India has its own version of the “hunger games” playing out that is turning out to be every bit as dramatic as the movie.

A renowned Indian academic and environmentalist, GD Agarwal, has been fasting since February to protest the reckless pollution of the Ganges, a river considered holy by Hindus. Agarwal gave up drinking water two weeks ago, and is currently lying on his deathbed, having removed a saline drip feed that has been keeping him alive for the past few days.

Agarwal demands that the building of all hydroelectric projects on the tributaries of the Ganges be stopped. He is also protesting against the ineffectuality of the National Ganga River Basin Authority (NGRBA), a government body formed to conserve the river basin. In the midst of illegal sand mining, reckless dam building and severe lack of adequate water and waste treatment facilities, the NRGBA has only met twice since it was formed three years ago. However, while Agarwal fasts for a free-flowing river, there are currently almost 200 proposed hydroelectric projects to be constructed on the major tributaries of the river. Despite severe objections from experts from environmental experts, many of these projects have already been given clearance, and are in the process of being built even as legal cases against them continue to stack up.

“Fasting unto death” to draw both the public and government’s attention to issues that need urgent attention is a famous Gandhian technique often used in India politics. In fact, this is Agarwal’s third fast in four years. However, while Anna Hazare’s fasts against corruption in the country garnered both wild media coverage and popular support last year, a life has already been claimed in the struggle for a clean and free-flowing Ganges.  Swami Nigamanand asted to death last year to end illegal sand mining in a Haridwar, and yet his death was largely ignored.

It seemed that Agarwal might suffer the same fate as the government disregarded Agarwal’s fast for seven weeks, until the 80-year-old suffered a heart attack, whereby he was taken into state custody. The story attracted further media attention when three experts appointed to the NGRBA resigned in response to authority’s inaction. Hazare, unsurprisingly, jumped on the publicity bandwagon as the movement gathered momentum, leading to further public scrutiny. As the story continued to gain coverage, the Prime Minister himself appealed to Agarwal to break his fast. The saga, however, continues as Agarwal refuses to eat or drink until he gets the government’s written assurance that they will stop building the hydroelectric dams.

Agarwal, of course, has a point: in the face of impending water scarcity and acute pollution, uncontrolled dam building cannot continue unchecked. Nevertheless, India is also starving for electricity; and a vast quantity of both money and vested interests are locked into the hydroelectric projects. It is highly unlikely that Agarwal will win this battle; and yet the much-battered government cannot afford to le the revered professor die in the midst of international media scrutiny.

As the country watches, the production continues to mix religion, non-violence, corruption and chaos in a unique way, characteristic of the nation’s messy politics. Ultimately, irrespective of the ending to this particular story, India faces a long road ahead, as it continues to struggle to find a sustainable balance between environmental protection, human rights and economic development.

India’s rapid economic growth has created a new middle-class that refuses to accept the status quo. Urbanization and growth has mobilized a new generation of Indians that expect the fruits of economic development to reach them without being pilfered by corrupt middlemen and bureaucrats. Tens of thousands of Indians rallied around an anti-corruption Bill, the Jan Lokpal Bill last year, hailing its figurehead, Anna Hazare, as the Gandhi of the 21st century. According to a 2011 Facebook report, the Bill was the most mentioned topic on Indian statuses.

Although this revolutionary bill was (unsurprisingly) shelved, change is still clearly afoot. A strong illustration of this point is Bihar, India’s poorest state. Once known as the Jungle Raaj for its lack of governance and rampant corruption, it has now been named the least corrupt state in the country, and even hailed by other countries for its good governance and rule of law. This state has set a strong example for others in the country in using technology to introduce accountability and transparency in governance. The Chief Minister, largely credited for introducing strong political reform in the state, has introduced a system to ensure that the hand-written grievances of citizens are posted on the Internet, and complaints of bribery are loaded onto YouTube to shame corrupt officials.

While other Chief Ministers might not be as bent on fighting the system from which they greatly benefit, a technology revolution in the country continues to build new frameworks to fight corruption. India has a famously outspoken Twitter community, and sites that monitor corruption such as IPaidABribe.com and that publish public and criminal records of politicians continue to flourish. The website that organized the rally around the Jan Lokpal Bill, India Against Corruption, has grown into a veritable force as it continues to promote its cause and engage with the public both online and online.

