The ‘Exclusionary Vision’ Dilemma for Sovereign Countries

Sovereign nations protect their distinct cultural foundations while still upholding an inclusive vision of governance. The same principle should apply to India. The ‘Universal Oneness Celebration’ event that was recently held in New York City attracted criticism that was only to be expected from certain obvious quarters who chastised the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) for having an allegedly ‘exclusionary vision’. In a free society, one can always express a personal opinion on the...

min read

The ‘Exclusionary Vision’ Dilemma for Sovereign Countries

Sovereign nations protect their distinct cultural foundations while still upholding an inclusive vision of governance. The same principle should apply to India. The ‘Universal Oneness Celebration’ event that was recently held in New York City attracted criticism that was only to be expected from certain obvious quarters who chastised the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) for having an allegedly ‘exclusionary vision’. In a free society, one can always express a personal opinion on the effectiveness with which the stated ideology or philosophy of any organisation is being implemented on the ground. However, labelling an organisation that considers ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’ as its core belief as having an ‘exclusionary vision’ is curious, to say the least. We are living in a world of different sovereign countries, each with its own history, cultural identity that acts as a foundation for nation-building and, of course, its own international borders and immigration policies. It is interesting to see how different countries look at the cultural identity and ethos that shape them, and how they protect the foundation on which they stand while still championing their own ‘inclusive vision’. Illusion of Contradiction Take France as an example. The principles of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity were born out of the French Revolution. They serve as the guiding star for France. Many other countries in the world have also adopted these principles and drawn inspiration from them. Such noble principles, however, are never sufficient to define the foundation of a sovereign country that differentiates it from others. While Liberty, Equality and Fraternity are held in high regard in France, the French language is the foundation on which France stands as a sovereign country. As it is often said, language carries with it not merely its grammar and vocabulary, but a whole culture of its own. Approximately 13 percent of the population in France has a mother tongue different from French. It is noteworthy how France looks at its cultural foundation — the French language — vis-à-vis the spirit behind the principles of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity enshrined in its Constitution. Article 2 of the same French Constitution explicitly states that France has only one official language — French. From time to time, there are demands to grant official status to other minority languages, but they face tremendous political and legal resistance and are shot down. Other languages are denied even ‘co-official’ status because this is perceived as a direct threat to the deeply rooted ideology of the centralised linguistic unity of France. It goes a step further. There is a concerted, systematic effort to preserve the ‘purity’ of the French language and fight the ‘invasion of English’, called Franglais. It is mandatory under the law, including the Toubon Law, to use the French language in government publications and workplaces, and to include a French translation if any English slogan is used even in a commercial advertisement. Similarly, although Italy recognises a few ‘minority languages’, its official national language is only one — Italian. The approach taken by Germany or Japan is broadly the same. One cannot but wonder whether the same critics of the RSS would call an approach taken by France ‘exclusionary’. The fact is that every sovereign country has its own cultural foundation, which is the cause of its very existence. Countries go out of their way to ‘exclusively’ protect and preserve that cultural foundation. That does not mean, however, that France exclusively belongs only to the majority population whose mother tongue is the same as the national language. Nor does it mean that the State will treat its citizens differently based on their mother tongue, or give preferential treatment to the majority community over linguistic minorities. It is in this perspective that one needs to look at the civilisational ethos dating back thousands of years that forms the foundation of the Indian subcontinent, and the historical context of events that led to India being born as a present-day sovereign country in 1947. How India should treat its cultural foundation is no different from how France, Italy, Germany or Japan should do it. Needless to say, neither India nor any of these other countries discriminate against certain citizens when it comes to governance and the rule of law. There is no contradiction or ‘exclusionary vision’ whatsoever in the approach taken by France, and the same should hold true for India as well. Contextual Similarity As far as the United States of America is concerned, neither any particular language, nor any religion, nor any ethnic origin independently defines the cultural foundation of that country. And yet, there is certainly an ‘American culture’ that defines the country and acts as its foundation. People from all over the world, with very different backgrounds, have migrated to that land and ‘American culture’ has assimilated them. Although it may be difficult to define it very clearly, there is certainly ‘Unity in Diversity’ in American culture. The country calls itself ‘a melting pot’. It goes out of its way to protect this attribute through uniform civil laws that apply to all citizens regardless of their religion or ethnicity. Not everything was just and fair in American history. However, American culture and its democratic ethos not only allow open discussion and debate on what was wrong, but also encourage action on the ground to correct historical wrongs. Former President Bill Clinton summarised it well in one of the presidential debates when he said: “There is nothing wrong in America that cannot be corrected by what is right in America.” When it comes to immigration, whether for tourism or work, the US perhaps has been the most open country for several decades. Its policy towards even illegal immigration has been very soft. It has realised, however, that all this is being taken for granted by many countries and even deliberately misused. Any legitimate attempt, in the larger interest of the country, to change and tighten that policy and stop illegal immigration and settlement invites severe criticism. With that criticism, ironically, an otherwise very open and welcoming country gets painted as being very rigid and intolerant. This specific aspect of American culture, and the criticism it faces, has a clear parallel with the civilisational ethos that forms the foundation of India. Indian culture has also assimilated people from many parts of the world for centuries. It too has its own ‘Unity in Diversity’ that is not very easy for many to define and appreciate. It also welcomes open discussion about historical wrongs and makes a sincere attempt to correct them. The accommodating and welcoming nature — the ‘Atithi Devo Bhava’ psyche — implicit in Indian culture has also been deliberately and rampantly misused. Any attempt to enforce the law of the land invites the same criticism that the US faces. Needless to say, India, like the US or any other country, would and should go out of its way to protect its cultural foundation. Doing so can be termed an ‘exclusionary vision’ only as part of a motivated agenda, if not an absolute unwillingness or inability to grasp and respect the cultural foundations of different countries. There is a need to refine and temper the definition of the so-called ‘exclusionary vision’ for it to make sense in a world of sovereign nations that want to legitimately protect their individual identities in different ways. In other words, the very definition of ‘exclusionary vision’ itself needs to be more ‘inclusive’ in more ways than one. Given its history, the US perhaps is the best country to appreciate what it means to espouse ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’ as an inclusive ideology. It is also the best country to appreciate the fact that attempts to prevent the deliberate misuse of an inclusive ideology cannot be termed an ‘exclusionary vision’. (The writer has worked in the Information Technology sector. Views personal.)

