The tragedy of responsibility in high Asia: modernizing traditional pastoral practices and preserving modernist worldviews

Abstract

The nomadism/pastoralism debate has always been closely connected to discourses about modernization theories whenever development issues were at stake. While the mainstream debates have changed since stage models apparently became outdated, it is surprising that the Chinese development model seems to adhere to classical modernization theory. Consequently, it appears worthwhile to consider present challenges in the pastoral sector first from the Chinese perspective and, second, in comparison with the situation in neighbouring countries. The discussion reveals that the Chinese model is quite different from neighbouring countries' practices and is embedded in an authoritarian approach that suggests similarities with the implementation of a development model during the collectivization phases in the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China, when Stalinist- and Mao Zedong-inspired models were implemented under autonomy and sedentarization regimes. Nevertheless, the present context is quite different because ecological degradation of pastures and the non-existent closure of the development gap between affluent urbanites and remote farmers and pastoralists have been addressed by implementing the present resettlement programmes. In China's pastoralism regions, the tragedy of responsibility is related to top-down approaches without adequate participation of stakeholders. In neighbouring countries, pastoralists tend to complain about negligence by state authorities, nonbinding regulations and arbitrariness by powerful actors. Countries such as India and Pakistan are still reworking their colonial legacies and trying to adapt pasture legislation to the demands of rangeland management and nature protection.