Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal 1 (2): 81–82, July 2018 

 
CONVERSATIONS 2: Air Pollution  
 

Editorial Note 
 

Vikram Dayal   
 
We have three different perspectives on air pollution. 

First, Ashish Kothari sees air pollution in Delhi as a symptom of the wrong 
model of development. Because this is one environmental problem that 
affects the rich and powerful, it may get focused attention. But quick fixes 
like clean fuels will not solve the problem. We need to change the energy 
system, so that it is based on renewables, and even restrain energy 
consumption itself. The urban transport system has to be overhauled so 
that public transport, cycling, and walking are given priority. Housing, too, 
should move to such materials as mud and bamboo. And agriculture can be 
based on organic, biologically diverse farming. All these radical changes 
require radical democracy with meaningful participation, and that each of us 
change our worldviews. 

Second, Rohit Negi notes that members of India’s civil society such as 
Kothari want the Indian state to take environmental concerns more 
seriously. Negi examines one aspect of Delhi’s air pollution: when it moves 
across the portfolios of different administrative units, how do they 
collaborate? Government departments and political leaders engage 
differently with the phenomenon and with even trying to collaborate. Negi 
discusses the views of political leaders—the initial appeal by the chief 
minister of Delhi; the response by the chief minister of Punjab, which was 
that his state lacked resources; and the suggestion of the minister of 
environment and forests at the centre—the smog in Delhi was not an 
emergency. 

 
 Associate Editor and Coordinator for this Conversations section. Professor, Institute of 
Economic Growth, University Enclave, North Campus, Delhi; vikday@iegindia.org 

Copyright © Dayal 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.v1i2.39  

https://doi.org/10.37773/ees.v1i2.39


Ecology, Economy and Society–the INSEE Journal [82] 

 

Third, Priya Shyamsundar picks up one aspect of Delhi’s air pollution that 
Kothari and Negi identify—rice straw burning in the Indo-Gangetic plains. 
Shyamsundar cites a study by IIT Kanpur (2016) that estimates that a third 
of the concentration of small dust particles in Delhi in winter months is due 
to biomass burning. In contrast to Kothari—who appears to suggest that 
you need a wholly different kind of agriculture, and lists a menu of far-
reaching changes—Shyamsundar focuses on agricultural machines that can 
solve the straw burning challenge. The Happy Seeder, for example, has 
diverse benefits: it reduces air pollution and water use and increases soil 
organic matter. Negi draws attention to the Punjab chief minister saying 
that the central government has to lead such efforts; Shyamsundar closes 
her piece by suggesting that the central government’s announcement of a 
subsidy package to help farmers who stop burning straw—along with other 

measures—could reduce pollution and lead to longer-term food security.