Case Study 1: The Vanishing Sea

⁠

By Arjun Singh |

Instagram⁠

Substack⁠

⁠

“…it played a role in moderating the climate, being a habitat to various species of fish and birds, local traditions and folklore, transporting goods, and recreation and tourism². Now, it has become the Aral Desert”.

⁠

ਜਗਜੀਵਨੁ ਜਗੰਨਾਥੁ ਜਲ ਥਲ ਮਹਿ ਰਹਿਆ ਪੂਰਿ ਬਹੁ ਬਿਧਿ ਬਰਨੰ ॥

The Master of the Universe, the very Life of the World pervades the sea and the land, manifesting Himself in myriads of ways.

ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਸੇਵਿ ਅਲਖ ਗਤਿ ਜਾ ਕੀ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਰਾਮਦਾਸੁ ਤਾਰਣ ਤਰਣੰ ॥੪॥

So serve the Guru, the True Guru; His ways and means are inscrutable. The Great Guru Raam Daas is the Boat to carry us across. ||4||

Svaiyay Mehl 5 - Bhatt Gayandh - Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji -

Ang 1402⁠

⁠

Preliminary Facts

The Aral Sea was a body of water situated in Central Asia, between the borders of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. Being over 68,000 square kilometres large, it was one of the world’s largest inland bodies of water. It served as an important source for agriculture in the regions around it, along with a fishing industry that would provide for the nearby communities¹. In addition, it played a role in moderating the climate, being a habitat to various species of fish, birds, local traditions and folklore, transporting goods, and recreation and tourism². Now, it has become the Aral Desert.

⁠

Photo by

true⁠

Unsplash⁠

⁠

Central Planning Goals & Motivations

With the drastic increases in population in the surrounding areas, this ultimately led to a rise in demand for food. The Soviet government assumed that the areas around the sea had potential for agriculture, as long as they were provided with sufficient water¹. Additionally, there was a desire to drive output to the cotton industry and hydroelectric power to increase economic prosperity. Although the government may have had the right intentions, good intentions are insufficient for statecraft as good outputs are what matters most.

With these motivations in mind, the Soviet government had decided to divert the water from the Aral Sea into two different canals which ultimately led to less water arriving into the sea. They constructed structures such as canals and reservoirs to alter the river course and redistribute the water into the Amu Darya and Syr Darya rivers.

⁠

Detrimental Outcomes

Firstly, due to the reasons mentioned above, the water levels of the Sea declined significantly and the salt concentration in the sea and the surrounding plants and grass increased, which forced the surrounding aquatic and other life forms to decline and go extinct.

In a video on BBC News³, a worker mentioned that the animals who ate the grass fell ill, got headaches and became dizzy. They would hit their heads against the ground and eventually die. This worker lost 15 camels after this illness.

The fishing industry had also collapsed, which resulted in a high unemployment rate and hardships. Specifically, there were more than 40,000 fisherman that were working at the sea. Due to the lack of water access and security, many people had fled the area, and those that stayed back had high rates of cancer and disease, along with the highest infant mortality rate in the world³.

With the sea being dehydrated, the seabed itself was fully exposed, which was mainly compiled of salt and pesticides; when this is forced into the air, the air quality becomes much worse and this resulted in many health problems for the surrounding population. Toxic dust being pushed into the air with industrial projects around the sea didn’t help this problem either.

Additionally, the government failed to recognize the moderating effects the sea has in regards to weather patterns. The drying out of the sea created more of a desert-type environment, which resulted in extreme sandstorms that affected the humans, animals, and plants in the area.

⁠

Lessons

We can agree in this case that the government had good intentions with providing resources to allow agriculture to thrive, however the outcomes were insufficient. Providing a centrally planned state with this authority can have major detriments, as seen with the Aral Sea disaster. Addressing all of the environmental and economic variables is crucial to ensure effective and positive outcomes for all stakeholders. The tragedy of the commons here unfortunately allowed a smaller group to make a detrimental decision for all of the parties involved.

To conclude, further analysis on the environment must be conducted to ensure that the long-term effects are accounted for when introducing new policies and developments. At the end of the day, grand-scale decisions may not be most effective by a small-scale group - in this case, the Soviet government.

⁠