Abstract
Land acquisition (LA) in India is associated with development paradigm and economic growth through industrialisation. India being predominantly agriculture-based society, land is not only used for food production or is a source of livelihood but also is a symbol of social identity, status, power and wealth. Loss of land due to various development projects in different parts of India thus came under scanner from civil society actors, especially the displaced and project-affected population (PAP) since the early 1980s, and the extent and impact of land acquisition were questioned stridently. Large-scale displacement, multiple displacements and associated impoverishment, socio-cultural alienation and uprootedness became points of contention against rampant and greedy land acquisition. Emphasis on rehabilitation and resettlement (R&R) increased along with land acquisition and displacement for restoration of lives of the PAPs. Demands for effective R&R became louder in 1990s and was promoted as a prerequisite of land acquisition. Government of India recognised LA and R&R as two sides of one coin through legislative process which started in early 21st century. Land acquisition as a process by the state is contested for years on ground of ‘eminent domain’ and ‘public purpose’ for private industries.
This special issue of the journal strives for presenting historical and contemporary debates comprehensively, and pitching the debate on new scale with newer dimensions of land acquisition, displacement and R&R (LADRR) from the perspective of policy framing. Performative reviews of land acquisition have shown lapses committed by the administrative officers in LARR, and the greed of corporates and other institutions acquiring land. In order to rationalise land acquisition, minimise displacement and develop R&R packages that restore lives of the PAP, policy framing needs to address the following aspects systematically. Role of the government in the process of LA needs to be clarified, especially in the context of diverse development projects, for private industries and other institutions. A need for exploring various types of LA models has emerged, namely, land leasing, land purchase, tripartite land acquisition model of the USA, etc. Hence, various types of assessments—social, economic and environmental—prior to LA need to be strived; such assessments are seen as strengthening democratic process as well as participatory and transparent governance. One of the main justifications for LA is the economic growth of the country and only agricultural economy cannot be sufficient and sustainable. In this context, employment generation across different sectors, strengthening of manufacturing sector to make ‘make in India’ efficacious and sustainability of growth through other economic initiatives are major concerns. In the present economic growth and governance model, ‘loss of livelihood’ as a consequence of LA is counter aligned to skill-based, ‘formal’ employment generation. Some studies show how building of infrastructures, especially highways, have become a source of allied income-generation activities, for instance, coming up of food joints (dhaba), auto repair shops, vendors selling items that are of interests to the travellers/tourists along the roadside, and so on. Such activities are part of an unorganised sector and largely individual initiatives for self-employment. This situation stresses a need for assessing all accepted operative means for ‘loss of livelihood’ as against standalone development projects or industrial initiatives; no such model or means are developed/are operational. LA in urban areas has posed for tailor-made R&R package. The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Rehabilitation Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR) has attempted to address some of the issues. Promulgation of three ordinances on LARR—one in 2014 and two in 2015—have generated heated/vociferous debate on LADRR; it apparently created a threat to farmers and faced vehement opposition from different walks of life. The present NDA-led government then decided not to re-promulgate the ordinance at central level post August 2015, and let LA at the state level be taken care of by the state government. This decision suggests that issues of LADRR need be understood and investigated in depth for introducing changes in existing policy or legislative processes.
This issue incorporates articles that explore different dimensions of LADRR, such as from perspectives of legal, historical–social construction, citizens’ rights, governance, economy, agriculture and R&R. A discussion on compensation as policy brief and two book reviews complements an overview on LADRR in India.
We take this opportunity to sincerely thank all the anonymous reviewers who have contributed this Issue indirectly, have ensured quality and academic rigour in form of their comments.