Ecofeminism

UNIT 1 ECOFEMINISM (Discourse of Eco- (Discourse of Eco-

Feminism and
Feminism and Deep Ecology) Deep Ecology)

Structure

1.1 Introduction
1.2 Objectives
1.3 Defining Ecofeminism
1.4 Theoretical Debates
1.4.1 Nature-Culture: The Seeds of Eco feminism in the West
1.4.2 Prakriti and Shakti: Towards a More Indigenous Approach in Eco feminism

1.5 Alternative Ideas

1.6 Environmental Activism: Chipko and Beyond
1.7 Let Us Sum Up
1.8 Unit End Questions
1.9 Answers to Check Your Progress Exercise
1.10 References
1.11 Suggested Readings

1.1 INTRODUCTION
You may have heard of the term „ecofeminism‟ already. In this unit, we will
try to achieve a greater understanding of the term within different contexts.
We will examine the definition of ecofeminism, and then look at some related
theoretical debates. We will look at both western and indigenous approaches to
ecofeminism. With the help of this theoretical framework, we will try to gain
a critical perspective on some of the ways in which the subjugation of the
environment is linked to that of women. You will also learn about the role of
different women‟s movements and their struggle to preserve the dignity of
our environment.

1.2 OBJECTIVES
After reading this unit you will be able to:

 Critically analyse the notion of ecofeminism as theory and as a practical

solution while approaching problems regarding gender and the
environment;
 Describe the subjugation and oppression of environment and women by
a larger system or culture; and
 Explain how different cultures come to see the environment and the
conflicts in these multiple perceptions. 9
Linkages
Between Gender
1.3 DEFINING ECOFEMINISM
And Sustainable
Development Before we begin to examine various aspects related to ecofeminism, let us
first attempt to define it. It is important to understand that ecofeminism as a
theory is a combination of ideas that support the fight for women‟s
empowerment and that of a viable, sustainable environment. Braidotti (1994)
defines ecofeminism as „the feminist position most explicitly concerned with
environmental degradation‟. Thus in the most simple terms, ecofeminism comes
to regard an association between women and nature as essential to the way
both are treated. For both women and nature are mistreated and subjugated—
and as Francoise d‟Eaubonne, the French feminist credited with the
emergence of the idea of ecofeminism, comes to note—this is because of the
„Male System‟. She suggests that the only way to save the environment is
through the destruction of male power by women. Yet, ecofeminism is much
more than a mere disapproval and destruction of the male power. It is very
much embedded in the way women are closely associated with the
environment in the multiple ways in which they are perceived. And within
feminism too there is no one way of looking at this relation, for as a theory
ecofeminism is linked to diverse thoughts and practices.

1.4 THEORETICAL DEBATES

As a movement, ecofeminism has come to be influenced in different ways by
different strands of the feminist movement. Thus, Jaggar notes that liberal
feminism is least able to associate itself with ecology for its orientation remains
centered on white, middle class concerns. And even though radical feminism
uses the association between women and nature as a rallying point in its
emancipator politics, their argument is seen as far too simplistic too carry
forward a movement. However, Social Ecofeminism comes across as an
interesting new movement that is influenced by Marxism and is based on the
recognition that gender is socially constructed and recognizes the urgent need
to develop conceptual tools that will look at ecological and social change vis-
à-vis gender.

Bina Agarwal (2007) lays out certain key ideas within ecofeminism. First,
there is an important connection between the domination and exploitation of
nature. Second, in patriarchal thought women are seen to be closer to
nature—and men as closer to culture. Nature in turn is seen to be inferior to
culture, and therefore women are inferior to men. Third, the domination and
oppression of nature and of women have occurred together. Women have an
important stake in ending the domination of nature, thereby bringing together
both human and non-human nature. Fourth, the feminist movement and the
environment movement must stand together to create a more equitable
and just society. Both the movements have a lot in common and are can
create a common perspective, praxis and theory. In this sense, Agarwal notes
that the eco-feminist movement has an ideological base that attributes the
source of the subordination and domination of women in existing systems of
beliefs and practices, and representations. And the supporters of this
movement are calling out to all men and women to rethink and recreate their
10
relationship to nature. Ecofeminism emerged as a response to the large-scale Ecofeminism
(Discourse of Eco-
destruction of the environment and the subsequent impact on women. Feminism and
Interestingly, the correlation between a tortured and exploited environment Deep Ecology)
and a subjugated and oppressed sex was evolved in the West. But in order to
create a workable theory of action the need to look at cross-cultural debates
and issues led to the emergence of other strands of thought within
ecofeminism. This was also in answer to large-scale ecological movements in
developing countries where the ties between nature and women were seen
to be of more relevance.

