What do you think?
Rate this book
How Much Should a Person Consume?: Environmentalism in India and the United States
Based on research conducted over two decades, this accessible and deeply felt book provides a provocative comparative history of environmentalism in two large ecologically and culturally diverse democracies―India and the United States. Ramachandra Guha takes as his point of departure the dominant environmental philosophies in these two countries―identified as "agrarianism" in India and "wilderness thinking" in the U.S. Proposing an inclusive "social ecology" framework that goes beyond these partisan ideologies, Guha arrives at a richer understanding of controversies over large dams, state forests, wildlife reserves, and more. He offers trenchant critiques of privileged and isolationist proponents of conservation, persuasively arguing for biospheres that care as much for humans as for other species. He also provides profiles of three remarkable environmental thinkers and activists―Lewis Mumford, Chandi Prasad Bhatt, and Madhav Gadgil. Finally, the author asks the fundamental environmental question―how much should a person or country consume?―and explores a range of answers.
Permanent Black
Permanent Black
276 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2006
23 people are currently reading
724 people want to read
About the author
Ramachandra Guha
113 books1,613 followersRamachandra Guha was born in Dehradun in 1958, and educated in Delhi and Calcutta. He has taught at the University of Oslo, Stanford, and Yale, and at the Indian Institute of Science. He has been a Fellow of the Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin, and also served as the Indo-American Community Chair Visiting Professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
After a peripatetic academic career, with five jobs in ten years on three continents, Guha settled down to become a full-time writer based in Bangalore. His books cover a wide range of themes, including a global history of environmentalism, a biography of an anthropologist-activist, a social history of Indian cricket, and a social history of Himalayan peasants.
Guha’s books and essays have been translated into more than twenty languages. The prizes they have won include the U.K. Cricket Society’s Literary Award and the Leopold-Hidy Prize of the American Society of Environmental History.
After a peripatetic academic career, with five jobs in ten years on three continents, Guha settled down to become a full-time writer based in Bangalore. His books cover a wide range of themes, including a global history of environmentalism, a biography of an anthropologist-activist, a social history of Indian cricket, and a social history of Himalayan peasants.
Guha’s books and essays have been translated into more than twenty languages. The prizes they have won include the U.K. Cricket Society’s Literary Award and the Leopold-Hidy Prize of the American Society of Environmental History.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
May 13, 2020
"Environmentalists may wish to change the world, but environmental historians should seek merely to understand and interpret it."
It's an attempt of a scholar trying to depict the ways we handle environment exploring the history, cultural traditions of United States and India, and relate it with our economic and social life, political institutions, mainstream popular mentalities, and scientific research. Providing ways to understand how people think when it comes to this topic, what makes them act in sects and groups, what means are being used by those.
This is an unavoidable work to be read for Environmental Activists, Tourists, Wildlife aficionados, Vegans or incorrigible consumers in general to get the other side of the picture on what are the consequences we, as a species in general, face trying to find an universal solution to problems across the vast geographical land and peoples with varied ways of seeing and living.
Raymond Williams says, "if we only talk of singular Man and singular Nature, we can compose a general history, but at the cost of excluding the real and altering social relations."
Maybe we can think about ending speciesism only after we start thinking of all humans as a single species acknowledging our differences in values and virtues.
We have the obligation to make this world a safer place for human differences as 'civilized' being of whatever that means.
I read it as a part of my elective paper on Social Ecology which aims to bridge the gap between authoritarian biologists who favor nature over man and anthropocentric socialists who favor the other way. A bit repetitive in certain places yet the writing style is interesting enough to get through. Recommended for the possibilities of life.
I shall never again think and see the national parks, wildlife sanctuaries the same way whenever I visit them, nor be happy if a new hydropower generation projects are undertaken by governments planning to build dams, nor subscribe to any particular ideologies of primitivism, agrarianism and scientific industrialism. That is a beginning.
It's an attempt of a scholar trying to depict the ways we handle environment exploring the history, cultural traditions of United States and India, and relate it with our economic and social life, political institutions, mainstream popular mentalities, and scientific research. Providing ways to understand how people think when it comes to this topic, what makes them act in sects and groups, what means are being used by those.
