Interview : Dr Eklabya Sharma, Ecologist and Padma Shree awardee

 

 

I interviewed Dr Eklabya Sharma, just a couple of days after the news broke that he had been awarded the Padmashri On behalf of the North Bengal Bird Newsletter. He was very busy, his phone was continuously ringing and on the particular day that we interviewed him, the Chief Minister of Sikkim was scheduled to come to his flat for lunch. Even so, he was kind enough to allot 30 minutes to us for this interview. We sat in the verandah of his third floor flat at Silver Oaks in Matigara with the welcome February sun warming us. It was a free ranging discussion and lasted a lot more than the time he had set aside for us. He talked freely about his journey to this level, his concerns about the environment and his ideas about the mitigation of climate effects (among other things).

 

 

 

NBBN: On behalf of the North Bengal Bird newsletter, allow me to congratulate you on the award of Padmashri. I am sure that I am joined with all our readers and well-wishers when I say this is a proud moment for those who are interested and working on wild life and conservation issues all over West Bengal and particularly in North Bengal and adjacent areas.

At the outset, I would like to ask about your background, where you grew up and was there in any inspiration from your family or upbringing that made you come into the field of ecology and habitat research?

ES: I am from St Mary’s Hill in Kalimpong in the Darjeeling District, where we now sitting and I was born there and did my schooling at the Kurseong  Central  , my Pre university at the St Joseph’s College at Darjeeling and then I went to the Benaras Hindu University ( BHU) for my BSc, MSc and PhD.  For my PhD, my field site was In Kalimpong, in Forest Ecology. One of the main reasons for selecting this region was the Himalayan Elder. This is nitrogen fixing tree species and I was able to show its role in fixing nitrogen in the soil. Previously we knew only about the role of leguminous plants and bacterial symbiosis. In the Himalayan region, local people were familiar with this tree but did not know that it had a symbiotic relationship with actinomyces and that it fixes nitrogen. I was the first to report this activity by the Himalaya elder in the forests of Kalimpong. I continued with this research,  bioenergetics, biological recycling for the next twenty years and my work was published in major journals like the Journal of Ecology, Journal of Functional Ecology, New Phytologist, Plant and Soil etc.  This was in the 80’s. Then I moved to Sikkim to establish a Regional Center of the G B Pant National Institute of Himalayan Environment. I had a dual responsibility, to establish a center as were starting from scratch.

NBBN : this was in Gangtok?

ES : Yes , this was in Gangtok and this programme covered Sikkim, North Bengal and also the entire North East. Later, of course centers were set up in Nagaland and then in Itanagar in Arunachal Pradesh, so they shared some of the geographies. A lot of the field work was done in Darjeeling and Sikkim. This was now the “real world “phase for me. We had a lot of programmes, one was on watershed management. Mamlay watershed is a famous watershed. There were so many papers on watershed management, land use change, forest composition, regeneration, edible fruits, hydrology all sorts of work were done on the Mamlay watershed. We got a grant from the USAID, and this was very important as we could set up a project called Biodiversity Conservation and Network ( BCN). This started in 1995, and this looked mainly into how biodiversity can be conserved by communities provided entrepreneurship is brought in.  We were trying to test the hypothesis that biodiversity has a biological value and we worked in the Sikkim Biodiversity and Ecotourism project. (SDE). On of the outcomes of this work was the creation of the Kanchenjunga Conservation Committee which is very active. They have their own building in Yuksom and are a very important NGO. They also record the bird and animal life in the high altitudes. They protect the environment and control tourist related disruptions in the mountains.

Another very important aspect of our work was the development of community skills. Communities were trained in bird watching, plant identification and as nature guides. I got people from the BNHS to train them and they are now well settled and guiding tourists from Yaksum to Dubdi forest and elsewhere.

Research was very important. I had 5 PhD scholars working an all these aspects. One of them worked on high altitude pasture lands, which was being degraded by pack animals and tourism and how they could be regenerated by protection. That student is now heading the CSIR in Imphal.  Another scholar worked in the Kuchipudi Lake, which incidentally has a lot of birds. Another girl worked on the Economic evaluation of nature destinations like the Kanchenjunga Biosphere reserve and she also looked into tourism initiatives and their economic evaluation. One of my students, Nakul Chhetri worked on the trekking corridors from Yaksum to Djongri. Djongri , as you know, lies above the tree line and he looked into the impact of tourism on forest structures. He also looked into bird and butterfly species as indicators of forest degradation. Prof Deb, from the Zoology department of the North Bengal University was his co guide who looked into the fauna while I was taking care of the ecological aspects of his work. There were a lot publications form this work as well.

