British Rule and India’s Ecological Transformation

How British colonial policies reshaped India’s landscapes, exploited its natural resources, and disrupted centuries-old ecological balance

This essay was written by Avish Patel: a student from India

Introduction

An ecosystem comprises a community of organisms engaged in a dynamic network of biological, chemical, and physical interactions with one another and their non-living surroundings. Therefore, an ecosystem includes both the communities and the non-living components, as well as their interactions. The term "ecosystem" was first introduced by A.G. Tansley in 1935, who defined it as a self-sustaining community of plants and animals existing in its natural environment.

Alfred W. Crosby later introduced the concept of "Ecological Imperialism," which described a complex mix of invasive species, animals, and diseases brought about by European biological expansion and migration, resulting in the destruction of indigenous flora, fauna, and human societies in the New World.

In this article, the term India is used in a historical and geographical context, referring not only to the Republic of India today, but the broader Indian subcontinent which includes the lands of present-day Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Nepal.

The Columbian Exchange and Its Indirect Impact on India

What started off as voyages initiated by Christopher Columbus in 1492 marked the beginning of a fundamental shift in the history of mankind by allowing the transfer of plants and animals, culture, technology, and diseases between the Old World (Europe, Asia, and Africa) and the New World (the Americas). Although India was not directly involved in this transatlantic exchange, its agricultural practices and traditions were much affected along with the economy and society, reaching their heights from these colonial networks set in motion by various European powers like the Portuguese, Dutch, French, and British. As and when various American food products, including potatoes, maize, chilies, tomatoes, and sweet potatoes, made their way to India, old agricultural systems were destroyed and Indian society was transformed. The introduction of the potato and chili to India may be seen as one of the most vital continental exchanges that have transformed Indian agriculture. Native to the Andean region of South America, the potato was brought to India during the late 16th and early 17th centuries by the Portuguese. It slowly became a staple crop in many areas of the subcontinent, in particular northern India, where, on the foothills of the Himalayas, they found a hospitable land in their cool climate. Potatoes are considered an integral part of Indian cuisine today and are prominently used in dishes like aloo paratha, samosas, and various curries. Chili, a New World crop, was also brought in by the Portuguese. From the onset of its introduction, it substituted black pepper as the chief source of heat in Indian cooking. One must concede that chili became accepted and became an identity of Indian cooking and culinary practices that go along with it from region to culture.

Pre-Colonial Legacy

One of the major trends emerging from the pre-colonial environmental history of the sub-continent is the perception of the relationship between man-made and natural environments as co-evolutionary, sustainable, and mutually diversified, as conditioned by cultural, religious, and pragmatic values. This enabled long-term sustainability and management of their environment through indigenous ecological knowledge. Religious practices conserved sacred groves and other protected forested areas, also indirectly preserving biodiversity. Stepwells, tanks and canals are the advanced water management systems designed by ancient Indian societies that have shown their skills in different environmental conservation practices.

Ramachandra Guha and Madhav Gadgil characterize colonialism as a significant ecological turning point. They point that the Pre-colonial society was the Golden Age of Environment in India. They argue that while Europe could not establish a neo-Europe in India by destroying indigenous populations and their resources, they did intervene and dramatically alteredexisting agricultural systems and their ecological foundations. During the pre-colonial period, state control was primarily focused on extracting certain plant and animal species or maintaining hunting reserves.

For example, Tipu Sultan claimed state rights over sandalwood, a valuable resource. Although ecological harmony was not fully achieved, arable land was plentiful, and state control was limited. A hierarchy of user rights rather than a strict notion of property dominated in both agricultural and forest land use.

Ancient Indian Philosophy and Sacred Groves

The Vedas mention three categories of forests:

1. Tapovana: Forests serving as homes for sages, where kings and princes would visit for counsel.

2. Mahavana: Larger forests that housed various wild plants, trees, herbs, shrubs, and animals.

3. Shrivana: Forests associated with temples, with flora dedicated to religious purposes, playing a key role in preserving indigenous flora and fauna.