This is an unavoidable work to be read for Environmental Activists, Tourists, Wildlife aficionados, Vegans or incorrigible consumers in general to get the other side of the picture on what are the consequences we, as a species in general, face trying to find an universal solution to problems across the vast geographical land and peoples with varied ways of seeing and living.
Raymond Williams says, "if we only talk of singular Man and singular Nature, we can compose a general history, but at the cost of excluding the real and altering social relations."
Maybe we can think about ending speciesism only after we start thinking of all humans as a single species acknowledging our differences in values and virtues.
We have the obligation to make this world a safer place for human differences as 'civilized' being of whatever that means.
I read it as a part of my elective paper on Social Ecology which aims to bridge the gap between authoritarian biologists who favor nature over man and anthropocentric socialists who favor the other way. A bit repetitive in certain places yet the writing style is interesting enough to get through. Recommended for the possibilities of life.
I shall never again think and see the national parks, wildlife sanctuaries the same way whenever I visit them, nor be happy if a new hydropower generation projects are undertaken by governments planning to build dams, nor subscribe to any particular ideologies of primitivism, agrarianism and scientific industrialism. That is a beginning.
January 29, 2025
This book, ‘How much should a person consume? Environmentalism in India and the United States’, I picked up because I thought it would be a comparative study between the environmentalism in India and the US. However, it did not turn out to be. The author, Ramchandra Guha, has written it more like a memoir and biographies of the people rather than what the title suggested. I was thinking that I would read something akin to the last chapter of the book, ‘How much should a person consume?’ I was expecting some hardcore analysis in terms of graphs, tables, and numbers by reading the topic of the book, but reading this book was not only a pain, it was also a drab experience. The book contains a lot of information about the people (or institutions) who are or were on the forefront of environmentalism, but I couldn’t deduce how the author intended it to be a comparative study. I did not enjoy it much and gave it 2.5 ⭐.
January 8, 2017
Why is a book on history and theories of environmentalism, biographies of environmentalists be titled - "How much should a person consume ?"
Ignoring the misleading title, it was good in parts but a bit dry and repetitive.
Ignoring the misleading title, it was good in parts but a bit dry and repetitive.
January 10, 2012
I picked up Dr. Guha's book because I was intrigued by the title. Is it really possible to quantify the amount one should consume irrespective of countries where they live in, the social classes to which they belong and the aspirations one has in life? In the end, the book is not so much about this question in spite of the title. Only in the final chapter does the author take up this question and ends up only posing further questions rather than answers. Of course, it is unfair to even expect that such a question can be answered with a number like '42'!
This book is mostly about the comparative history of the environmental movements in two democracies which are at the opposite ends of affluence - India and the U.S. It is also about the contributions of four eminent environmentalists - Patrick Geddes, Lewis Mumford, Chandi Prasad Bhatt and Madhav Gadgil. For me, the book was mostly an education in certain aspects of the environmental movement in India and the US and associated personalities.
Dr.Guha says that the dominant environmental philosophy in India is Agrarianism whereas in the US, it is Wilderness Thinking. The curious thing about this is that wilderness thinking is hostile to agriculture whereas agrarianism is not favorably disposed to lovers of the wild. However, the author likes to believe that we are on the threshold of a new synthesis of environmental ethics - taking the idea of Diversity from Primitivism, the idea of Sustainability from peasant cultures and the value of Equity from Modern societies. He is however, very critical of the wildlife conservation movement in the West which seeks to deny the right of tribals to continue to live in the forests where they have lived from time immemorial - all in the name of protection of species. He says that these movements have done great harm to native populations in Africa, India and Latin America by this policy.