In the next section, we trace the links theoretical influences of the eco-
feminist movement, with reference to the West—and later look at the other
cultural understanding of the movement. In the latter case, the focus is
especially on India as over the past two decades it has spawned many
ecological movements lead primarily by women.

1.4.1 Nature-Culture: The Seeds of Ecofeminism in the West

Sherry Ortner’s (1972) formulation linking nature to women and culture to
men remains the definitive ideological influence of the ecofeminist
movement. The nature-culture approach looks at the close relation that
women share with nature and the resultant insubordination of both nature and
women.

In trying to understand the reasons behind the insubordination of women in

society, Ortner identifies three levels of the problem. The first level refers to
the universal fact of the inferior position of women in society, which is
however socially and culturally endorsed. Ortner wishes to examine the
reasons behind it. Second, are the cultural symbolisms, ideologies and social
structural arrangements that are related to women but differ from one culture
to another. Third, what are the means by which women revolt or try to
suppress these structures of oppression and insubordination. Ortner is
categorical that in examining the inferior position of women she is looking at
universals, or facts applicable across cultures that place women in a
disadvantageous position.

Yet, before one begins to associate women with nature and men with culture
it is important to understand that the categories of nature and culture
themselves and are cultural categories—social constructions. According to
Ortner, culture therefore implicitly recognizes and asserts the difference
between nature and natural phenomena, and itself. Here the focus is on the
difference in the operation of nature and the operation of culture—and a
situation wherein culture sees itself as capable of controlling the operation of
nature and nature itself. Thus, Ortner says, “This culture (i.e. every culture) at
some level of awareness asserts itself to be not only distinct from, but
superior in power to, nature, and that sense of distinctiveness and superiority
rests precisely on the ability to transform—to „socialize‟ and „culturalize‟
nature” (1972, p.11).
Having established the universal domination of nature by culture, Ortner
creates the foundation of her examination of how women come to be
11
Linkages identified with or symbolically seen to be closer to nature, as opposed to men,
Between Gender
And Sustainable
who are associated with culture. Women are placed within the format of
Development nature primarily because of their physiological, bodily make-up. Her body
and its functions are thought to condition her social roles and psychic
(emotional, mental) structure in such a way that removes her from cultural
functions, by putting constraints on her.

Ortner draws from her understanding of Simone de Beauvoir’s Second Sex to

look at how women are perceived to be physiologically closer to nature and
therefore inferior. For Beauvoir the role that women play in society is an
extension of the physiological state. The physical make-up, development and
functions of the human female are “…..to a great extent than the male, a prey
of the species” (1972, p.14). That is many major organs and processes within
the female body are actually geared towards the reproduction of the human
species rather than the personal needs of the woman herself. Take the
example of the female breasts, which according to Beauvoir serve absolutely
no purpose to a woman‟s personal health and can be done away with.
Similarly menstruation and the ovarian cycles are geared towards creating
conducive conditions for bearing children. For Beauvoir, it is almost as
though the woman has to adapt to the needs of the egg, rather to her own
requirements. Most of the above processes are a source of discomfort and
may often in many cultures be the reason for segregation and isolation, as is
the case with menstruation.

The above reasoning for women‟s inferior role leads to a larger point that
Ortner wishes to make. Though descriptive, the above analysis points to how
in reproducing the human species, women are handicapped, while men in
being excluded—directly—from the task of reproduction are at an
advantageous position. Men create more than life—they create „meaning‟. By
meaning Ortner and Beauvoir are referring to things that exist beyond the
level of mere existence and the survival of the species. For men are able to
create inventions of novelty and value meant for the future—while women by
virtue of their physiognomy are „doomed‟ to repeat and recreate the human
race. In creating technology and symbols, man is involved in the production
of things and values that are eternal and everlasting, whereas women are
creating only perishables or human beings.