Additionally, as internet penetration in India remains poor, groups are looking at other using forms of technology to increase transparency in the country. As more Indians now have more mobile phones than toilets, Stanford’s Program on Liberation Technology is examining the uses of mobile phones in social audit. Perhaps the most inspiring of these innovative programs is Aadhaar, a Unique Identification (UID) project. This is one of the most ambitious programs to have ever been undertaken by the Indian government and has been assigned the Herculean task of creating the world’s largest biometric database in order to assign over billion Indians a Unique Identity Number to ensure intended recipients benefit from government subsidies designed for them.

And yet, it is clear that mobilizing the masses online and promoting transparency through technology is not sufficient to battle corruption. Effective laws, speedy trials, an honest police-force, and the political will to fight corruption are essential elements of the struggle; but shaming corrupt officials publicly and instilling a sense of accountability is an important first step.

India has a long way to go before this movement translates into better governance and improved infrastructure. Yet, news that the government is doing its best to hamper this internet revolution by censoring social media and dragging Google and Facebook to court is a sure sign that the movement is making progress.

[Image credit: Ganesh Bhakt; GNU Free Documentation License]

Despite two years of vigorous campaigning in Uttar Pradesh (UP) by Rahul Gandhi, the scion of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty and often touted (by his mother) as India’s next Prime Minister, the Congress Party was walloped in the recent state elections. It captured a measly 28 out of 403 seats in the country’s most populous and politically important state; but the Congress’ damning loss is the Indian voter’s gain.

It is clear from the results of India’s state elections this month that voters’ aspirations and demands in the country are changing. The high voter turnout in the state elections, where an additional 20 million people voted in UP alone, is an indication that Indians haven’t given up hope of better governance despite the repeated corruption scandals and policy paralysis that has made international headlines.

Additionally, the public’s spurning of the Congress’s populist politics is a strong indication that change is afoot. Economic liberalization and urbanization has spurred voters to look beyond the politics of caste, class, and religion, and focus on development and economic growth. Encouragingly, the public seems to finally be demanding accountability from their elected leaders by returning those that keep their promises to power and doing away with those that fail their duties.

On the other hand, while newly developing regions grow more politically aware and demanding, the Indian urban and elite classes seem to have remained apathetic. Indian cities have registered voter turnout of less than the national average since 1977. Perhaps this is because the privileged distance themselves from politics because the system works in their favor; or perhaps it is because they simply do not believe change is possible. A common refrain of the urban elite that abstains from voting is that there is no ‘better’ alternative, and that it doesn’t matter whom they vote for, as all the candidates are equally corrupt.

While politicians such as Nitish Kumar and Jairam Ramesh are outstanding exceptions to this criticism, it is undeniable that such inspiring leaders remain far too few and scattered. Nevertheless, the poor and marginalized cannot afford to take this view; they depend on the promise of impending economic development for access to better basic public services and are thus keen to exercise their rights in favor of those that promise it.

In the face of the shocking inequality that exists in India, the educated classes must take a more active role in ensuring the government fulfils its basic duties in redistributing resources effectively. New faces and political talent is required to encourage competition and combat corruption and inefficiency within the system. And yet, India’s educated youth tend to stay away from politics, not just due to apathy, but as the road is notoriously long and hard, and almost impossible to traverse without the right connections.

Even more troublingly, a new study shows that two-thirds of national legislators under the age of 40 are related to India’s current political leaders. This severe political nepotism in choosing the future crop of India’s leaders is a subversion of democracy; the proliferation of political dynasties has no place in Indian government. In order to encourage more talent and diversity, the government needs to introduce meritocratic programs that encourage the participation of youth in government and offer fellowships to attract and train the country’s brightest minds to work in the public interest.

There are heartening signs of a new political awakening amongst India’s growing voter base, as the public demands increasingly better governance and change. However, for real change to take place, Indian politics must be altered from within by elected officials, as well as through external public pressure. The country’s young population and their evolving aspirations must be represented by those that have earned the right, not inherited it.