Dr.Guha's preference is for what he calls 'Social Ecology' which would bring together the complementary skills of the sociologist and the ecologist in its approach to the Environment. On this, he writes extensively about three social ecologists, two from India and one from the US. The first is about the Historical Social Ecology of Lewis Mumford, who advanced a conception of regional development that balanced the needs of the social world with those of the natural ecosystem. The second one is on the Subaltern Social Ecology of Chandi Prasad Bhatt from the Garhwal Himalayas. Mr.Bhatt is a humble, sparsely educated transport dept employee who caught the attention of the world in the 1970s through the Gandhian ecological movement called 'Chipko' where men, women and children of the Himalayas hugged hundreds of trees to prevent timber merchants from felling them. The third is about the Democratic Social Ecology of Dr. Madhav Gadgil, a professor from the Indian Institute of Science. Dr.Gadgil contributed greatly to forest policy and forest management in India looking both at the scientific limitations of forestry as it was practised and its wider implications in terms of social equity. The National forest Policy of the Govt. of India in 1988 bears the mark of his studies and recommendations, not least in its ecological focus but also in its relative sensitivity to tribal and rural interests. Finally, Dr.Guha says that the question 'how much should a person consume' should come to dominate the intellectual and political debates of our time. In this, he takes Prof. J.K. Galbraith's question of the 1950s - 'how much should a country consume' as the point of departure.
I would recommend the book not so much for any new ideas but as an education on the subject.
This book is mostly about the comparative history of the environmental movements in two democracies which are at the opposite ends of affluence - India and the U.S. It is also about the contributions of four eminent environmentalists - Patrick Geddes, Lewis Mumford, Chandi Prasad Bhatt and Madhav Gadgil. For me, the book was mostly an education in certain aspects of the environmental movement in India and the US and associated personalities.
Dr.Guha says that the dominant environmental philosophy in India is Agrarianism whereas in the US, it is Wilderness Thinking. The curious thing about this is that wilderness thinking is hostile to agriculture whereas agrarianism is not favorably disposed to lovers of the wild. However, the author likes to believe that we are on the threshold of a new synthesis of environmental ethics - taking the idea of Diversity from Primitivism, the idea of Sustainability from peasant cultures and the value of Equity from Modern societies. He is however, very critical of the wildlife conservation movement in the West which seeks to deny the right of tribals to continue to live in the forests where they have lived from time immemorial - all in the name of protection of species. He says that these movements have done great harm to native populations in Africa, India and Latin America by this policy.
Dr.Guha's preference is for what he calls 'Social Ecology' which would bring together the complementary skills of the sociologist and the ecologist in its approach to the Environment. On this, he writes extensively about three social ecologists, two from India and one from the US. The first is about the Historical Social Ecology of Lewis Mumford, who advanced a conception of regional development that balanced the needs of the social world with those of the natural ecosystem. The second one is on the Subaltern Social Ecology of Chandi Prasad Bhatt from the Garhwal Himalayas. Mr.Bhatt is a humble, sparsely educated transport dept employee who caught the attention of the world in the 1970s through the Gandhian ecological movement called 'Chipko' where men, women and children of the Himalayas hugged hundreds of trees to prevent timber merchants from felling them. The third is about the Democratic Social Ecology of Dr. Madhav Gadgil, a professor from the Indian Institute of Science. Dr.Gadgil contributed greatly to forest policy and forest management in India looking both at the scientific limitations of forestry as it was practised and its wider implications in terms of social equity. The National forest Policy of the Govt. of India in 1988 bears the mark of his studies and recommendations, not least in its ecological focus but also in its relative sensitivity to tribal and rural interests. Finally, Dr.Guha says that the question 'how much should a person consume' should come to dominate the intellectual and political debates of our time. In this, he takes Prof. J.K. Galbraith's question of the 1950s - 'how much should a country consume' as the point of departure.
I would recommend the book not so much for any new ideas but as an education on the subject.
January 2, 2014
The book is less about the title and more about the synopsis, as many have already pointed out. Guha, in his distinctive style, elaborates upon the history of environmental movement in India and the US and what have been their guiding forces. The contrast presented by him is intuitive. Indian environmental movement has more or less been people oriented, i.e., movement against the state's denial of local usage of resources to pave way for industrial/urban development. On the other hand, its American counterpart has been wilderness oriented, i.e., preserving the wilderness of nature for its own sake, which essentially means no human interference (in spite of the fact that humans have lived in harmony with nature for centuries before industrial revolution).