Interestingly, in such a formulation men are seen to be associated with culture

through the invention and participation in hunting and warfare. Acts that do
not create—but destroy. Women are nature in that sense that they create what
man destroys. Yet on the other hand women are very much part of the cultural
enterprise. They are part of the socialization process that trains the young to
join society. Though socialization as part of childrearing is an extension of
childbearing (which in turn restricts her to the household and the domestic
domain), yet it is a role that mediates between nature and culture. In this
sense women come to be seen as intermediaries.
This intermediate status of women is read as the middle position in a
hierarchy where culture is at the top and nature down below. Ortner sees that
the role of being intermediates may stem from mediating between nature and
12 culture. Women remain close to nature, but also important participants in the
social and cultural process through their role in socialization. Though Ecofeminism
(Discourse of Eco-
relegated to the domestic milieu of childbearing and childrearing their Feminism and
importance as primary agents in the transmission of cultural values to the Deep Ecology)
younger generation (boys‟ socialization is taken over by men once they reach
puberty, while that of girls‟ continue with their mother) cannot be wished
away. However this mediation with culture can be relegated to a lesser domain.
So, Ortner notes that the participation of women in the domestic domain is
seen as a form of lesser culture, in opposition to the higher culture that men
belong to and cultivate, such as religion, law, arts, etc.

Take for instance cooking - Ortner notes that cooking as an act within the
domestic domain is a job for women, primarily because of their natural
association with the household. However, cuisine or cooking as an art remains
the domain of men and therefore superior to and separate from everyday
cooking. For Ortner, the universal devaluation of women comes from the
separation of nature and culture—and within culture the difference between
low and high culture. Either way, whether in their association with nature or
with low culture, women remain inferior and subordinated. In all this,
tellingly, women accept their subordinate role as intermediaries and
reproducers of the natural order, just as nature accepts the domination of man
and culture.

The above theoretical background forms the foundation of the Western

ecofeminist movement. Bina Agarwal notes that the biological essentialism
inherent within this formulation (for which Ortner too has been extensively
criticized) does not take into account the way women are viewed in different
cultures. It places woman as a unitary category (2007, p.319) ignoring
cultural, class and ethnic differences. Second, with such an ideological
framework the ecofeminist movement depends on a logic of subordination
that ignores the ways in which domination is exercised—beyond the realms
of ideology and at the level of economics, politics, etc. Third, the above
approach does not look at the ways in which ideological constructs come
about—both historically and culturally, and how they become predominant
within society. That is, what institutions, social and economic relations make
such ideas of subordination dominant. Finally, the association of women with
nature does not take into account women‟s everyday association with nature.
It pushes forth a kind of „essentialism‟ that looks at female essence as static
and unchanging. Agarwal finds such a stance deeply problematic as notions
regarding nature, culture and gender have already been seen to be socially
and historically constructed.

However proponents of this theory find support in ecofeminists such as Ariel

Salleh who places women‟s reproductive functions within the domain of
nature. She attempts to move forward by placing ecofeminism within a mode
of praxis or movement. Salleh (1993) is very clear about the importance of a
discourse that places women and nature as similarly represented, if not
treated, especially symbolically. She endorses the linking together of the
feminist and environmental movements to put forth an alternative world
view. This is tellingly evident in her critique of another strand of
environmental theory, called Deep Ecology, that Salleh sees as representing
the requirements of white, middle class men who see nature as a means of 13
Linkages reconnecting with the human „ego‟ and is removed from any activist concerns
Between Gender
And Sustainable
regarding the environment. Salleh wishes to stress on a theory that can also
Development form the basis of an active movement wherein excluded and oppressed
groups within society such as women are members and frontrunners.

In her attempts to create a theory that is tied to a praxis rooted in life needs
and the survival of the habitat, Salleh recommends looking at the hands-on
experiences of those women who are closest to their habitats, such as Third-
World women. Ecofeminism according to her should be a strategy for social
action that includes both men and women. In fact in answer to critics, such as
the deep ecologists, who maintain that women are as much responsible for
the destruction of the environment in their dependence upon labour-saving
devices and technology—Salleh notes that women continue to be relegated to
their „natural‟ role as housekeepers even with the advent of such technology.
She is categorical in noting that this view emerges from a biased, Western
standpoint that does not take into account the lack of any such labour-saving
technology at the disposal of poor Third-World women, who live and work
with their own labour, close to nature. She also insists that the
acknowledgement of the feminine role as „carers‟ and backbones of families is
an important aspect of the ecofeminist movement.

Vandana Shiva finds the Western ecofeminist movement as lacking in the

way it presents the association between women and nature. Her formulation of
a more inclusive and dynamic theory, draws on Indian cosmological and
philosophical thinking to project a new relationship between gender and
nature. Having examined the movement within the western context, let us
now turn to India to examine indigenous approaches to ecofeminism.