I was able to get a lot of good people from outside to train them and to have proper setting up of monitoring sites. Rodney Jackson, the top snow leopard expert, and a good friend came for seven/eight years to my lab and I was able to fund this from my project. India’s best ecologist, Dr J S Singh also visited us among others.

We worked on medicinal plants and other high value products: so many things. My Sikkim work was a great success, it was community linked and we also developed policies, including in community livelihoods. Say agroforestry- I worked a lot in agroforestry- which incidentally are also a good place for birdwatching. If you go to Yuksom, you will be able to see a lot of agroforestry and these have a good bird population. We have a paper on this as well. Let me end the Sikkim part here.

I then moved to ICIMOD. This is an intergovernmental agency of 8 countries. First, I was in charge of the farming division. At that time strategies were changing and I became the Manager for natural resource development and then the Director Programmes and finally the Deputy Director General of ICIMOD. Here a lot of technical work was done, but I would like to focus on the science diplomacy work we did. Getting good scientific data was a great challenge; the IPCC report of 2007 clearly stated that the Hindu Kush Mountains are a “white spot”. A blank spot. That means that there was no systematic data available for this region. That was a big challenge and by then (2007) someone published in the grey literature (not peer reviewed literature) that Himalayan glaciers will vanish by 2035. This created a hue and cry. It also alarmed governments, NGOs policymakers etc and ICIMOD got the opportunity to gather data. My team and I did the Eastern Himalaya assessment.

NBBN: Did your data confirm this alarming assessment?

ES : In the Eastern Himalayas climate change assessment, we could do some work but we were unable to cover the all the glaciers. However, our data indicated that it was not that alarming. We published a series of papers which were comprehensive in nature on this subject. Then we thought that we need to set down baseline data. At that time the Director General, myself and other board members from eight countries attended a conference in Reykjavik in Iceland. The then Iceland President was very environment friendly and had visited India several times. We had a one-and-a-half-day session on the Hindu Kush mountains. I presented that we need a comprehensive Hindu Kush assessment and we got the clearance to do so. From October 2013 we started working in this project. A lot of funding was looted and meetings were organized. I got 300 scientists from all over the world to work on this comprehensive assessment. It took three years to collate all the science that existed and we prepared a report on all pillars of sustainable development. It had 15-16 chapters. One was on the impact of climate change, then the impact on glaciers, glacial lakes, another was on water induced disasters. A number of papers were published. Biodiversity was there, gender issues were there, and so were governance issues. Once the results were generated, we organized country consultations and this was taking the science to the policymakers of the countries and getting their inputs and we codeveloped with the governments of these countries a regional call for action. This was an important publication and it talked about what can be done in the region and a Ministerial Summit was held in 2020 and their declaration was in place. So, we could do good science, develop a call for action and put into action as well.

Coming to the question of Science Diplomacy, there were eight countries involved; Afghanistan, Pakistan, India. Nepal. Bhutan, China, Bangladesh and Myanmar. As you are aware there are many conflicts between these countries, but on the basis of science we were able to bring them together for regional cooperation. Science to actual practice in the community e g we developed transboundary landscape management; take for instance the Kanchenjunga where India, Nepal, Bhutan are cooperating. Also, the Kailash landscape where China, Nepal and India are cooperating. Like this we have 4 different transboundary landscapes from East to West all of which have multicountry involvement.  Then the major river basins. E g the Kosi basin, Indus basin: very big initiatives were started. We had multiple countries developing data, creating a database, upstream and downstream linkages in terms of connecting communities, flood warning systems using simple technologies. Som this is the type of science diplomacy we have done and it is still working very well. I could give many such examples.

Then we worked very hard from 2011 to bring the mountain agenda to global discourses. We attended the Climate Summits where we provided important inputs. We also worked in conventional biodiversity. I was in the ad hoc committee for developing a plan for the mountains. We developed a plan which was adapted in Rome 2004. It was important to bring the effects of climate change on mountains to the discourse. People talk about low lying areas, near the sea, or even arctic ice, but our mountains were left out. This was also my major work in science diplomacy.

So lots of science, lots of policy making, especially in the Indian Himalayan region related to nature and environment, science diplomacy and bringing the mountain agenda to the fore. This has been the spectrum of my work.

