The high-altitude Himalayas

The high-altitude belt of the IndianHimalayas is a harsh expanse of wastelandand craggy slopes ringed by snow-cladpeaks. The communities that inhabit thisextremely tough terrain reside in scatteredsmall villages across the valleys andplateaus, cut off from the world due to cli-matic and infrastructural adversities. Thesehardy highlanders have learned to eke outa living from subsistence agriculture andpastoralism during the short, mild sum-mers; the winters are bitter stretches whenno productive activity is possible. Povertylevels are high, and deprivation is stark.Lack of irrigation makes cultivation of cashcrops difficult, and the produce is sold rawin distant markets with very low returns forthe farmers. The near-total dependence onnatural resources for cultivation, fodder,timber, and fuelwood is also having a griev-ous impact on the fragile land and furtherimpoverishing the indigenous communi-ties. Crop productivity is declining, and theburden on women—the traditional non-timber forest product (NTFP) collectors—is steadily increasing. This poses severeproblems with regard to their health andeducation. The altitude is also a barrier toresource flows into the area. The extentand quality of infrastructure and basic ser-vices such as communication, healthcare,and education—considered commonplacein the plains—is pathetically poor. Thedevelopmental status of these communitiesis therefore far below that of the rest ofIndia.

Development needs, opportunities,and hurdles in the high altitudesSustainable development in the moun-tains requires a focus on 3 critical issues:

• Lack of economic development in thecontext of inadequate infrastructureand skills;

• Lack of community development result-ing from inadequate welfare services;

• Natural resource degradation resultingfrom overexploitation of resources.

Occupational diversity and valueadded to local produce have been foundto be significant catalysts for developmentof rural areas, bringing in revenues that inturn attract other constituents of develop-ment such as welfare services and infra-structure, while reducing pressure on nat-ural resources. Rich in resources on whichplains communities depend, high moun-tain regions have the potential to producea variety of niche products for whichlatent markets exist. In addition, the bur-

Common Energy Facilities Based onRenewable SourcesEnabling Sustainable Development in Highland Areas in the Indian Himalayas

Gargi BanerjiManali Baruah

98

Mountain Research and Development Vol 26 No 2 May 2006: 98–103

From its decade-long pioneering work dedicat-ed to the economic development and environ-mental regeneration of the high-altituderegion of the Indian Himalayas, Pragya—anNGO based in Gurgaon, India, focusing onappropriate development of vulnerable com-munities and sensitive ecosystems—devisedthe MVPower (Mountain Village Power) model.This comprises in essence the development

of decentralized energy facilities for use in(a) improving rural welfare facilities, (b) creat-ing sustainable, niche-sector enterprise clus-ters, and (c) providing alternatives to overuseof natural resources. A pilot project is beingimplemented in the district of Lahaul and Spi-ti in the Western Indian Himalayas. Discus-sion of the initial results of the project con-stitutes the core of this paper.

Characteristics of the high-altitudebelt of the Indian Himalayas

• Geographical area including Ladakh,Lahaul and Spiti, Kinnaur, Pithoragarh,North Sikkim, and Tawang;

• Villages situated at altitudes between2600 and 5300 m;

• Population density: 2–10 persons perkm2;

• Summer temperatures average 17°C andplummet in the winter to –40ºC;

• 89% of the population work on their ownfields;

• Markets are at a distance of at least 200 km from the area;

• Only 17% of villages in Lahaul and Spitidistrict possess any medical facility;46.5% of settlements in West Kamengare electrified; 31% of villages in Tawanghave primary schools.

BOX 1

Development

99

geoning tourist market in these regionsrepresents substantial consumption capac-ity for a range of goods and services.

Yet the disadvantages of mountainregions have meant a high drain of rev-enues and inability to realize potentialadvantages. These regions are character-ized by a one-way extractive pattern: theyprovide water, timber and minerals to peo-ple downstream, but negligible benefitsflow back in return. The solution lies inremoving the bottlenecks that preventmountain areas from benefiting from spe-cific advantages associated with nicheproducts and markets, and in developingeco-culturally appropriate solutions toaddress these problems.