1.4.2 Prakriti and Shakti: Towards A More Indigenous

Approach In Ecofeminism
In ancient Indian philosophy the association of women with nature is even
more deeply embedded than in Western thought. However, unlike in the West,
the opposition between the male and the female, and in turn between nature
and culture, does not exist in Indian philosophical thought. Vandana Shiva
(1988) finds this to be the hallmark of a culture that looks at both the male
and female as the expression of the same person—and not separate from each
other.

In Indian cosmology the world is produced through the opposing play of

destruction and creation, and cohesion and disintegration (Shiva, 1988). The
dynamic force that comes out of this process is called Shakti—which is
literally the source of everything and in turn pervades everything. And the
manifestation of Shakti, or the feminine principle in the form of an energy or
power is called Prakriti, or nature. “Nature, both animate and inanimate, is
thus an expression of Shakti, the feminine and creative principle of the cosmos,
in conjunction with the masculine principle (Purusha), Prakriti creates the
world” (Shiva, 1988, p.38). Thus here person and nature or Purusha-Prakriti
are a duality in unity. They are not opposing to each other, but rather they are
“…inseparable complements of one another in nature, in woman, in man”
14 (Shiva, 1988, p.40).
Shiva notes that the association of women exclusively with nature is not a Ecofeminism
(Discourse of Eco-
revolutionary thought but is actually the source of the subjugation and Feminism and
exploitation of women and nature. She finds Beauvoir‟s formulation to be Deep Ecology)
characteristic of Western feminist thought that accepts the duality and
opposition of the male and female—further placing the woman as weak and
therefore oppressed. In fact the answer to the woman problem, for Beauvoir,
lies in masculinizing women. Liberation will come through in a world where
women are free to assume masculine values. For Shiva such a formulation is
problematic especially when the categories of masculine and feminine are
themselves socially constructed. Western gender theory has placed them
within biological essentialism. However Shiva supports another line of
thinking that looks at a transgender ideology wherein the feminine principle is
seen in both men and women. This feminine principle is the principle of
activity and creativity in nature, “One cannot really distinguish the masculine
from the feminine, person from nature, Purusha from Prakriti” (Shiva, 1988,
p.52). Nowhere else is this more evident than in ancient philosophies,
especially those found in the Third World where, “Women and nature are
associated not in passivity but in creativity and in the maintenance of life”
(author’s emphasis, 1988, p.47).

Despite there being a unified approach towards nature in terms of men and
women, Shiva reiterates that women do share a special relationship with
nature. This is seen in the following ways. First, in the ways in which
women‟s interaction with nature was reciprocal—for they found themselves
to be close to nature in the way both produced and replenished the earth and
society. Second, women are in partnership with nature by not only using its
resources, but also giving it back. They do not own nature like property, but
insist on participating in the process of „to let grow and to make grow‟. Last,
with nature women are producers who help sustain society and relations.
There are proponents of a subsistence economy and the inventors of the first
productive economy (Shiva, 1988, p. 43).

In such a situation any kind of division and oppression of nature and of

women is a result of colonialism. Shiva finds colonialism to be a source of
the destruction of nature and of women‟s work. The coming in of science and
technology has broken the synthesis between nature, masculine and feminine
principles—and this has been replaced by an unequal and hierarchical
relationship. Development is seen as maldevelopment for women and nature by
perpetuating domination and centralization through patriarchal control.

Take for instance the colonial destruction of forests in India. Shiva notes that
the forest in India is a symbol of life and fertility. Known as Aranyani or the
Goddess of the Forest, she is worshipped in different regions by different
names. The forest has always been the highest expression of harmony and
communal habitat—honoured and protected as sacred groves. This is
symbolic of the community‟s sense of deep ecological understanding.
Colonial rule was established with the destruction of the natural resources of
India, such as forests. The colonial practice of commercial forestry and the
scientific management of forests, involving the marking out of forest area as
„reserved‟ and protected, was the beginning of the displacement of traditional
indigenous knowledge and women‟s subsistence economy. The above 15
Linkages practice involved the erosion of forests and the rights of the local people on
Between Gender
And Sustainable
its produce.
Development
Shiva insists that the role of marginalized women and communities becomes
especially important for they are living proof of the harmful effects of
progress, as also they have the holistic and ecological knowledge of what the
protection and production of life involves. Women of the Third World are the
best representatives of such a category.

