Monsoon blues

All the bluff and bluster of services driven, $1 trillion economy comes apart, almost minute by minute, as the monsoon gets delayed.

Unlike the G 7 countries, where a miniscule per cent of people survive on the farm, in India and China more than one thirds of people survive on the mercy of the land. And unlike China, India is a democracy. Already there are protests in Uttrakhand and Madhya Pradesh on water shortages, these could just be starters should the Monsoon fail. The Monsoon is the umbilical cord of the Indian economy - even 60 years after independence - that cord has not been cut.

While estimates differ, there is a broad agreement among economists that the monsoon determines at least two per cent of GDP growth for India. In the context of the slowdown, a bad monsoon can be a disastrous. Even more so because so far buoyant rural demand has allowed India to grow at more than 6 per cent per year.

The share of the Monsoon fed agriculture in total output in India according to official statistics is at 18 per cent. The trick is the number of people dependent on it - and that is overwhelming. A government that swears by the national employment guarantee scheme cannot afford bad rains.

A failed monsoon will put pressure on FMCG’s, the sensex as well as tertiary sectors such as transport and storage. It will also curtail any food grain export hopes India may have harbored and put pressure on the trade deficit by encouraging imports.

“Monsoon is critical. It is a trigger not just for the FMCG sector but also for the economy. I believe that if the Monsoon fails, it shaves off the demand. At the end of the day a good one percent of the economy as a whole gets written off.”, comments Chennai based C K Ranganatan of Kavin Care, India’s second largest shampoo firm.

And it is not just the shampoo or the soaps we may suffer. We could be all in the dark. After all that fancy engineering with massive dams like Tehri, there is a 34 per cent deficit in India’s dammed reservoirs already. Bad rains will mean North India in a partial eclipse.

India’s hope of keeping the recession away was counting on the fact that we have robust domestic demand - but that too may be hit with a bad monsoon. The cumulative effect of an economic slowdown and a bad monsoon can be deadly.

To sum up, if as you read this and if it is not raining, be prepared for a longer economic downturn. A lack of money supply can be made up with the monetary policy, lack of bank loans interest rates can take care of – but short of hiring the American Indians - rains will be tough to come by.

wildlife tv as voyer feed

Legendary crocodile hunter Steve Irwin died doing what he loved, diving the depths off the Australian coast searching for yet another creature and tempting fate. Even as the world mourns a man who did more than anyone else to bring wildlife to the drawing room, his methods have brought up important questions that have divided the naturalist community.
While some believe that his style popularised wildlife among the masses, for others it reduced wildlife to a sideshow for couch potatoes. That Steve had no scientific training was another criticism towards his cowboy approach masquerading as ecological knowledge.
By intruding into the space of diverse fauna across the world, Steve trivialized the many complexities involved in the relationship between an animal and its ecology, thereby peddling a sort of eco-porn.
His was a brand of spectacle where enthusiasm made up for rigor, audacity substituted scrutiny and showmanship replaced information. When one grapples with a 350-pound anaconda in the remote Amazon basin, or gets up, close and personal with a 20 foot Nile crocodile, the line between wildlife documentation and circus-entertainment blurs. It was this that troubled serious and committed wildlife photographers and filmmakers and true lovers of ecology.
Steve of course was aware of the limitations of his stunts and had argued that all he was trying to do is to take away the unjustified fears that people have of wild animals they perceive as dangerous. However in realty, the effect was quite the opposite. Animals that in their natural surrounding would most likely leave humans alone were portrayed as dangerous beasts that can be ‘tackled’. The fact that Steve was seeking and provoking the animals was left unsaid. This important fact was never put into context by the producers of his dramatic documentaries. A lot of this change has to do with the changing nature of those who fund wildlife programming. The transformation happened with pay television taking roots in the developed economies. The sober, scholastic approach best underlined by the work of David Attenborough for the BBC was replaced by an emphasis on production quality and viewer interactive stunts. This meant that the "color" of the story became the overriding priority for the producer. To achieve this color, many a time wildlife encounters were simply set up. Tigers, surrounded by trekkers astride elephants, were seen huddling for the camera with bait tied all around. Similarly, fights were deliberately provoked between wild African elephants. The audience of course only saw the action and not the artifice. In a famous case it was reported that Britain-based John Downer Productions had used a plastic Solomon fish to film grizzlies in the Alaskan wilds. But as long as the bears bared their fangs, who cared if the fish was fake.
Even as the world mourns Steve's death, it is perhaps time for all involved, the channels, the production companies but most important of all the viewer to choose between wildlife as informed documentation or the sexed-up version, which, while pleasing to the eye, is not the 'real thing.' The wild is a primeval, lonely space that can be best understood on its own terms. It is time for the mass media and its audience to respect those terms.