Guha clearly elaborates on the reasons behind this contrast, which is again somewhat intuitive. There are also chapters on some of the prominent American and Indian environmentalists - Lewis Mumford, Chandi Prasad Bhat and Madhav Gadgil. IMO, the selection of specifically these environmentalists could be attributed to two reasons - one, their relevance to the ideas presented in the book and two, Guha's research on them (Mumford and Bhat) or work with them (Gadgil).
This book is clearly not expansive. For example, in the context of Indian environmentalism, it speaks only about Forest Law and movements of tribal/rural populace and speaks nothing about environmental regulation in terms of Air Act, Water Act and EPA. Because of this reason, Guha has also omitted the noted environmentalists (such as Anil Agarwal) whose work has focussed more on regulation.
All in all, it is a great but limited read. Recommended for someone interested in exploring the history of environmentalism.
Guha clearly elaborates on the reasons behind this contrast, which is again somewhat intuitive. There are also chapters on some of the prominent American and Indian environmentalists - Lewis Mumford, Chandi Prasad Bhat and Madhav Gadgil. IMO, the selection of specifically these environmentalists could be attributed to two reasons - one, their relevance to the ideas presented in the book and two, Guha's research on them (Mumford and Bhat) or work with them (Gadgil).
This book is clearly not expansive. For example, in the context of Indian environmentalism, it speaks only about Forest Law and movements of tribal/rural populace and speaks nothing about environmental regulation in terms of Air Act, Water Act and EPA. Because of this reason, Guha has also omitted the noted environmentalists (such as Anil Agarwal) whose work has focussed more on regulation.
All in all, it is a great but limited read. Recommended for someone interested in exploring the history of environmentalism.
June 13, 2012
Guha wears his biases on his sleeve, which does not excuse the ridiculous omissions, willful ignorance of positionality, privilege or identity, and an odd valorization of national chauvinism. Also his writing betrays a certain generational handicap. I don't think he has kept up with a lot of what has happened in the field.
March 28, 2019
I’d been looking forward to reading this for a while - until I finally got my hands on the book and realised I was misled by the title too.
The book profiles environmentalists and ecological schools of thought from the West and from India. The author talks about exploitative overconsumption, existing environmental movements, and how conservation work can be but futile if it isn’t complemented with a reduction in individual consumptions. Some good insights into the history of how the West and India have perceived society’s role with respect to the environment.
While that is an interesting comparison in itself, there was potential to explore much more in those ideologies, to finally arrive at the concluding chapter: “How much should a person consume?”. Instead - the flow felt fairly disjoint and the concluding chapter didn’t provide much new insight into individual consumption or actions.
The book profiles environmentalists and ecological schools of thought from the West and from India. The author talks about exploitative overconsumption, existing environmental movements, and how conservation work can be but futile if it isn’t complemented with a reduction in individual consumptions. Some good insights into the history of how the West and India have perceived society’s role with respect to the environment.
While that is an interesting comparison in itself, there was potential to explore much more in those ideologies, to finally arrive at the concluding chapter: “How much should a person consume?”. Instead - the flow felt fairly disjoint and the concluding chapter didn’t provide much new insight into individual consumption or actions.
August 31, 2025
I used to see environmentalism as this monolithic entity where environmentalists around the world worked with the same aim. They may have their own agendas but the overarching aim would remain the same.
However, this trip that Ramchandra Guha took me on changed that perspective. A lot of conservationists who i respected in India and abroad now seem to be more exclusionist in nature while the real story of consumption seems to have been greenwashed.
It is more relatable when living in the village and looking at aspirations within the village while we consider the low consumption in the same. Gives great credence to the saying "Environmentalism without class struggle is gardening."
However, this trip that Ramchandra Guha took me on changed that perspective. A lot of conservationists who i respected in India and abroad now seem to be more exclusionist in nature while the real story of consumption seems to have been greenwashed.