Bina Agarwal finds Shiva‟s theory different from the Western feminist
perspective in the sense that it explores aspects that the latter have left out in
their formulation, especially the links between development and
developmental change and their impact on the environment, as well as the
aspect of people‟s dependence on the environment for their livelihood.

Yet, the theory is not without some drawbacks. One, Shiva‟s theory places all
Third-World women under one category. This kind of generalization that
collapses cultural, economic and social differences is also a kind of
essentialism, according to Agarwal. It sees all Third-World women as close
to nature, especially in terms of their knowledge base and dependence.

Two, within India itself the theory does not take into account other historical,
cultural and social processes and ideas that may have impacted the
relationship with nature. The dependence on Hindu philosophical thought
does not apply to other systems of thought and practices in India. Besides
within Hinduism itself there are very many different strands of understanding
that may not support what Shiva lays out in her theory.

Three, Agarwal contends that Shiva does not include the impact of pre-
colonial structures and practices upon the environment and on women.
Inequality in the form of caste, and class have long existed within the Indian
social framework, which Shiva ignores, giving precedence to colonial
oppression and the coming in of modern scientific thought as the primary
reasons for the destruction of the environment and the suppression of women.
The above criticisms point to the fact that within ecofeminism there is still
space for change and reformulation. As Salleh notes, the movement‟s
dynamism lies in its theoretical stance that adapts to changes occurring across
the world as well as giving due importance to alternative theories that
combine a more holistic approach to environment and gender issues.

In the following section, you will learn about some alternative approaches to
ecofeminism which will help you to think critically about ways in which
these debates may be resolved.

1.5 ALTERNATIVE IDEAS

The need of the hour remains the formulation of a theory that is an inspiration
for a movement uniting the fight for the protection of the environment, and
women‟s rights. Such a theory should also unite rather than alienate women
and men across the world. ecofeminism has tried to do so in many ways, but
of late the need to encapsulate aspects that point to the diversity in women
16 and their ties to the environment has led to the formulation of alternative
theories that aim to be more inclusive. Ecofeminism
(Discourse of Eco-
Bina Agarwal formulates the idea of feminist environmentalism wherein the Feminism and
Deep Ecology)
link between women and environment is seen through the dynamics of
gender, class, caste and race, and through the organization of production,
reproduction and distribution. In terms of being a theory for action, “such a
perspective would call for struggles over both resources and meanings”
(Agarwal, 2007, p.324).

This approach involves the inclusion of ideas such as the appropriation of

resources by dominant groups in society through control over property, and
power. The ways in which this control is exercised, both ideological and
institutional, is a sign of privilege and therefore needs to be examined further.

In terms of feminist ideology, Agarwal talks of notions regarding gender and

the actual division of work especially in relation to the environment. On the
environmental front there is a need to look at the relationship between people
and nature in terms of exploitation and appropriation by a few.

Agarwal goes on to discuss the importance of feminist environmentalism in

relation to the Indian experience. Here she analyses the different reasons
behind the subjugation of women and the exploitation of the environment.
Needless to say the dynamics behind this oppression goes beyond the
simplistic understanding of nature as similar to women—and therefore subject
to similar treatment by those in power. It includes issues such as class and
caste control and other social, economic and political problems.

Forms of environmental degradation such as water and wind erosion, falling

surface or ground water, indiscriminate sinking of tubewells, amongst many
others are connected to exploitation at various levels of power and
governance. The process of statization or the state‟s increasing control over
forest commons has been noted since colonial rule. This has led to large scale
degradation and deforestation. Post-independence the government has actively
pursued the policy of alienating the people from their rights in common
forest land. Locals do not have access to forests from which they drew their
sustenance and livelihood. The process of privatization of common resources
has meant that forests are now being increasingly commercially exploited.
The erosion of community resource management systems; exclusion of local
people, especially women from control over these resources; excessive
population growth, and its pressures on natural resources; and the negative
impact of technology such as that used in the Green Revolution have only
made the environmental issue more serious.