When Solar Starts Chilling Milk

Anusreeta Dutta

Aug 11

5 min read

India’s renewable-energy story is moving beyond electricity access to protecting rural value by cutting waste and strengthening livelihoods.

For decades, the story of rural energy in India was about providing electricity to communities. But the next chapter might be something more practical: what power can really do for rural economies. In Maharashtra, solar electricity is being used to cool milk, which sounds like a simple task. Dairy collection centers in Dharashiv and Latur are relying less on traditional electricity and diesel with solar-powered milk chilling infrastructure, which also helps chill milk closer to where it is collected. The development is part of a larger trend taking place across India’s dairy sector where the cold chain is getting access to renewable energy.

India is the world’s largest producer of milk, producing close to 209 million tons of milk per year. But the nation’s dairy business still faces a fundamental infrastructure problem: milk is highly perishable, and the route from farm to processing plant starts in villages where reliable refrigeration is not always available. The fresh milk from the animal may be at the temperature of 35 to 37 degrees Celsius. It is necessary to maintain at or below 4°C to prevent microbial activity and maintain quality. Therefore, refrigeration has become an integral part of the dairy supply chain. This is when India’s energy crisis turns into a dairy crisis.

Unreliable Grid

The margin for error in a milk collection center that lacks reliable power is very small. The farmers bring their milk in the morning. If it isn’t chilled quickly, the quality begins to decline. A power outage is therefore more than a nuisance to the collection center; it can mean lower-quality milk, more spoiling, and ultimately, lost revenue. Many years, diesel generators were a backup. Diesel solves one problem but creates another. It increases operating expenses and adds emissions to an already climate-affected supply chain. WWF-India states that more than 3 percent of India’s milk production is lost every year due to unpredictable energy, which is equivalent to about six million tons. Its work on sustainable dairy cold chains demonstrates how solar-powered chilling can reduce fuel dependence, pollution, and milk losses.

That impacts how we look at rural solar. The usual story goes like this: solar panels power homes, farms, and irrigation pumps. What is more interesting is when that electricity starts to power useful infrastructure.

A solar panel powering a milk chiller does more than just generate clean power. It protects the farmer's produce. It adds time between production and collection. It can cut the demand for diesel. And most importantly, it can help to decide whether milk is sold as a higher-quality commodity or as a perishable liability.