A paucity of energy is among themost serious bottlenecks to developmentin the Himalayan highlands (Box 1).There are about 5000 non-electrified vil-lages in the Himalayan region; moreover,an electrified village is not necessarily onein which all households have electricity,nor one in which electrically poweredenterprises would be feasible. The qualityof available power is very poor, and thereare weeks of blackouts during the freez-ing winters. Biomass, with its severe envi-ronmental and health costs, is the majorfuel, of which 60–80% is in the form offuelwood. Women’s health is damaged byexposure to wood smoke and the carryingof fuelwood loads on their heads acrosslong distances. The ecology of the regionis also severely affected, as the sparse veg-etation cover is removed for householdenergy needs. Inadequate levels andforms of energy hinder education andmake it impossible to process productsand achieve added value through mecha-nization.

Human resource capacity in theHimalayas is severely stunted and is a fur-ther reason for the lack of development.The isolation suffered by highland commu-nities has meant an increasing gulf in skillsand technologies. Despite the immenseadvances made by the rest of the world,these communities remain trapped in prac-tices that prevent them from producingand selling value-added products or new-age services, at best deriving small benefitsfrom low-end tourism employment in theflourishing tourist markets in their regions.

Common energy facilities formountain villages

Energy is neither explicitly recognized asa basic human need nor as a cause ofpoverty. Yet it is clear that efficient anduninterrupted supply of energy facilitatesthe forces of development, enables a bet-ter quality of life, and builds humancapacity. Although efforts have beenmade to promote renewable energy (RE)

Characteristics of Common Energy Facilities (CEFs) andtheir advantages for remote Himalayan villages

• Decentralized, village-level energy generation and distribution;

• Renewable energy system using 1 or more available sources;

• Micro- to pico-scale system for the whole village;

• Serving energy needs in an integrated manner, for households, welfare,enterprises;

• Equitable and total coverage of village population.

BOX 2

FIGURE 1 The pawan-chakki orwindmill built by the Lossarpas.(Photo courtesy of PRAGYA)

Gargi Banerji and Manali Baruah

Mountain Research and Development Vol 26 No 2 May 2006

100

sources in the Himalayan highlands, thelow level of penetration stems from seri-ous gaps in adaptation of RE technologiesto high-altitude social and ecological con-ditions. The only RE infusion in the areahas been of solar photovoltaic (PV) instal-lations, and has focused on household-level applications. This has left the poorerhouseholds that are typically unable toinvest out in the cold. Larger, beyond-the-household energy needs for welfare facili-ties and enterprises are also left unad-dressed.

The dispersed nature of habitation inthe region necessitates decentralized ener-

gy generation (Box 2 and Figure 1) anddistribution services. The lower capacity ofthe community, along with great homo-geneity and cohesion, also calls for com-munity rather than household-level ener-gy units. Pico- to micro-scale power gener-ating systems using renewable sources ofwind, sun, and/or water available at theparticular site may be installed in a villageand cater to all village-specific energyneeds. A green energy solution forremote, energy-deprived mountain vil-lages, such Common Energy Facilities(CEFs) may be jointly invested in andmanaged by the village community. Unlike

FIGURE 2 Schematic representation of thepath to sustainable development for high-altitude regions, showing theenvironmental, social, and economiccharacteristics of mountain areas and therole of distributed energy systems. (Figureby Ulla Gämperli, based on graph byPRAGYA)

Development

101

household RE appliances, a CEF canensure power for the poorest householdsthat would not otherwise be able to enjoyit, and address larger, community-levelenergy needs alongside household needs.

The path to sustainabledevelopment for highlandcommunities (and the role of CEFs)Dispersed rural servicesIn light of restricted access and movementin the region for a significant part of theyear, the reach of basic services such ashealth and education—the route toenhancing the capacity and quality of lifeof Himalayan communities—can beensured by village-level provision andmanagement of these services (Figure 2).A CEF can cater to householdelectrification in the village and also act asa critical enabler for improving the level ofrural services. Schools and health centersdisadvantaged by a lack of power can besupplied by energy generated throughCEFs. Supplementary facilities, such asrural education centers and ICT kiosks,can also be enabled and in turn aid thedevelopment of mountain communitiesand their economic mainstreaming.