These forests and groves were often tied to specific communities in the Vedic period, with beliefs linked to particular plants dedicated to local deities.

The ‘Sacred Groves’ are forest patches of different sizes, which are commonly protected and which usually have some type of religious significance for the protecting community. Hunting and logging are generally banned in these patches of forest; while other uses such as honey collection and deadwood gathering are sometimes permitted on a sustainable basis. Non-governmental organizations work with villages to conserve sacred groves. In India, traditionally, and even presently in some cases, members of the community take turns protecting the groves.

In the epic Mahabharata, Lord Krishna grew up in the sacred forest region of Vraj (Braj), which is documented to have housed several hundred forests; however, only twelve remain today.

As forests were cleared for agriculture, at least one tree was typically left standing in the open area, which was later enclosed with wooden fencing. Over time, this wooden enclosure was replaced with stone, leading to the establishment of temples. The site of the preserved tree within a temple became known as Sthal Vriksha, facilitating the protection of endemic and endangered plant species. The tradition of tree worship can be traced back to the Indus Valley Civilization, as illustrated by the seals from that era. Among the most revered trees is the Peepal or Asvattha tree, where Lord Buddha attained enlightenment and where Lord Krishna passed away, making it sacred to both Hindus and Buddhists.

Colonialism and Environment

Pre British India, despite significant inequalities of caste, creed, and class, pre-colonial society maintained a considerable level of coherence and stability. Upon contact with Europeans, who were on the verge of the Industrial Revolution, a major social transformation began. This revolution allowed for the conversion of resources and their transportation over vast distances. Wood was a critical resource in subsistence economies, primarily used as fuel and later transformed into paper or burned for steam engines powering trains and ships. By 1860, Britain had become the world's leader in deforestation, depleting not only its own forests but also those in Ireland, South Africa, and parts of the United States to facilitate shipbuilding, iron smelting, and more.

The British also used the destruction of forests to symbolize their political triumphs; for instance, after defeating the Marathas, they levelled teak plantations in Ratnagiri, previously nurtured by Maratha admiral Kanhoji Angre. As oak forests dwindled in England, there was an urgent need for a consistent supply of durable timber for the Royal Navy, leading to the recognition of India as a key resource. It is said that the Indian teak industry was vital for England during the Napoleonic Wars (1800-1815), with Britain consuming around 4.9 million tonnes of wood annually. Even in the 1880s, the Indian Forest Department frequently received requests from the British Admiralty for supplies of Madras and Burma teak. From a colonial perspective, forests were seen as obstacles to agriculture and a hindrance to imperial prosperity. Consequently, agrarian policies prioritized the expansion of cultivation, leading to widespread forest destruction. Significant portions of forests were cleared to meet the demands for railway sleepers; for example, the sub-Himalayan forests of Garhwal and Kumaon faced severe deforestation, and both Indian and European contractors were complicit in this devastation. The forests of the Doab region were similarly ravaged in the 1880s to supply fuelwood for the North-West Provinces railways before the Raniganj coal mines were discovered.

Colonial Forestry and Hunting

Colonial forestry negatively affected traditional conservation and management practices among forest-dwelling communities. The attempts by these communities to reclaim their rights resulted in colonial authorities labelling them as "Criminal Tribes." For instance, the Chenchu tribes in South Hyderabad lost their hunting rights and control over forest resources, relegating them to a status akin to serfdom. To survive, these tribes often resorted to banditry and theft. The new forest regulations restricted small-scale hunting but significantly promoted the masculine sport of "Shikar" or game hunting. From the mid-19th century, large-scale slaughter of animals ensued, with hunters from all ranks of the British Indian Army, including viceroys, participating, often motivated by the desire for record-setting kills.

