Skip to main content

Beyond the Sattvik plate: Prof Anil Gupta's take on food, ethics, and sustainability

By Rajiv Shah 
I was pleasantly surprised to receive a rather lengthy comment (I don't want to call it a rejoinder) on my blog post about the Sattvik Food Festival, held near the Sola Temple in Ahmedabad late last year. It came from no less a person than Anil Gupta, Professor Emeritus at the Indian Institute of Management-Ahmedabad (IIM-A), under whose guidance this annual event was held.
While I have taken his comment in the comments section of my news blog – where he originally posted his critical remarks – I believe they deserve a wider audience, so I am quoting him here as well. One of the most socially conscious academics, Professor Gupta begins by thanking me for visiting Sattvik but regrets that I "unintentionally" overlooked the organic farmers who were "selling fresh as well as processed food made mostly by farmers."
He provides examples, stating that at the Sattvik Food Festival, there were "some conservators of seed diversity," including Priya from Tamil Nadu who had "brought fifty varieties of tomatoes" and Lalu Bhai from Sonepat who brought local varieties of vegetables collected during "shodhyatras."
Professor Gupta's "shodhyatras," or research journeys, are known to focus on "the search for knowledge, creativity, and innovations at the grassroots," according to a website he manages. He has conducted 51 of these journeys across India.
At the same time, Professor Gupta acknowledges that the Sattvik Food Festival did not allow "non-vegetarian foods," which he describes as "our bias, you may say." However, he insists, "It is not to exclude anybody. If that was the case, then people from Kashmir, Sikkim, and dishes from Nagaland would not have found a place in the GIAN (Gujarat Grassroots Innovation Augmentation Network)-supported stall of LHC" (Little Himalayan Co.)."
Taking the "argument of inclusion to an absurd limit," he asks, "Will you then not complain that communities which consume animals that many of us care for and love are not represented? There are tribal communities which eat ants, as we found in Bastar, and they also deserve mention. Can we have vegetarian food without feeling guilty about not being able to eat non-vegetarian food?" He answers: "I think we can."
While all communities have the complete freedom to eat anything they are morally permitted to consume, Professor Gupta wonders, "Can any one platform serve all of them?" He points out that his initiatives such as the Honey Bee Network, the Society for Research and Initiatives for Sustainable Technologies and Institutions (SRISTI), SRISTI innovations (primarily Ramesh and Chetan Patel), which organized Sattvik and GIAN and brought Himalayan communities to the Ahmedabad festival, "tried to create a market for the farmers who are conserving soil health and producing non-chemical-based food products."
He emphasizes that these initiatives also "tried to create consumer awareness about traditional foods, particularly those using millets," describing it as a "small effort without any outside support or sponsors for the last 22 years." He adds, "It seems that it is serving a small purpose... How can we serve all social goals with a single instrument?"
Professor Gupta notes that he and his organization, GIAN, had a stall at Chaos, the annual cultural festival held at IIM-A from January 9 to 12, 2025, which "had non-vegetarian dishes from Kashmir." However, he insists, "But let Sattvik remain vegetarian," underscoring that "the carbon footprint of a vegetarian diet is much smaller than non-vegetarian diets."
In this context, Professor Gupta cites a study, "The carbon footprint of common vegetarian and non‑vegetarian meals in Portugal: an estimate, comparison, and analysis," published in "The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment," which states, "All environmental indicators showed a positive association with amounts of animal-based food consumed. Dietary impacts of vegans were 25.1% (95% uncertainty interval, 15.1–37.0%) of high meat-eaters (≥100 g total meat consumed per day) for greenhouse gas emissions, 25.1% (7.1–44.5%) for land use, 46.4% (21.0–81.0%) for water use, 27.0% (19.4–40.4%) for eutrophication and 34.3% (12.0–65.0%) for biodiversity."
He also refers to a study titled, "Vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters in the UK show discrepant environmental impacts," and an answer to an unstarred Rajya Sabha question as an Indian reference to further support his argument.
Professor Gupta concludes with the following advice: "Having said this, we respect the right of all communities to consume what they prefer and can afford. We only wish them to be healthy, agile, and responsible for the environment. Meat-eaters may save more water and conserve more forest and thus compensate for a slightly higher carbon footprint. Many farmers of crops waste water and other material resources, and that needs correction as well."
With due respect to Professor Gupta's argument, I have always wondered: Isn't non-vegetarianism often looked down upon by those in power as something "impure" or "non-sattvik"? Shouldn't someone hold a festival to challenge this myth, especially considering its underlying caste implications, particularly in Gujarat, his "karmabhoomi" (place of work)?