It is more relatable when living in the village and looking at aspirations within the village while we consider the low consumption in the same. Gives great credence to the saying "Environmentalism without class struggle is gardening."
June 16, 2019
One of the finest books on sustainability and climate change understanding.
December 4, 2022
Amazing comparative read between US and Indian environmentalism; left w/ lots of new sources. I found his autobiography fascinating but some of the other biographical sections a bit superfluous.
February 17, 2017
Although I didn't really find an answer to the question in the title, it was still such a well researched, well written book. Gave a whole new (logical) perspective to the fundamental environmental questions.
April 14, 2020
There's a lot more information on the other environmentalists and ecologists and their research than any information collected primarily by the author. It's an extremely dry read and the title of the book doesn't reflect in the content at all barring the last few chapters. I'd avoid this one.
January 4, 2008
Although the question that is the title is not answered exactly (how could it be) a definitive answer is that the US could stand to consume much less. Guha highlights little know activists and nature historians from India and the United States mostly arguing for a synthesis in environmental activities between indingenous or tribal societies, scientists and ecologists and government policies. He proves over and again how a unilateral conservation system tends to harm peoples who are dependent on the land and benefit big business or nationalist narratives which can be big business as well. An introduction into little known battles that have preceded what most would recognize in some threads of popular environmentalism today. One problem with the actual book itself though- pages 115-145 are out of order, not backwards, but all mixed up. Maybe it was just my copy?
Read
August 6, 2011This book is an output of Guha's two decade long research. In this he traces the history of environmentalism in US and India.Rejecting the traditional environmentalist arguments, he persuasively argue for biosphere that consider human beings as much as other species.
He also provides the profiles of three eminent environmentalists- Chandra Bhatt,Madhav Gadgil and Mudfold. The basic question he is trying to answer through this books is how much should a person consume?
A must read for all who have interest in the future of humanity...!
He
He also provides the profiles of three eminent environmentalists- Chandra Bhatt,Madhav Gadgil and Mudfold. The basic question he is trying to answer through this books is how much should a person consume?
A must read for all who have interest in the future of humanity...!
He
July 8, 2013
In my opinion, this book is must read for anyone who is interested in Environment. Guha articulates the various complexities in addressing the questions in environment conservation, the tribals vs conservation efforts, the exploitation of resources by the state / mighty ( he terms them as Omnivores - good word), conflicting interests and more. If you do not have time to read the full book, at least read the last chapter. You may chose to disagree with the points, but before that at least read them once as they are the fruits of 3 decade long research.
March 29, 2013
The book is a comprehensive summary of comparative history of environmentalism in India and the US focusing on the major strands of the movement. I loved how it traced environmental thinking in India to the works of Dietrich Brandis, Patrick Geddes and Lewis Mumford in the middle nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. This is a short easy read, no high intellectual prowess required but really helps one in contextualizing the environmental movement.
July 21, 2015
The earth we are living is not our property. It is something which was gifted to us by our forefathers to be passed on to our children. Are we aware of the environmental impact or damage by our life style.
In a consumer driven advertisement promoted world, this book is surely an eye opener. Good research done by Guha
In a consumer driven advertisement promoted world, this book is surely an eye opener. Good research done by Guha
July 29, 2007
Overall I think the first and last chapters are the most interesting, but I did like the whole book as an overview and comparison of Indian and American environmentalism. I also applaud it for addressing the question that is the elephant in the room - how much should a person consume??
June 4, 2014
A fascinating comparative look at the long history of the Indian and U.S. environmental movements and their leading thinkers. Bring a deep concern for the rights of tribal forest dwellers and critiques environmentalists and the Forest Dept for their dealings with the adivasis.
December 1, 2016
Misleading title. More of a book on the comparative history of the rise of Environmentalism and the personalities who defined it. Doesn't offer much especially if you are inquisitive about the history of the environmental movements or environments or environmentalists..
July 18, 2013
Great Introduction to Indian Environmentalism!!
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews