ABSTRACT
Precisely in its paradoxical dimensions this constellation has been addressed for quite some time in India - particularly by proponents ofthe Indian environmental movement (Agarwal and Narain 1991). However, the Indian environmental movement itselfis characterized by extreme heterogeneity and, at times, contradicting interests. In arecent paper that reflected on the state of the movement, the environmental scientist and activist Sharachandra Lele identified three broad currents. These are (i) 'wildlife conservationists' emphasizing rather narrowly the conservation ofparticular biospheres; (ii) the so-called 'livelihood movements' focusing on the habitats ofpoor populations and addressing their structural exploitation and marginalization; and (iii) the 'urban environmentalists' who are mainly comrnitted to more sustainable patterns of resource usage (Lele 2012: 213). In order to unite these diverse environmentalist currents into a social movement, according to Lele, two conditions have to be met. What is needed is, on the one hand, a multidimensional analysis of the roots and consequences of climate change complemented, on the other hand, by the acceptance and linking of plural engagements (Lele 2012:
214-215). Both principles - an elaborated identification of the issue and the correlation of various forms of action - certainly mark the fundamental conditions for social movements that are to evolve. The Indian climate movement, however, is still in its infancy and thus characterized by isolated criticism and dispersed protests. In this chapter we will introduce possible footholds of such a movement and illuminate their stance on climate change. Approaching the problem thus we follow Lele's justified demand. We root our analysis in the interrogation of both discursive and practical dimensions, and ask how particular actors correlate with diverse dimensions of climate change and which alliance and coalitions are fostered through their practical engagements. On such an interaction of diverse layers and actors rests the potential of a broad political mobilization and intervention.