These processes are happening at the macro level wherein the state is
becoming oblivious of how its policies are impacting the micro-local
populace—especially women and children. Agarwal lays out certain aspects
of how this process of statization, increasing technology and privatization is
affecting the marginalized population of women and children. First, the
preexisting division of labour based on gender places women in poor peasant
and tribal households as the chief source of sustenance. They are hugely
dependent upon the environment, taking fuel from firewood found in the
forest—environmental degradation and the state control of forest land is 17
Linkages pushing women and young girls to travel further for fuel or firewood. The
Between Gender
And Sustainable
stress on getting food and basic necessities that were earlier available close to
Development hand, is creating an unequal division of labour where women have to labour
harder. Second, the systematic differences in allocation of resources in terms
of gender—is evident in the huge mortality and morbidity rates amongst
women and children, especially girls. Third, inequalities in men‟s and
women‟s resources also include a disadvantaged position in the labour
market. Fluctuations in weather patterns mean more uncertainty in
agricultural work—leading to availability of primarily seasonal work. It is
these reasons amongst others that create the need for a movement that looks
at the processes by which the degradation of the environment is often
connected to the marginalization of communities and groups such as women.

1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISM: CHIPKO

AND BEYOND
Interestingly, the cause that ecofeminism wishes to fight for around the world
has been women-led environmental activism. In India as way back as the
1970s a wave of environmental movements spread thanks to the dedicated
involvement of women fighting to safeguard their environment and resources.
The most famous of these was the Chipko movement that gathered steam in
the hills of India affecting village after village.

Radha Kumar (1993) lays out a dateline of the movement to show how
much the involvement of women affected the way the government framed its
policies around environmental policy. The movement began in 1973 in
Gopeshwar in Chamoli District in northern India. It began with the women of
the village hugging (chipko in Hindi) the ash trees of the nearby forest that a
sports goods contractor from Allahabad had come to cut. This was followed
by one of the movement founders, Chandi Prasad Bhatt, influencing the
villagers of Reni, to take action against the auctioning off of the forest
neighbouring the village. The men of the village decided to approach the
government, even after which the indiscriminate cutting of trees began.
Seeing this the women led by a 60 year old widow Gaura Devi went ahead
and hugged the trees, foiling the attempts of the contractors to cut them.

Again in June 1975 women stopped the felling of trees in a forest near
Gopeshwar village by clinging to them. The Chipko movement spread in
many areas of Uttaranchal—especially in the districts of Chamoli and Terhi-
Garhwal.

The movement began to organize itself and called itself the Dasauli Gram
Swarajya Mandal that helped form women‟s organizations such as the Mahila
Mangal Dals. This helped women in becoming a part of the way in which
they could claim their rights to decide what was done to the forests and fields.
The characteristic of the environmental movement is seen especially in terms
of how it has been led by women at the local level, with the men often not
supporting their activism. In most cases the movement has involved a face-off
between the male-dominated village panchayats and the Mahila Mangal Dals
18 (women‟s groups). The struggle for the protection of the environment has
often taken on an anti-men stance. Conflict over grazing and rights over Ecofeminism
(Discourse of Eco-
resources has been reflected in the way men have tried to coerce women into Feminism and
toeing their line—through threats and beatings. Often in support of the Deep Ecology)
contractors the men and the panchayats have tried to dissuade environmental
activists from fighting for their cause. Interestingly, as Kumar notes, the
Chipko movement takes on different issues for the purposes of activism.
Anti-mining, timber contracting and anti-alcohol movements trace their
original source to the movement for environmental rights. The anti-alcohol
movement for instance is in response to the ill- effects of alcohol addiction in
rural areas. Not only does the addiction lead to violence against women, it
also impacts the men‟s health and most importantly leads to a squandering of
household income. This affects women directly—especially in rural and tribal
areas. In the latter, many tribes have willed forest land to contractors under
the influence of local, country-made liquor. The movement for prohibition
therefore is seen to be necessary to protect both the environment and
women.

Uttarakhand Sangharsh Vahini was formed in 1977 in support of prohibition.

In 1983, in a mass meeting held by the organization alcoholism was seen to
be a major problem. From 1965-71, anti-alcohol activism gained
momentum leading to prohibition in many areas. In February 1984, villagers
in a district in Almora successfully managed to bring to book an agent in
illicit liquor, as well as the government official who was involved in smuggling
the liquor. The movement then spread to different villages where the Vahini
activists went about destroying liquor, liquor shops—and made liquor vendors
apologize in public.

In order to analyse the impact of the environmental movement in India, three

examples are presented here. Each of the three movements are over the span
of atleast three decades—and show the struggle that women have to
undertake to fight for their rights and those of the environment. Interestingly,
the rights of women and the environment seem to compliment each other in
each of the instances discussed here. The examples are all from India.