Alternatives to overuse of natural resources Sustainable use of ecosystem resourcesrequires development and institution ofalternatives to overused natural resources.Fuelwood needs to be replaced withrenewable sources, while the escalatingconversion of forestland to agriculturalland and overgrazing of pastureland tomeet people’s livelihood needs can beslowed down or halted with the infusionof alternate, non-farm occupations such asagri-produce processing, handicrafts, andecotourism. By addressing householdheating requirements, CEFs can signifi-cantly reduce fuelwood use and the associ-ated burden on women. They can alsoenable mechanized economic activities aslivelihood alternatives, improve resourceproductivity, and reduce resource use.

Niche sector clustersEconomic development efforts in thehighlands need to concentrate on cre-ation of development clusters for ecologi-

cal and cultural niches. Geographic prox-imity and commonality of resources andactivities can give the cluster constituentsthe economic benefits of several positiveexternalities. Forward linkages withregional techno-economic networks canensure product–market compatibility forthese clusters and help them keep pacewith ongoing development in the regionwhile contributing to balanced regionalgrowth. Cluster development in theHimalayas can be enabled by CEFs andfacilitated to incorporate primary to sec-ondary-level processing as well as suitablepackaging and marketing. Area-specificproduce such as medicinal plants andcrafts can be developed as niche sectorproducts. CEF-powered clusters can thusopen up new livelihood avenues thatinvolve less physical drudgery, while

The Lossar solar–wind hybrid Common Energy Facility (CEF):site conditions, system features and the installation process

• Has a capacity of 2.1 kWh, comprising 14 solar PV panels generating 1 kWh, and a windmill generating 1.1 kWh;

• Fulfils lighting and power requirements for the operation of equipment ina Community Work Station, a Village Education Center, and a PrimaryHealth Center;

• Generates a maximum of 7 units/day and can thus supply power for 4 hrs/day for 2 days when there is no power generation.

BOX 3

FIGURE 3 Villagers volunteering to set up thewindmill in Lossar. (Photo courtesy of PRAGYA)

Gargi Banerji and Manali Baruah

Mountain Research and Development Vol 26 No 2 May 2006

102

improving rural incomes. This can greatlyimprove the quality of life for mountainpeople, and for mountain women in par-ticular.

The CEF that has revolutionized lifein LossarPowerless, cold, and dreary winters are areality for remote high-altitude villagessuch as Lossar in Lahaul and Spiti District,one of the highest inhabited villages inthe Indian Himalayas. Lossarpas spendtheir summers farming small plots of land,grazing their livestock on adjoining range-lands, and employed in back-breakingroad labor in order to earn a small cashincome. The village has a primary schooland a health center, both of which are fre-quently inoperative. The road to Lossarcloses every October and the villageremains snowbound and isolated untilJune. Villagers rely on fuelwood to meetenergy requirements for cooking andheating. Although the village is connectedto a grid, there is no power for most of thewinter and long stretches in summer.Among potential RE sources in the area,water lies frozen in winters and the sunand wind make their presence felt alter-nately. Pragya, an NGO working in theregion, designed and installed a pico-scale(smaller than micro, with a maximum out-put of 5 kWh) Solar–Wind Hybrid System

(Box 3 and Figure 1) for the village. Thisharnesses one RE source when the otheris in short supply, ensuring uninterruptedpower for select village facilities and somehouseholds as well.

Establishment and managementA community task force was constituted forthe installation, and every Lossar family vol-unteered a few days of labor to the project(Figure 3). Select local youth were providedwith intensive training in operation andmaintenance of the CEF as well as in assem-bling small RE applications. These youngpeople are being developed as a cadre ofrural “technopreneurs” for local-levelRenewable Energy Technology (RET) salesand service to reduce the community’sdependence on distant service providers.The village governance council has takenup the management of the CEF and thefacilities it supports, instituted member-ship subscriptions for these facilities, andestablished a system of service chargesfrom other users as well as a refundabledeposit against potential damage.

Impacts of the Lossar project in thewords of its children—A poem

Our windmill is very close to our hearts,Our windmill is incomparable,Our windmill is the very best,Our windmill is our great friend.

If our windmill were not thereHow would we study all night?If our windmill were not thereHow would we write all night?

Our windmill gives us heat,Our windmill gives us light,If our windmill were not thereHow would we watch TV?If our windmill were not thereHow would we excel in exams?

Our windmill is very close to our hearts,Our windmill is incomparable,Our windmill is the very best,Our windmill is our great friend.

