Like the waters that rush down these mountain slopes, many other things seem to have a penchant for moving down and out of the mountains — the soils, the people and even the economy. Against these powerful currents of nature and the market, present-day development appears to be a feeble counter force. Everyone's complaint these days has been the rapidly escalating costs and the negligible benefit of development programmes.
What is probably worse is that development forces are themselves beginning to trigger a whole new set of, what some see as negative, consequences. The most notable of these are the effects on the fragile hill environment. Roads have increased deforestation and denudation of hillsides, leading to frequent landslides, greater penetration of the market economy, and the consequent dislocation of traditional employment and income opportunities, and in some cases even increased inequality. The effects of energy projects are less well known. Education and training have encouraged "out-migration" of younger minds. Rural development projects are said to have created a dependency syndrome amongst the hill people.
Time and again, dedicated efforts have resulted only in sporadic successes. However, because of the physical and socioeconomic factors unique to the mountain space, the few successes have not been easily replicable. They have a low "demonstration effect".
Given the difficulties encountered in mountain development, what lessons are there to be learnt? Are many of the so-called negative consequences of development projects totally bereft of positive elements? Or can any of these difficulties or obstacles be turned into positive assets as forces for change?