Madhu Sarin (2001) looks at the politics of the forest and the role of women
in environmental activism in the Kumaon-Garhwal region. In Uttarakhand,
even though women have been closest to the environment in terms of
livelihood and cultivation, yet the forests have been under the control of the
men. Under colonial rule, the British rulers took over most of the forest land
and made it inaccessible to the local population under this elaborate system
of scientific management of forests that placed them under the category of
reserved areas. Denotified or preserved forest land was an attempt by the
government to have access to areas rich in natural resources. Post-
independence, the government introduced the notion of Van Panchayats
which would be involved in joint forest management (JFM). The idea of JFM
came about through the Chipko struggle that fought for involvement of the
local population with their natural resources. However, the panchayats in this
area had been traditionally male-dominated while the movement had been
overwhelmingly led by women. Therefore, the unofficial, informal
community forest management (CFM) was formed by women in favour of
their role in safeguarding natural resources and the forests in the area. The 19
Linkages CFMs in the area where opposed to the male- dominated Van Panchayats and
Between Gender
And Sustainable
the government-controlled JFMs. The first point of conflict began with the
Development formation of village forest joint management (VFJMs) which were funded by
the World Bank in association with the Uttaranchal Government. The till now
autonomous Van Panchayats came under the control of the VFJMs. This was
because women had begun to take over the reins of the Van Panchayats, and
with the help of government programmes such as Mahila Samakhya, which
aims to empower women, they were doing an outstanding job of protecting
the forests and safeguard the community‟s resources. The VFJMs represented
opposition from the village men and the forest department.

In Khirakot, a village in the Someshwar valley in Uttaranchal, the women

found their access to the forest blocked by a miner who was building a
soapstone mine in the area. When the mine dust began to settle on their land
making it difficult for them to plant their crops and plough the field, the
women launched a protest against the miner. In retaliation the miner filed
criminal cases against the village men, each of those who had protested against
the setting up of the mine. The women in turn were not intimidated (even
though the men were) and collected money from each village household to fight
the case. The contractor further tried intimidation in the form of destruction
of property, and stoning of the villagers‟ houses. The activists in return
blocked the route to the quarry and did not let labourers to work in the mine.
Finally, on a visit to the area the district magistrate was moved by the struggle
of the village women and immediately recommended cancelling the case.
This was further followed by the closing of the mine in 1982—a true
victory for the women‟s movement (Kumar, 1993).

Another very significant instance of women‟s involvement in the fight against

human and environmental injustice is the infamous Bhopal gas tragedy, with
which you would be already familiar, as it has been under media glare for
several years since it occurred in 1984.

Box 3.1: Case Analysis of the Bhopal Gas

The Bhopal gas tragedy of 1984 saw a mass movement of women gas victims
in response to the indiscriminate and avoidable death of around 4000 people
to gas poisoning from the Union Carbide factory. The tragedy that recorded
500,000 as potential victims—in terms of long-term signs of gas pollution—
was a result of gross negligence. After the Government of India decided to
take sole control of the disaster in terms of relief, and pursuing the case
against the American firm for compensation to the victims—a lot of information
was closeted under the Officials Secrets Act. To unearth the information and
fight for adequate medical care, the women of Bhopal came out in large
numbers.

Women‟s‟ continuous protest against the Bhopal gas disaster is exemplifying

the aspect of existence of ecofeminism in the contemporary context of
nature/culture debate. Over the years the ratio of women to men in protests and
demonstrations increased to 90:10. The women went on fighting for relief
and employment even after the government settled for much less with Union
20 Carbide in 1989. Finally with the election of a new government, the activists
were able to win Rs. 360 lakh as a three-year relief grant, as well as Ecofeminism
(Discourse of Eco-
government access to medical information. Most importantly they secured Feminism and
the government‟s support to reopen the case against Carbide that had been Deep Ecology)
infamously settled in 1989 by the Supreme Court (Kumar, 1993). It is these
stories of courage and activism that have inspired feminists and
environmental activists around the world. And it is these very movements
that inspire ecofeminists to fight for the rights of women and the
environment.

Check Your Progress Exercise I

Note: i. Use the space given below to answer the questions
ii. Compare your answer with the one given at the end of this Unit
1. Write short notes on Joint Forest Management.
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………

1.7 LET US SUM UP

This unit looks at the importance of an ideology that aims to bring together
the shared causes of women and the environment. In particular, the unit
focuses on the following aspects of the eco-feminist movement:

 Showing how women are intrinsically linked to the environment and

nature, through their physical make-up and the social roles that they
fulfil due to their physiological structure;
 Linking women in the Third-World to the environment through their
dependence upon it for their survival and livelihood; and
 Tracing how institutional mechanisms and social structures such as caste,
class and gender suppress both the environment and women, as part of
the larger structures of dominance and insubordination.