In order to achieve these goals, the first phase of the mission, which aims to commission 1000MW of grid-connected solar power projects by 2013, set a limit on the number of projects that could be alloted to a single company, in order to allow a greater number of companies to participate in the scheme. However, the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), a non-government environmental agency, has announced that they have discovered a case of shocking corruption where one major private power company acquired much more stake than legally allowed.

The CSE reports that this company was awarded nine of the projects, and a quarter of the MW allocation to be derived from solar radiation by floating front companies to evade government regulations. While the company’s name only appears in two projects, the CSE alleges that it owns a 99% share in seven other companies that were awarded projects. The CSE also notes that the company in question is assured revenues of Rs 13,000 crore over the next 25 years through consumer subsidies.

The story of how the CSE discovered this suspected rampant corruption would be comical, if it were not so serious. The CSE’s suspicions were aroused when it noted that some of the winners of the auction process were unknown companies. Additionally, the NTPC Vidyut Vapar Limited (NVVN), the state owned enterprise responsible for contracting, buying, and selling of solar power, seemed strangely secretive about disclosing information regarding the winners of the auction. The NVVN neglected to mention the background information, contact details, addresses of companies, or even the winning bid amounts when they published the list of companies awarded the projects. The body seems to have had good reason to do so, as after undertaking an extensive investigation, the CSE discovered that some of the companies that won the bid had no previous experience in the solar power industry. The investigators were further taken aback when they realized that nine of the winners shifted their location to the same place once they won the bid and that seven of the winners had won the bid by bidding at a price with a negligible 5 paise difference.

It also appears as though the private power company that that the CSE claims owns these companies did not try very hard to cover its tracks, as the CSE went on to uncover that the detailed project reports of these companies were almost identical. In fact, as one of the investigators points out, even the corrections made to the report were in the same handwriting. And yet, representatives of the power company have stated that they strongly object to the CSE’s allegations.

The NVVN’s role in covering up this scandalous trail is almost as damning as the evidence. The CSE reports that when it attempted to probe the winning projects, the NVVN was reluctant to disclose any information on the companies. After the CSE was forced to resort to filing for their legal right to the information, the government body responded by saying that this information was “not in the public’s interest.” This non-transparency and lack of public accountability in government operations is nearly as shameful as the alleged corruption itself.

This case also begs the question of why the CSE was the only body in the country to detect and investigate this matter. The companies awarded the project were published for all to see, and yet only one agency demanded to know which projects the public were paying for and why. Moreover, from the CSE’s reports, it is clear that the power company in question did not expect to be seriously investigated. But the systemic corruption in the country cannot be tackled in the face of public apathy. This case needs extensive media coverage and further government investigation in order to set a serious example for others.

A vast amount of tax payer money is to be spent on the solar mission in order to subsidize solar power in India. The government must ensure greater transparency in its allocation of projects if it is to convince the public to pay for the country’s much needed renewable energy policies.

The urgency to pass this legislation is understandable from a political point of view, as it forms a key part of the Congress’s pro-poor platform. In light of the upcoming vital election in Uttar Pradesh (UP) and in the midst of increasing inflation, slowing economic growth and corruption scandals, the government must find a way to appease an increasingly dissatisfied public.

This effort to spread the benefits of economic development to the poor seems laudable at first glance.  However, this distribution of resources is exactly what the bill fails to provide for. While it legislates for specific amounts of food grains to be distributed to needy families, it lacks detail on how it plans to ensure this allocation.

India’s supply chains are famously afflicted by inadequate infrastructure and its distribution channels riddled with corruption. Food grains are produced in surplus in the country, but rot due to the lack of sufficient cold storage year after year. And yet, instead of dealing with this recurrent underlying problem, the bill seems to focus on the superficial aspects of food security.  Without paying attention to effective distribution, the bill will simply exacerbate the problem of food wastage while millions continue to starve.

