







































Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal 1 (1): 113–115, April 2018 

 
BOOK REVIEW  
 

Sharachchandra Lele  
 
M V Nadkarni. 2017. Parisaranītiśatakam. Veliyanad, Ernakulam, Kerala: 
Chinmaya International Foundation Shodha Sansthan, Adi Shankara 
Nilayam, ISBN: 978-93-80864-40-2 
 
Ecological economics has always prided itself on being not a sub-discipline 
of economics—the adjectival form notwithstanding—but a much broader 
field of enquiry into our environmental predicament. Prof M.V. Nadkarni, 
who founded the first academic department of ecological economics in 
India, has always exemplified this breadth of enquiry. His books have 
ranged from a study of farmer movements to the political economy of 
forests and, more recently, Gandhian ethics. 

Nadkarni’s latest book Parisaranītiśatakam (or ‘Hundred Verses on 
Environmental Ethics’) continues this innovative tradition by composing 
113 verses in both Sanskrit and English to propound the basic principles of 
environmental thought. Each Sanskrit verse is written in Devanagari and 
Roman script, then transliterated word for word into English. The meaning 
is then presented poetically in English verse, which is followed by a short 
commentary by the author on its theme. 

The word nīti has two meanings—ethics and policy. Like Bhartrahari’s 
Nītiśatakam of c. 500 CE, Nadkarni’s composition encompasses both 
meanings and more. It includes not only philosophical statements about the 
ethical responsibility of human beings towards the environment but also 
factual statements about how human actions are affecting nature and, 
thereby, human well-being and its distribution, and specific suggestions 
about actions that need to be taken. 

 
 Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment, Royal Enclave Sriramapura, 
Jakkur Post Bangalore 560 064 Karnataka, sharad@atree.org 

Copyright © Lele 2018. Released under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 
International licence (CC BY-NC 4.0) by the author.  

Published by Indian Society for Ecological Economics (INSEE), c/o Institute of Economic 
Growth, University Enclave, North Campus, Delhi 110007.  

ISSN: 2581-6152 (print); 2581-6101 (web). 

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v1i1.26  

https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v1i1.26


Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [114] 

The first eight verses propound Nadkarni’s core philosophy: human beings 
are decidedly the most evolved of all species on earth; and have developed 
unprecedented powers to modify the environment; and, therefore, have the 
greatest responsibility towards its protection. At the same time, these verses 
highlight an existential constraint—that we have only one earth, and so we 
cannot afford to spoil it irreversibly. At the very end of the collection, he 
returns to this point, and highlights also our responsibility towards future 
generations.  

In verses 9–30, Nadkarni describes our environmental crisis—the loss of 
biodiversity; the industrial revolution that led to local air and water 
pollution as well as global warming; and the consequences of global 
warming in the form of melting icecaps, rising oceans, and chaotic rain 
patterns. As a true ecological economist, Nadkarni is quick to relate these 
biophysical changes to its human consequences—and, particularly, the 
uneven nature of these consequences. The poor suffer the most, as also 
women, while the rich enjoy luxury consumption (verses 31–35). Indeed, it 
is this overconsumption that is at the root of the environmental crisis—not 
the subsistence-level resource use by the poor. 

Coming to solutions, Nadkarni emphasizes that technology itself cannot 
solve the problem, unless there is a sea change in attitudes and values. He 
highlights the difference between shreya (true happiness) and preya (pleasure), 
and suggests that focusing on shreya will benefit not only the environment 
but also the rich themselves. Similarly, the solution to poverty lies not in 
unbridled growth but in a series of environment-friendly and livelihood 
oriented measures: organic farming; material use efficiency and recycling; 
water efficiency and treatment; small-scale industries, which are more 
fulfilling for workers than assembly lines; and scaled-down development 
projects based not on a simplistic benefit-cost calculus but on a genuine 
understanding, limiting and alleviation of the pain of the displaced. 

Nadkarni ends by praying that humankind—currently denying its oneness 
with nature and bent on destruction—may get the good sense (subuddhi) to 
change its ways. This is not a religious invocation, but a spiritual one; 
indeed, he criticizes so-called religious celebrations—whether in obeisance 
to Durga or Ganesha—for the pollution they create and wonders how such 
worship can ever be successful. The environmental ethic, he says, 
transcends all differences of religion and nationality. 

The content may not be new for scholars of the environment, although its 
balance between sustainability and equity and between economics and 
ethics is still valuable. The innovation lies in its form: pithy yet poetic. For 
instance (verse 93): 



[115] Sharachchandra Lele 

If great dangers exist, for forests endowed richly, 

from any project planned, just give up that undoubtedly. 

The main audience is clearly the wider public: those with Sanskrit skills  can 
enjoy the Sanskrit versions while others can enjoy the English versions (and 
some, like me, might re-familiarize themselves with Sanskrit). To reach this 
audience more effectively, I would suggest that the book be published 
online also and in a different format: the Sanskrit verses in one column and 
the English verses in a parallel column, so that transliterations or notes do 
not distract from enjoying the flow of the poetry, and the reader can 
appreciate Nadkarni’s ability to explicate in the ancient tongue a set of 
modern ideas.  