When people talk about cold chains in India, they often talk of warehouses, refrigerated trucks, and large processing facilities. However, the first and perhaps most important relationship can be considerably smaller: the local village collection center. Small dairy farms mostly do not have their own refrigeration facilities. Milk is collected from a number of producers and taken to a processing plant. Thus, the collecting center is a link between the formal dairy market and the producers. That bridge needs some kind of power. WWF-India’s renewable-energy dairy program has installed 101 solar-powered instant milk chillers in Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Karnataka, and Maharashtra. Together, these systems provide 851 kW of renewable capacity and cooling facilities for some 50,000 litres of milk per day.

Solar photovoltaic panels generate electricity, batteries provide backup, and thermal storage and cooling devices keep milk at safe temperatures. Renewable systems can give rural businesses some energy resilience on their own, instead of waiting for the electrical grid to stabilize entirely before productive infrastructure is built.

Energy Efficiency

India has invested decades in building electricity access. But access alone does not guarantee economic transformation. The tougher question is whether rural communities can regularly produce value from energy. A good example is the cooling of milk. If a dairy co-op saves money on diesel, some of that savings would stay in the local value chain. If milk quality improves, farmers may stand a better chance of getting quality-linked compensation. If spoilage rates decline, farmers will have more of what they grow to sell.

WWF-India says renewable-powered chilling can help farmers up their profits by improving the quality of milk and reducing fuel consumption significantly. It says the initiative has reduced diesel use by 90-95 percent among member dairy cooperatives.

There is also a gender aspect at play here. Women’s active participation in cattle management and other household dairy tasks is an important part of India’s dairy sector. What makes the Maharashtra case particularly interesting is the link between the solar cooling equipment and women dairy farmers and local collection networks. This raises larger issues on the sustainable energy transition of India. Who benefits a village from renewable infrastructure?

If only the electric consumer reacts, the impact is limited. But when farmers can save their produce, cut costs, enhance quality, and negotiate better market access through renewable energy, clean energy starts to work as economic infrastructure. This could be the start of a much larger tale.

But enthusiasm must be tempered by realism. A solar panel alone does not establish a functioning cold chain. Chilling facilities still require proper equipment, batteries or thermal storage, maintenance and reliable collection and transportation systems. There’s a big economics part of it too. In particular, small cooperatives and fragmented dairy markets face high capital costs. Solar generation is also variable. A well-designed system will need storage or some other backup device if milk needs to be kept cool after daylight hours. The issue of scale is also at stake.

Where milk volumes are sufficient and collection is organized, a village-level chiller may be effective. To scale the idea across thousands of remote settlements, it requires financing, maintenance networks, cooperative participation, and institutional support. The challenge is how to make it financially viable, and sustainable.

That may be why the Maharashtra experiment matters. Milk is only one of India’s many perishable agricultural commodities. The same problems exist with fruits, vegetables, fish, meat, and so on. A poor cold chain in these areas can convert a good harvest into an economic loss. Earlier, NITI Aayog had pointed out the opportunities for technology-enabled cold chains like solar refrigeration, IoT monitoring, and decentralized storage for reducing agricultural losses and improving farmer market access.

The opportunity is to shift from thinking about solar in terms of generating power to thinking about solar in terms of conserving economic value.

A solar milk chiller (SMC) serves as a link between production and marketing. These technologies collectively point to a new form of rural electrification that incorporates renewable energy directly into the economic activities that support rural livelihoods.

India’s energy transformation is usually told in form of gigawatts of solar power, renewable energy targets and big projects. But some of its biggest changes could happen on a much smaller scale. A solar panel above a village dairy collection center doesn't look like an energy revolution. But when that panel powers a chiller, keeps milk from spoiling, reduces diesel use, and helps a farmer get more value for her produce, the definition of clean energy changes. It is no longer enough to move from one source of electricity to another. Now is the time to strengthen rural economies.

Solar milk chillers in Maharashtra illustrate this possibility. The next chapter of India’s renewable energy story could possibly be about how much solar electricity waste can be avoided.

(The writer is a columnist and climate researcher with experience in political research analysis, ESG research, and energy policy. Views personal.)

The ‘Exclusionary Vision’ Dilemma for Sovereign Countries

When Solar Starts Chilling Milk

Recent Posts

Comments