscape Mosaic

Realizing that biodiversity does contribute in a variety of ways to ecosystem functions (Gliessman, 1990; Ramakrishnan, 1992a) and that agroecosystems do harbour a great deal of biodiversity valuable for human welfare (Pimental et. al., 1992), it is reasonable that we go in for a mosaic of natural ecosystems coexisting with a wide variety of agroecosystem models derived through all the three pathways. Such a highly diversified landscape unit is likely to have a wide range of ecological niches conducive to enhancing biodiversity and at the same time ensure sustainability of the managed landscape itself; what we have now represents the other extreme with miles and miles of ecologically non-sustainable human-altered agricultural mono-cropping systems.

Traditionally, many societies have viewed their land use activity in a given landscape as part of an integrated land use management, wherein human managed ecosystems are closely linked to a variety of natural systems (Ramakrishnan, 1992a; Ramakrishnan et. al., 1998, 2000). The diversity of cropping and resource systems that form part of the landscape serves not only as a major means of protecting ecological integrity at the landscape level, but also acts as the knowledge and resource base that makes adaptively possible; traditional societies adapt their land use practices both in space and time to cope up with uncertainties in the environment and/or to capture market opportunities (Ramakrishnan, 1992a, 1999; Brookfield and Padoch, 1994). Such an adaptability is feasible from the already conserved diversity readily available at the landscape level.

The concept of 'sacred groves' (patches of forests strictly protected and conserved for religious or cultural reasons), as typical examples of protected ecosystems were often part of each village unit (Ramakrishnan, 1992a; Ramakrishnan et. al., 1998), though this value system has been on the decline under the onslaught from the so called 'modernisation' phenomena. Indeed, many traditional societies even had large sacred landscape units: eg., the sacred Ganga river mega-watershed in northern India or the 'Demajong' landscape covering many altitudinal zones ranging from the alpine to the sub-tropical rain forest zone in eastern Himalayan Sikkim, and many sacred mountains in the tropical world(Messerli and Ives, 1997). In these landscape systems, traditional societies had their own way of making subtle distinctions between permissible small-scale perturbations and the tabooed large-scale perturbations, about which modern ecologists have started paying attention only during the last few decades (Ramakrishnan et. al. 1998). Indeed, the more recently evolved 'biosphere reserve' concept of UNESCO, is indeed a rediscovery of the 'sacred landscape' concept of many traditional societies dating back to antiquity, is an attempt towards an integrated management strategy to conserve natural resources for sustainable use, with inter-generational equity concerns.

Landscape management demands a variety of responses that are location-specific, in terms of land use activities linked with natural resource management such as, hydrology regime, sustainable soil fertility, biodiversity and biomass production. Whilst dealing with sustainable rural development in the Asian tropics under monsoonic climate, we have shown that water could be a powerful triggering agent for sustainable land use development (Ramakrishnan et. al., 1994a,b). Linking up traditional ecological knowledge and technologies in rain water harvesting and adapting them to meet with contemporary needs is an approach that was taken in the arid regions of Rajasthan in India, by an NGO organization 'Tarun Bharat Sangh', for reviving half a dozen of the already dried up rivers and thus developing the water resource base of this arid zone, through a revival of traditional dug out water harvesting tanks locally called 'Johads' (Singh, 1999). Through a series of over 2500 tanks and small engineering structures erected for soil conservation and increasing rain water seepage into the soil, this NGO organization has been able to regenerate a few thousand square kilometers of land area with good forest cover, increase agricultural production through redeveloped agroecosystems, improve wildlife, and provide a better quality of life to hundreds of villages. The basic tenet which was the driving force in this effort was small-scale operations that are location-specific, through community participation ensured through a variety of institutional arrangements arrived through a participatory mode. In this situation and in all other similar landscape situations, maintenance of the overall sustainability of the systems demand a loosely coupled management (Ehrenfeld, 1991), specifically designed to accommodate large variability in ecosystem complexity within a landscape mosaic.

 

How do we connect biodiversity, TDK and landscape dynamics with sustainable development?

I shall illustrate the interconnections using just one example. In the Central Himalayan region, are a set of culturally valued Quercus species, around which the local communities have many, folk stories, dance, music and poetry, since antiquity. This set of socially selected species are shown to be ecologically significant keystone species, which trigger a whole variety of soil biological processes, which in turn contribute to a rich associated biodiversity in the ecosystem (Fig. 5). Further, the organic litter from them and the associated biodiversity that they support is the key for sustainable mountain agriculture, also acting as a trigger for ecosystem rehabilitation with community participation. We have also shown that water, through cheap rain water harvesting tanks, acts as a trigger for the regeneration of this species (Ramakrishnan, 1992a; Ramakrishnan et. al., 2000), and these species in turn themselves contribute towards improved soil water balance!

In the ultimate analysis, social processes involved in developing TDK at all scalar dimensions, both in space and time should be reconciled with adaptation of traditional eco-technologies such as water harvesting, show an interesting interconnection between biodiversity, land use dynamics and sustainable natural resource management with concerns for societal welfare.

 

How do we operationalize ecological holism in teaching ?

Linkages between natural sciences and social sciences is a process of constant interaction, and involves moving back and forth between the ecological and social boxes (Fig. 4). One could move from a plot level analysis of natural and human-managed ecosystems, through a ecosystem level analysis of the ecological and social processes involved, moving on to an understanding of the sustainability considerations at the landscape level. Such a linkage analysis between natural and social sciences alone will be meaningful towards designing short-term strategies for sustainable livelihood of rural communities of the developing world, and for making long-term plans for sustainable regional development.

References

 

1. Brookfield, H. & Padoch, C. 1994. Appreciating biodiversity: A look at the dynamism and diversity of

   indigenous farming practices. Environment, 36: 6 - 11, 37 - 45.

    

2. Clements, F.E. 1916. Plant Succession Analysis of the Development of Vegetation. Publ. Carnegie Inst., Washington, 242: 1-512 (reprinted Edition, 1928. Plant Succession and Indicators. Wilson, New York)

    

3. Ehrenfeld, D. 1991. The management of biodiversity: A conservation paradox. In: F.H Bormann and S.R. Kellert (Eds.) Ecology, Economics, Ethics: The Broken Circle. pp. 26-39. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven.

    

4. Gliessman, S.R. 1990. Agroecology: Researching the Ecological Basis of Sustainable Agriculture. Ecol. Studies 78, Springer-Verlag, New York. 380 pp.

    

5. Odum, E.P. 1971. Fundamentals of Ecology. W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelhia. 574pp.

    

6. Messerli, B. and Ives, J.D. 1997. Mountains of the World. Parthenon Publ., Carnforth, Lancs., U.K. 495

   pp.

    

7. Pimental, D.A., Stachow, U., Takacs, D.A., Brubaker, H.W., Dumas, A.R., Meaney, J.J., ONeil, J.A.S., Onsi, D.E. and Corzilius, D.B. 1992. Conserving biodiversity in agricultural and forestry systems. Bioscience, 42: 354-364.

    

8. Ramakrishnan, P.S. 1992a. Shifting Agriculture and Sustainable Development: An Interdisciplinary Study from North-Eastern India. UNESCO-MAB Series, Paris, Parthenon Publ., Carnforth, Lancs. U.K. 424 pp. (republished by Oxford University Press, New Delhi 1993).

    

9. Ramakrishnan, P.S. 1992b. Tropical forests: Exploitation, conservation and management. Impact of Science on Society, 42: 149-162.