The unit also discusses the environmental movement, spearheaded primarily

by women to show how they have located themselves as the best supporters of
protection of the environment and sustainable development till date. When the
world is facing a global crisis vis-à-vis the environment, it is essential for us
to understand the ways in which the environment has come to figure in our
everyday lives. It is in this sense that we must also strive to protect it. It is no
wonder then that an important part of this course tries to look at how this
linkage can be established at the level of human relationships, especially that
with gender, and more specifically, women.

21
Linkages
Between Gender
1.8 UNIT END QUESTIONS
And Sustainable
Development 1) How are women related to nature and men related to culture? Explain it
in relation to ecofeminism.
2) Do you agree with the idea that women are closer to nature and therefore
inferior? How does Vandana Shiva formulate this idea? Substantiate.
3) What is feminists‟ environmentalism? Explain it from different theoretical
perspectives.
4) Discuss the salient features of environmental movements in India.

1.9 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

EXERCISE
Check Your Progress Exercise 1
1. Post-independence, the government introduced the notion of Van
Panchayats which would be involved in joint forest management (JFM).
The idea of JFM came about through the Chipko struggle that fought for
involvement of the local population with their natural resources.
However, the panchayats in this area had been traditionally male-
dominated while the movement had been overwhelmingly led by
women. Therefore, the unofficial, informal community forest
management (CFM) was formed by women in favour of their role in
safeguarding natural resources and the forests in the area. The CFMs in
the area where opposed to the male- dominated Van Panchayats and the
government-controlled JFMs. The first point of conflict began with the
formation of village forest joint management (VFJMs) which were
funded by the World Bank in association with the Uttaranchal
Government. The till now autonomous Van Panchayats came under the
control of the VFJMs. This was because women had begun to take over
the reins of the Van Panchayats, and with the help of government
programmes such as Mahila Samakhya, which aims to empower women,
they were doing an outstanding job of protecting the forests and
safeguard the community‟s resources. The VFJMs represented opposition
from the village men and the forest department.

1.10 REFERENCES
Agarwal, Bina (2007). „The gender and environment debate: Lessons from
India.‟ In Mahesh Rangarajan (Eds.). Environmental Issues in India: A Reader.
New Delhi: Pearson India.
Braidotti, R., E. Charkiewicz, S. Hausler, S. Wieringa (1994). (Eds.). Women,
the Environment and Sustainable Development: Towards a Theoretical
Analysis. London: Zed Books with INSTRAW.
Kumar, Radha (1993). The History of Doing. New Delhi: Kali for Women
Low, Alain & Soraya Tremayne (2001) (Eds). Women as Sacred Custodians
22 of the Earth? Women, Spirituality and the Environment. New York: Berghahn
Books. Ecofeminism
(Discourse of Eco-
Ortner, Sherry, B. (1972). „Is female to male as nature is to culture?‟. Feminist Feminism and
Deep Ecology)
Studies, 1(2), 5-31.
Sarin, Madhu (2001). „Empowerment and disempowerment of forest women
in Uttarakhand, India‟. Gender Technology and Development. 5(3).
Mahesh Rangarajan (Eds.). Environmental Issues in India: A Reader. New
Delhi: Pearson Longman.
Salleh, Ariel (1993). „Class, race and gender discourse in the ecofeminism/
deep ecology debate‟. Environmental Ethics, 15, 225-44.
Shiva, Vandana (1988). Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in
India. New Delhi: Kali for Women.
Warren, Karen & N. Erkal (1997). Ecofeminism: Women, Culture and
Nature.
Warren, Karen (2000). Ecofeminist Philosophy: A Western Perspective on
What it is and Why it Matters. Rowman and Littlefield.

1.11 SUGGESTED READINGS

Agarwal, Bina (2007). „The gender and environment debate: Lessons from
India.‟ In Mahesh Rangarajan (Eds.), Environmental Issues in India: A Reader.
New Delhi: Pearson India.
Ortner, Sherry B. (1972). „Is female to male as nature is to culture?.‟ Feminist
Studies, 1(2), 5-31.
Shiva, Vandana (1988). Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in
India. New Delhi: Kali for Women.
Warren, Karen (2000). Ecofeminist Philosophy: A Western Perspective on
What it is and Why it Matters. Rowman and Littlefield.

23