By the children of Lossar,translated by Pragya

BOX 4

FIGURE 4 Adolescents at the EducationResource Center; both boys and girls cantake advantage of the facility. (Photocourtesy of PRAGYA)

Development

Early impacts The CEF, Lossarpas decided, would beapplied for electrification of welfare facili-ties, such as a Village Education Centerand the Health Center. The CEF-suppliedpower has lengthened study hours forchildren and provided access to a varietyof educational resources in the educationcenter for children and adults alike (Figure 4 and Box 4).

The Health Center has also beenmade more effective, with uninterruptedpower from the CEF. Power generatedfrom the CEF provides heating and light-ing for a community work station as well,that is used by a women’s group for weav-ing carpets and shawls—crafts that weredying a slow death as the availability offuelwood declined and the space housingthe looms could no longer be heated. TheCEF has helped the women generateincome through sale of crafts to tourists,replacing road labor with less strenuousweaving, and developed crafts productioninto a niche enterprise (Figure 5).

The weaving center also doubles as aCommunity Utility Center and is helping tostrengthen social ties through communitymeetings and celebration of festivals. Thepower generated when the common facili-ties are not in use is provided to a fewhouseholds. This has greatly improved thequality of life for these households and alsoreduced their fuelwood use, in turn makingwomen’s lives much easier. The dark drearywinter scenario of complete isolation fromthe rest of the world has now changed forthe Lossarpas, with regular supplies of elec-tricity and access to satellite television andtelephones, even during the winter months.The impact of this initiative in Lossar isthus not restricted to activities related toimproving material conditions and ruralamenities; it has had positive impacts oncommunity relations, education, and othernonmaterial elements as well.

Conclusions

The CEF ably demonstrates the potentialof distributed power generation, not onlyin overcoming the energy bottleneck, butalso in effecting social and economicdevelopment and ensuring ecosystemintegrity. It can mean improvement of thequality of life in high Himalayan commu-nities, as well as their empowerment withinformation and connectivity with the restof the world. It can mean an improvementin the lot of mountain women, the back-bone of Himalayan society. It can facilitatediversification into alternate livelihoodsand supplementary incomes, which wouldin the long run help raise Himalayan com-munities out of the mire of deprivation,reducing the gulf between them andplains communities. Improvement of theireducational and health status throughprovision of welfare facilities, as well asimprovement of ecological conditions byreducing deforestation, would also boostthe quality and productivity of bothhuman and natural capital.

FIGURE 5 Women at the CEF-powered Community Work Station at Lossar.(Photo courtesy of PRAGYA)

AUTHORS

Gargi Banerji, Manali BaruahPragya, A212A Sushant Lok Phase I, Gurgaon-122002,India.info@pragya.org, gargi@pragya.org (G.B.);manali@pragya.org (M.B.)

Gargi Banerji is a development professional withcareer-spanning interest and work in the Indian

Himalayas. She is co-founder and Director of Pragya, anorganization dedicated to addressing issues in theHimalayan region and improving the lives of its indigenouscommunities. See www.pragya.org

Manali Baruah is a geographer with a special interestin management of natural resources and the study ofhuman–environment interactions in mountain ecosystems.She is currently working as a Core Team Member ofPragya.

103

FURTHER READING

Best G. 2001. Renewable Energy forSustainable Agriculture and Rural Devel-opment in Honduras. Rome, Italy: FAO[Food and Agriculture Organization].Lovins AB, Datta EK, Feiler T, RábagoKR, Swisher JN, Lehmann A, Wicker K.2002. Small is Profitable. Snowmass,CO: Rocky Mountain Institute.Manu Avinash G, Krishna Kumar G. Dis-tributed generation and its socialimpact. Energy Saving Now. http://www.energysavingnow.com/paper/dgindia/; accessed on 2 February2006.Messerli B, Ives JD, editors. 1997.Mountains of the World: A Global Priori-ty. New York and London: Parthenon.Padmanaban S. 2002. Energy efficien-cy, distributed generation and climatechange: Rising convergence, expandingopportunities. Renewingindia.org, Win-rock International India. REPSOurceREPsovision Vol 20. http://www.renewingindia.org/newsletters/repsovision/past/news_rep_spsl211.htm; accessed on 2 February 2006.WEC [World Energy Council]. 1999.The Challenge of Rural Energy Povertyin Developing Countries. London, UnitedKingdom: WEC.