Paradoxically, this bill which was designed to uplift the rural poor will hurt farmers by reducing the market prices of food crops by increasing the supply of subsidized grain. Thus, the bill may prove to be disadvantageous to the very population it was designed to benefit.  Additionally, as many have pointed out, the timing of the bill is economically inopportune (to put it mildly) in light of the country’s looming fiscal deficit and slowing economic growth.  The government has not as yet explained how it plans to finance this policy which is estimated to require 950 billion rupees per year.

Consequently, introducing this bill seems to be a baseless political move that provides little policy benefit. The country needs legislation that allows farmers to profit economically and grow autonomous, instead of forcing them to further depend further on the state. The government would do better to provide market incentives, not charitable hand-outs.

Despite these fundamental problems, it is likely that this legislation will pass through Parliament fairly smoothly. The bill is Congress Party President, Sonia Gandhi’s, pet project, and it is no secret that she pulls the strings of the government behind the scenes. As she is the head of the National Advisory Council (NAC) that has (conveniently) drafted the bill, it seems very unlikely that the plan will have trouble gaining approval. Furthermore, it would be political suicide for any political party to reject the bill when the mood in the country is already fragile; no policymaker will risk their seat by angering India’s poor further at this time.

The Congress party seems to have decided to stick to its guns firmly on this bill to prove it is still in control, after the Winter session of Parliament embarrassingly grinded to a stand-still this month after much uproar over a Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) retail bill that provided for foreign investment in the country’s supply chains and supermarkets. The FDI bill was ultimately shelved due to the strong opposition in Parliament, although ironically it had a much better chance at addressing the underlying problems the agricultural sector faces than the new bill.

It is highly unfortunate that the Congress party has chosen to stand firm on the wrong piece of legislation. Where’s the Indian government’s famous policy paralysis when you need it?

The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Bill, 2011 provides for mining companies to share their profits and royalty with those affected by their activities, by paying higher compensation to people displaced by mining activities. This bill has been drafted to replace 54 year old legislation and ensure the granting of leases in a more transparent manner.  It also helps to stop illegal and irregular mining by empowering state governments to constitute special courts to provide speedy trials for these offences.

The MMDR bill is strongly needed, as inadequate policies have allowed illegal mining operations to flourish, without strong and independent regulation. There has been rampant exploitation of forest land in India by iron-ore miners. India’s swelling Naxalite movement is testimony to this; the ‘red corridor’ that makes up the notorious movement includes some of India’s most mineral-rich and poor areas. The tribals that have resorted to violence against the Indian state are that segment of the Indian population that do not have adequate access to healthcare, education or even roads.

This piece of sustainable mining legislation was designed to boost the production of mineral resources by allowing a better legislative environment for investment and to allow for more transparency and quicker approvals in the system. And yet, mining stocks fell sharply when the bill was introduced in Parliament, as markets witnessed a strong sell-off. Additionally, most major mining companies have spoken out in protest of the bill.

This is unsurprising, as the well established ‘mining mafia’ in India is blocking this bill. Its members range from small local operators to powerful politicians as well as state owned companies such as the National Minerals Development Corporation (NMDC), and international mining companies. Their power is so endemic, that in August, an activist was killed for turning her attention to mining conglomerate Rio Tinto’s processes for extracting diamond-bearing ore from teak forests in the country.

Thus, despite its many key provisions, it hardly seems likely that this much delayed bill will be passed in Parliament. The government has already faltered, and shown its self to be indecisive, by shelving plans to allow foreign direct investment (FDI) in the retail sector in the country in the face of strong opposition.

And yet, in the midst of a country racked by anti-corruption protests, the Congress needs to make a bold move. The Indian government cannot continue to shy away from controversy. Either there will be unrest and civil violence in the country as people cotton on to just how unfair a deal they’re getting or businesses will suffer due to corruption and bureaucracy, dragging markets and politicians down with them. This is as much about politics as it is about policy; the current government must appease the increasingly angry public if it hopes to keep power. The MMDR Bill is a step in the right direction.

