Thinking on “GREEN” and “SUSTAINABILITY” Together

                                          Thinking on “GREEN” and “SUSTAINABILITY” Together

I have been thinking on how to mark my appreciation of an Editorial page article in the newspaper The Hindu, of 22, November, 2025.

The second sentence, the first merely to set the stage, in the article is bang on the class of environmental cheats. The clear accusation is that under the catchall heading of “ease of doing business”, reducing “green cover requirements for industrial estates, units within [these] estates, and stand alone industries” is celebrated. It is hard to come across such unconditional condemnation of industries. Chalk up one for the writer.

The relevance of copying foreign practices without ascertaining their relevance and suitability (ecological context) is the second arrow through the heart of the cheats, be they governments or industries.

I have walked in the vast expanse of a steel industry plant, and had I not been aware of the true meaning of “Green”, I would have celebrated the manicured lawns watered with care. This point is made in the article as, ”[O]n-site green belts cannot compensate for the broader ecological losses associated with land conversion.” Applause, please, for the writer.

Vegetation provides only local environmental benefits and does nothing to create positive ecological services. Nature by itself provides environmental benefits. I would give you an example: the sub-surface filtration of water over a distance of about 95 km from Catskill Mountains in the southeastern portion of the state of New York reduces the cost of water treatment for supplying New York City! Closer home (for me) in India, at IIT Kanpur which is not too far from River Ganges, faculty members did not want campus water supply from overhead tanks for their use. They are supplied directly from groundwater−after treatment, of course− that needs to be heated in winter only mildly. This is an indirect environmental benefit for the campus and cost-benefit to the occupants in the campus. This is how it was, when I spent two years on the campus. How it is now, I am not aware.

The most forceful sentence in the article, as I reckon, is the following: [P]olicy transfers across countries must be ecologically calibrated. The article merely expand on this “key point”. One other statement made a deep impact on me: “[T]he real sustainability dividend comes from restoring natural systems beyond industrial boundaries.” This should be taken as a demand on industries to look beyond their campus.

The measure of sustainability that industries should truly care about is not “how many trees stand inside the gates, but by how deeply industries root themselves in the health of the landscapes that surround them,” Extend this to how many people live around, recalling Bhopal methyl isocyanate gas tragedy.

Just a few words to end this post. It is written by one Mr. P. Raghavan who is “a researcher in the field of vegetated coastal habitats such as mangroves.” He appears young in the bylinephotograph. Perhaps he had carried out earlier research on the topics handled here. Any which way, I thank him for giving me a wonderful read early in the morning. 

I do wish to ask one question: How is it he ventured beyond his field of research and produced such a beautiful and cogently written opinion on environment, ecology, development, industrial pollution, meaningful compensatory mechanisms and so on. My hats off to the writer.

Raghuram Ekambaram