Abstract
This book focuses on development induced displacement and highlights the challenges faced by displaced people (DP) and project affected people (PAP). The book makes the case that land acquisition is an important core of development process, as believed by the state in India since independence. Such a policy ignores the fact that land in a village is the livelihood of not merely of its legal owner but also of the service providers and their dependents. Thus when displacement takes place it effects more people that those, whose land is acquired. Further displacement is not a one-time event but a long process having economic, legal, social, cultural and psychological components for the DPs–PAPs and those whose livelihoods are related to them. This review would first analyse the methodology used and then highlight few of the major arguments made in the book.
The data collected is extensive spanning over 16 years (2001–2016), a longitudinal study, covering 60 years of development induced displacement. It is important to note that the study on which this book is based was completed before the State was bifurcated into Andhra Pradesh and Telangana in early 2014. It is impressive how the scholars have put together the material into a coherent argument. The study collected primary data from fourteen projects, from eighteen districts of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, which included six projects from Coastal Andhra and Telangana each and two from Rayalaseema. The projects included dams, railway lines, industries, thermal plants, where the research analysed three aspects: first, the functions of the project; second, space it occupies in the local ecology; and third, the displacing potential of the project. The study used mixed methodology, with quantitative data supporting qualitative analysis. The scholars have analysed gazette notifications, land records, interviews with government officials and used case studies. The resources listed especially in the appendix are a rich source of material for researchers who are interested in the question of displacement and rehabilitation in India and wish to undertake large impact driven research projects. The book also highlights the lack of reliable data base on the number and type of DP–PAP and their rehabilitation.
The book makes multiple thesis as follows: first, displacement as a process begins much before deprivation and ends some years after resettlement; second, need to question displacement as a one-time event; and third, need to perceive rehabilitation as more than just meeting economic needs but to address it in terms of sustainable livelihoods. Based on the above, the core arguments of the book are as follows:
The book makes a strong case for distinction to be made between resettlement and rehabilitation; with resettlement being one-time physical relocation with or without other social-economic support, whereas rehabilitation is a long process that involves rebuilding of the economic. Over the years the government has followed poor resettlement policies, which deprived people of their livelihood and sustenance without providing sustainable alternatives. There is striking paucity of data on displacement, deprivation, resettlement and rehabilitation, which makes it necessary for the research on these aspects very important. Though the official figures more often than not underestimated, the scholars argue that there is high proportion of subalterns among the DP and PAPs. When one maps the DP–PAP, one can very clearly observe the class and the gender dimension. Further DPs–PAPs cannot be perceived as a universal category. It argues that among the DPs–PAPs, the ones belonging to forward castes, and the powerful among the OBCs get better deals such as facilities and jobs. It is the tribals and women from all communities, particularly from tribal communities that are the worst affected and have least negotiating and bargaining power. One of the important highlights of the book is the focus on the mental health of the DPs–PAPs. Most often the studies on displacement and rehabilitation focus on the economic components. But in this study along with a focus on the economic and social components, it mapped the feelings of helplessness and outlook of fatalism among the DPs–PAPs. It highlighted how they had over time developed a sense of powerlessness and how that created and intensified experiences of low self-esteem among them. This feeling the authors argue that was due to the paucity of the information that they were shared, the rumours about their livelihoods, home and future and the inadequate compensation that they were receiving. The authors make a strong argument about how the nature and extent of compensation and rehabilitation depended on the power relations in the affected community. The authors also have highlighted about the destructive coping mechanisms followed by the people, who were to be displaced. They especially focussed on how they did not take care of their land, did not invest in nurturing it and did not make any plans for the future as they were not sure for how long they would have access and control over it. The book emphasises the important role of people movement’s, organisations and NGOs in pressuring the state, in ensuring that DP–PAP get a good rehabilitation package and are resettled properly. These organisations also play an important role in helping the DPs–PAPs in building and strengthening their social systems, which the government and its officials are not bothered. The book asks the following questions: (a) Why fertile land is targeted and acquired even when less fertile land is available for industrial projects. (b) Why is there acquisition of more land than required and why does SEZ Act 2005 legalises land acquisition instead of minimising displacement.
The book would be of great interest to disciplines, like sociology, development studies and policy studies. The appeal of the book is vast. I would also recommend the book for research scholars interested in undertaking large scale impact projects, particularly the manner in which the research group handled and organised data, by using multiple forms of data collection and planned a longitudinal study spread over 16 years analysing development induced displacement over 60 years: 1951–2010.