Representative democracy seems to have reached its tipping point in countries that have long been lauded for their democratic models. The Congress is dead-locked in the US, as political ideologies reach a bipartisanship that is seemingly irreconcilable. When even the so-called ‘super’ committee comprised of only 12 individuals can’t seem to agree, the Senate’s failure to pass legislation on anything from climate change to rising the debt-ceiling doesn’t seem to be too outrageous in comparison. The only thing that seems to unite Congress is worrying about China’s growing power and currency manipulation.

The EU, on the other hand, has almost stopped trying to sell the idea of democracy to its voters, as five of its governments have been felled over the current debt crisis. Brussels has openly installed technocrats in Italy and Greece that have been received fairly warmly by the public, who seem to think that any form of decision-making is better than the political dithering seen over the past few years. Further treaty changes will force countries to compromise their sovereignty and agree to budgetary control and supervision by external independent bodies.

In the East, the winter session of the Indian Parliament has literally grinded to a stand-still as both the opposition and members of Singh’s (ironically a technocrat himself in the world’s largest democracy) own party cause an uproar over Singh’s weak attempt to open up the Indian retail sector to FDI. India is seized by political stalemate even as mass protests against corruption rock the country as shocking government scams come to light. The strong opposition to the usual farce of Russian elections has taken Kremlin by surprise. Pro-democracy protests in Moscow have led to the first real political crisis Putin has had to face. If the next election is open to real competition, he may be the first Russian President to ever have to take part in a televised debate.

The world continues to deal with the fall-out of two unprecedented crises in 2008 and 2011 as the repercussions continue to ripple through the global economy.  On the other hand, international climate change talks continue to be a massive disappointment as the Kyoto protocol is in danger of dying without any legally binding agreements in place. As an impending global recession beckons, unemployment numbers rise ever higher even as anger at increasing inequality reaches climax. Mass uprisings extending from the U.S. to the Middle East have sprung up in the past year as the public fights for parity and more transparent governance at a pivotal time. How longer do we have before these global movements turn violent?

China seems to be the linchpin of the global economy, as it continues to invest heavily in infrastructure and clean energy and grow at a phenomenal rate It is one of the few places in the world where the government seems to actually be able to take decisions- in an undemocratic way, of course. No matter how much the West moans worries about its rapid progress and impending threat, it is the one bright spot in the market. This unexpected economic success of undemocratic policy-making calls our own models of governance into question.

However, it isn’t that democracy has failed; it is simply that it has de-evolved; our systems of governance have grown bloated, corrupt and decidedly undemocratic. Crony capitalism and the revolving door between the banks and government have never been highlighted so boldly as by the 2008 crisis and the OWS protests. If we are forced to pay for others mistakes, and accept losses for risks we didn’t take as others reap the returns, can we claim to follow a democratic model of governance?

The OWS movement has been heavily criticized for failing to politicize in a more traditional form, but it has the right idea. We cannot change the heavily inefficient political system from within; there are too many well set-up barriers to entry that include resources and time.  But we don’t need to work within the system. Whether the politicians like it or not, the internet is a democratizing force. Social networking and media has revolutionized the way we function, and the realm of possibilities of our actions. People are easier to connect; protests and actions are easier to organize. For instance, in Russia, the government has traditionally relied on state-controlled TV to set the political agenda; but independent news sources have penetrated Russia through the internet and encouraged political awareness. A video of a youth slapping one of India’s most famously corrupt Ministers went viral in a day with thousands of Indians lauding his actions on Facebook and Twitter. The Egyptian government made the mistake of attempting to cut off the internet when the rising against Mubarak first erupted- where is Mubarak now? For an example closer to home, look no further than this site- it would have impossible for our generation to voice our political opinions and be taken seriously just ten years ago.

We’re in the midst of a dramatic revolution, as the world grows flatter. The 1% is powerful because we choose them to be. It is time we recognized the clout of the 99%. The Move Your Money project is a great illustration of this as it encourages the public to shift their funds from Wall Street’s major banks to local ones, taking the power away from the bankers. Additionally, an increasing number of people are organizing to take urgent climate change action into their own hands, as politicians continue to drag their feet. As funding from banks dries up, renewable energy companies have begun to raise money through groupfunding using social networks.

The two crises have highlighted that our economic and political systems are broken; we must adapt to survive. We can and are creating new models of governance.