NBBN: A more personal question. Why did you go into environmental studies? Was there any family model you looked up to?

ES: Very interesting: in my life. In my family, my eldest uncle was in the Army and in fact, he was the ADC of the first President of India. My father was also in the army. Then my fifth uncle (my father was one of six brothers) was in Calcutta University with Prof. S P Roy Chowdhury. Dr Roy Chowdhury moved to Benaras, the BHU, to head the Zoology Department, and my uncle who wanted to do his PhD with him, moved to Benaras also. He joined as lecturer. You know we have a big family gathering during Dashain and there I was called to discuss my future. One of my uncle’s sons was In Belgaum in the Army School, destined for an Army career, and it was time for me to decide; if I wanted to go to the Army, I would have to go to Belgaum. So, they asked me, but I was not mature enough to make this decision. The only thing that was coming to my mind was that if I go to Belgaum, I will be far away from my mother and her love. But if I wanted to go into science like my fifth uncle, I could stay on in Kurseong. So, I think it was my mother’s love and blessing that pulled me to academics. This is one part, another was that when I finished my masters, my uncle wanted me to work with Prof A K Sen, at the Bose Institute on tissue culture of tea. It was not that I was very interested in this topic and in any case, Prof Sen was then in Frankfurt and I waited about six months for him to return to India. It was not possible to wait any longer, so I decided to go for ecology. In Benaras, the Eco lab was headed by Prof Ram Deo Mishra who is the father of Indian Ecology. He had established the lab after doing his PhD in Leeds and it was really a top-notch center, a Center of Excellence and I joined the department to do my PhD. So, this changed me from Biochemistry to Ecology.

NBBN: There are a lot of NGOs working on the ground on conservation, birds and their ecology, wildlife, etc. How can they be involved in doing good scientific work? Do you think they have a part to play in Science?

ES: I think they have a big role. One group, is, of course the NGOs. I think what I really like, and this is what Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE) does (I am now with ATREE)- citizen science. In Bird science or any other science, I feel that a portal has to be built and then from time to time, invite people to train them. We can have groups going to areas where work is going on and get people interested, so that they can use smart phones to record and send observations. We have seen, in many places in NE India, from ATREE’s point of view, it worked very well. I will certainly say that general people can be involved and they then start taking pride in their work. They may record a new species and they become very engaged. This is one possibility and we should definitely look into how citizen science can be used.

The other aspect is that NGOs, if they are responsible NGOs, and if they are linked with Protected areas (PAs) e g the Mahanada Wildlife Sanctuary. You may not be able to enter the Sanctuary itself, but the NGOs can develop capacities for instance in bird identification, wildlife watching and training can be provided so that livelihoods can be created, particularly in buffer Zones by developing Eco tourism.

So, there are two parts, one is citizen science and other livelihood development for people living in the fringes of the PAs. The third thing is that if some NGOs can be put in a consortium for conservation, some experts can train them. These are three pathways that I can see that we can use to engage NGOs in conservation and research.

NBBN: In North Bengal, at the ground level, we feel that one of the biggest problems that the forests face are encroachments and second loss of forests outside the PAs. Anywhere we go, we find that where just five years ago, there were forests, today there is a village.  Sure, there are needs of development. Just in front of where we are sitting, they are cutting all the trees for road development. Development needs exist, but can be done, in your opinion, to strike a balance?

ES: I feel sorry, to be frank, because our planning is not integrated, it is not farsighted, it is not a long-term vision. Whatever long term vision there is, it is for the market, conservation issues are lost. So, we have to really improve. I intend to take it up with the Minister, particularly related to the mountains, as they are more fragile. We are not against development, but we need to see how development can be done in a more secure, risk managed approach. But here, mega roads are being created, but we have to see if they are really needed. We have to do quick mapping. In some areas we are going to lose a less common species. Say, there are peepal trees and we are cutting ten of them, but there are thousands of them still extant, so I may not mind, because the thousands are there and those will regenerate. But if there are rare, endemic species, which are endangered, protecting them must be top priority.

NBBN: There are also issues- say in mountain development- as development in the mountains may not only affect the mountains but entire basins as you just pointed out. Just as in the recent Sikkim episode. We know that the problem happened in Sikkim, but its effects were felt all the way down to the Dooars and Bangladesh as well. And one of the immediate effects that we have felt as bird watchers is that migratory birds have not come or have come in very small numbers to Gazaldoba and the Teesta plain. So, do you think that this sort of development is unwarranted, or is this an inevitable price we have to pay for people’s benefit? What can we do? People like us, we are puzzled- what should we think?