One planter in the Nilgiris reportedly hunted 400 elephants, while viceroys shot thousands of birds in a single day to claim world records; Indian nobles, like the Maharaja of Gwalior, killed over 700 tigers in a century. Colonial authorities regarded shifting cultivation or Jhum as primitive and unproductive, leading to its prohibition, which triggered violent resistance from tribal groups. The Imperial Forest Department was established in 1864 with the assistance of German experts, recognized for their expertise in forest management. Dietrich Brandis, the first Inspector-General of forests and a botanist from Bonn University, established the legal framework to assert and maintain state control over forests through the Forest Act of 1865.

Impact on Indigenous Communities

The consequences for many nomadic and pastoral communities, as well as those reliant on hunting and gathering, were disastrous. Numerous customary rights held by rural and tribal populations were abolished. State- designated forest reserves impacted the ecology, as certain plants like oak and Terminalia were supplanted by commercially valuable species such as teak, pine, and deodar. The colonial government opposed shifting cultivation and compelled many tribal groups to adopt sedentary agricultural practices. During the 1860s, intense efforts were made to transition the Baigas of the Mandla, Balaghat, and Bilaspur areas in the Central Provinces away from shifting cultivation. The redefinition of property rights by the colonial state led to vast areas of previously cultivable land coming under the control of the Forest Department, which played a pivotal role in the colonization of the land. This increased bureaucratic control also entrenched serfdom and the practice of Begar (unpaid labor).

Conclusion

British colonialism profoundly transformed the Indian environment, leaving a legacy of deforestation, water mismanagement, industrial pollution, wildlife depletion, agricultural changes, and urbanization with negative environmental consequences. The exploitation of natural resources and the implementation of policies focused on colonial interests rather than sustainable development resulted in enduring environmental degradation that continues to impact India's ecosystems and communities to this day.

The colonial regime in India is often given credit for conserving plants and animals, but these acknowledgements often fail to recognize that the interest of the colonial government was not in conserving ecology, but tapping and extracting nature as a set of resources for Britain's industrial development.

Although these measures formed some regulations of the environment unexpectedly, they also undermined traditional rights of access to the forests, water bodies and pastureland that indigenous and rural populations had utilized for centuries. By denying grazing, shifting cultivation and the community wood-cutting of young trees, the British were not merely separating indigenous or rural communities from their ecological means, the British were robbing rural people of their subsistence economy.

While it can be argued that colonial land revenue systems, irrigation projects, and commercial crop initiatives provided a boost in agricultural surplus, they could not do so without ecological repercussions. With the increase in cash crops like indigo, cotton, and tea, deforestation increased, oil depletion occurred and subsistence farming was pushed to the margins. Pasture lands turned into revenue-generating estates were devoid of any extra space for animals and biodiversity was sacrificed for monoculture, plantation ecology.

In this way, even if colonial institutions and policies serendipitously paved the way for certain facets of contemporary conservation institutions, they were ultimately extractive by nature and focused on the unilateral economic interests of the imperial powers at the expense of ecologies and socio-cultural fabric of the indigenous peoples of India.

In addition to colonizing the Indian people, the British Raj also impacted the country's flora and fauna, which is why independent India continues to face environmental problems.

References:

Crosby, Alfred W. Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900–1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.

Grove, Richard. Green Imperialism: Colonial Expansion, Tropical Island Edens, and the Origins of Environmentalism, 1600–1860. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Guha, Ramachandra, and Madhav Gadgil. This Fissured Land: An Ecological History of India. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1992.

Skaria, Ajay. Hybrid Histories: Forests, Frontiers, and Wildness in Western India. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Sivaramakrishnan, K. Modern Forests: Statemaking and Environmental Change in Colonial Eastern India. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999.

Tansley, A. G. “The Use and Abuse of Vegetational Concepts and Terms.” Ecology 16, no. 3 (1935): 284–307.

Thapar, Romila. The Past and Prejudice. New Delhi: National Book Trust, 1975.

Gadgil, M., and V. D. Vartak. “Sacred Groves of India: A Plea for Continued Conservation.” Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 72 (1975): 314–320.