Comments

TRENDING

Why Venezuela govt granting amnesty to political prisoners isn't a sign of weakness

By Guillermo Barreto   On 20 May 2017, during a violent protest planned by sectors of the Venezuelan opposition, 21-year-old Orlando Figuera was attacked by a mob that accused him of being a Chavista. After being stabbed, he was doused with gasoline and set on fire in front of everyone present. Young Orlando was admitted to a hospital with multiple wounds and burns covering 80 percent of his body and died 15 days later, on 4 June.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Walk for peace: Buddhist monks and America’s search for healing

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat*  The #BuddhistMonks in the United States have completed their #WalkForPeace after covering nearly 3,700 kilometers in an arduous journey. They reached Washington, DC yesterday. The journey began at the Huong Đạo Vipassana Bhavana Center in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 26, 2025, and concluded in Washington, DC after a 108-day walk. The monks, mainly from Vietnam and Thailand, undertook this journey for peace and mindfulness. Their number ranged between 19 and 24. Led by Venerable Bhikkhu Pannakara (also known as Sư Tuệ Nhân), a Vietnamese-born monk based in the United States, this “Walk for Peace” reflected deeply on the crisis within American society and the search for inner strength among its people.

Four women lead the way among Tamil Nadu’s Muslim change-makers

By Syed Ali Mujtaba*  A report published by Awaz–The Voice (ATV), a news platform, highlights 10 Muslim change-makers in Tamil Nadu, among whom four are women. These individuals are driving social change through education, the arts, conservation, and activism. Representing diverse fields ranging from environmental protection and literature to political engagement and education, they are working to improve society across the state.

Bangladesh goes to polls as press freedom concerns surface

By Nava Thakuria*  As Bangladesh heads for its 13th Parliamentary election and a referendum on the July National Charter simultaneously on Thursday (12 February 2026), interim government chief Professor Muhammad Yunus has urged all participating candidates to rise above personal and party interests and prioritize the greater interests of the Muslim-majority nation, regardless of the poll outcomes. 

Trade pacts with EU, US raise alarms over farmers, MSMEs and policy space

By A Representative   A broad coalition of farmers’ organisations, trade unions, traders, public health advocates and environmental groups has raised serious concerns over India’s recently concluded trade agreements with the European Union and the United States, warning that the deals could have far-reaching implications for livelihoods, policy autonomy and the country’s long-term development trajectory. In a public statement issued, the Forum for Trade Justice described the two agreements as marking a “tectonic shift” in India’s trade policy and cautioned that the projected gains in exports may come at a significant social and economic cost.

When free trade meets unequal fields: The India–US agriculture question

By Vikas Meshram   The proposed trade agreement between India and the United States has triggered intense debate across the country. This agreement is not merely an attempt to expand bilateral trade; it is directly linked to Indian agriculture, the rural economy, democratic processes, and global geopolitics. Free trade agreements (FTAs) may appear attractive on the surface, but the political economy and social consequences behind them are often unequal and controversial. Once again, a fundamental question has surfaced: who will benefit from this agreement, and who will pay its price?

Why Russian oil has emerged as the flashpoint in India–US trade talks

By N.S. Venkataraman*  In recent years, India has entered into trade agreements with several countries, the latest being agreements with the European Union and the United States. While the India–EU trade agreement has been widely viewed in India as mutually beneficial and balanced, the trade agreement with the United States has generated comparatively greater debate and scrutiny.

Samyukt Kisan Morcha raises concerns over ‘corporate bias’ in seed Bill

By A Representative   The Samyukt Kisan Morcha (SKM) has released a statement raising ten questions to Union Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan regarding the proposed Seed Bill 2025, alleging that the legislation is biased in favour of large multinational and domestic seed corporations and does not adequately safeguard farmers’ interests.