ES: I definitely feel that the Sikkim hydropower project was not systematically developed. But before coming to this there are larger issues, which we are not seeing. In 2015 in Paris, we agreed to a global warming limit of 1.5°C. But our studies showed that this was too much for the Hindu Kush region. Also, we wanted to see this rise by 2100. But, do you know that the temperature has already risen by 1.2°C. We may reach that limit by 2030, 70 years before we had envisaged. In the meanwhile, as you go higher up, there is more rise in temperature. Because of this, high altitude glaciers are melting, and in the glacial lakes being formed, the moraine is very loose and rocks and debris is protecting them. If there is a small landslide, or even a small earthquake, say 3.0 in the Richter Scale, which we do not even feel, the protection will breach. This is what is happening, and this will happen more and more. We have seen that in about 10 years more than 1000 such lakes have formed in the Hindu Kush Himalayan region.

The other thing is permafrost. Permafrost is ice in the soil in the alpine regions which binds the soil and rocks. If this melts, all the rocks and debris is now loose and will start coming down You were talking about Teesta: because of the rising river bed, due to the rocks and debris the river bed is rising and there will be more floods. We do not have enough monitoring stations in the mountains in high altitude areas. There are fewer people living there, so we don’t bother. But most of the risk is coming from the high-altitude areas because of climate change. So, we need to recognize this and understand the cause that most of the risk in these high altitudes is directly due to climate change.

Then we need to look into the downstream- the river basin approach. Planning has to be done right from where the glaciers are to the Bay of Bengal. Technically, it has to be modelled- what can be done and what cannot. We have to look into the forecasts for 100 years, to see what the basin will look like in 100 years, and no go zones have to be demarcated, where no development will be allowed. All this will have to be done technically. I don’t mean to say that Bangladesh will put money in the mountain part, or West Bengal will put money in Sikkim, or that Sikkim will put it in West Bengal. I am not talking about resources- I think we need to have a Master Plan for the whole basin to be done systematically, and this needs to be verified by multiple stake holder consultations and the plan has to be followed.

NBBN: In your experience, - you have been working in this filed for a long time – how receptive are governments to this sort of plan?

ES: I think they are very receptive in most of the countries. The problem is that we do not have the capacities. Skills is the biggest problem. Even if you want to do something a lack of skills is the biggest problem. That is why I come back to the Universities. They have to train this type of manpower and these people have to be in our planning system so that they can help the governments in implementing and developing these plans.

NBBN: We have already taken a lot of your time, in fact more than you had allotted us. I will ask just two more quick questions, that we ask all the people we interview.  Regarding the environment, what are the things that make you optimistic: that things will go right?

ES: One thing is that when I look at the mountains, in the mountain in general, the forests are increasing. I am not sure about the quality of these forests, but the area under forests is definitely increasing. If you go to any state the Forest Departments have become very strict in protecting them. I am also very optimistic about the PMS programme about millets and so on. This is a great encouragement. The lesser-known crops, which were a poor man’s crop has now got recognition. Sush crops are grown in remote areas, they will now get a premier price. For instance, I search here for Phapar (Buckwheat), but I do not get it. If, say, a phapar availability is there in Siliguri, there will be many people who will want to buy it. This is just one example. Many other products are there: medicines, aromatics. After Covid, people have become health conscious, so they will go for green tea and other natural products that are produced in the mountains. So, if the mountain people, instead of cultivating paddy, go for buckwheat, millets, herbal medicine, then incomes will rise, youth will be retained here. Another positivity is that there is now so much connectivity, the internet has created a revolution. The main problem is climate change which we cannot fix on our own. All our countries are Carbon negative or carbon neutral. So we cannot do much about greenhouse gases, but we are the sufferers. We have to adapt and develop some type of resistance. This is my main worry.

NBBN : And what makes you pessimistic?  

ES: I think that traditional value systems are being lost, living languages are dying out. Though now, people have become more aware and are trying to preserve these languages. Mountain life has survived centuries and will continue to survive provided that the traditional knowledge systems are taken into our planning. We have to marry modern science to traditional knowledge systems.

NBBN : Thank you so much for your time. It was an enriching experience for us. Our congratulations once again and we hope that more laurels will follow in the future.