So many policies, so little clarity
A businessman wants to start—or expand— his business. He requires land, just as he needs capital and human resources. The businessman zeroes in on a location. He buys the land from the existing owners and starts his business.
A businessman wants to start—or expand— his business. He requires land, just as he needs capital and human resources. The businessman zeroes in on a location. He buys the land from the existing owners and starts his business.
The cost of land acquisition, just as the cost of capital and wage bill, is a part of his business plan. Looked at from this somewhat innocent point of view, the current controversy over land acquisition in the country seems a bit out of place.
Especially, when one considers the fact that India has abundant arable land (49 per cent of total, compared to 18 per cent in the US and 15 per cent in China) and some of the biggest industrial projects in Independent India have been built on vast tracks of land acquired from farmers. So, why is it that land owners and land buyers can’t suddenly seem to see eye to eye?
The missing meeting point is policy. India’s Land Acquisition act is as old as 1894, though there have been amendments to it. And, until recently, the country did not have a law on rehabilitation and resettlement (R&R) issues. Past acquisitions were done without a framework or guideline—in some cases with little or no compensation.
Says M. J. Vijayan, Coordinator of Delhi-based NGO, Delhi Forum, a support group for R&R activities in India: “The (R&R) track record of the state inspires little confidence, which leads to obdurate resistance to land acquisition by local communities.”
Beginning 2003, both central and the state governments (land is a state subject) have made some efforts at framing policies for R&R. The pace of efforts has quickened over the past one year. Suddenly, there is a deluge of policies and guidelines, from governments, public sector undertakings and private companies. This has brought some clarity—and lots of confusion. In the following two pages, we take you through both.
—Rishi Joshi and Kapil Bajaj
The cost of land acquisition, just as the cost of capital and wage bill, is a part of his business plan. Looked at from this somewhat innocent point of view, the current controversy over land acquisition in the country seems a bit out of place.
Especially, when one considers the fact that India has abundant arable land (49 per cent of total, compared to 18 per cent in the US and 15 per cent in China) and some of the biggest industrial projects in Independent India have been built on vast tracks of land acquired from farmers. So, why is it that land owners and land buyers can’t suddenly seem to see eye to eye?
The missing meeting point is policy. India’s Land Acquisition act is as old as 1894, though there have been amendments to it. And, until recently, the country did not have a law on rehabilitation and resettlement (R&R) issues. Past acquisitions were done without a framework or guideline—in some cases with little or no compensation.
Says M. J. Vijayan, Coordinator of Delhi-based NGO, Delhi Forum, a support group for R&R activities in India: “The (R&R) track record of the state inspires little confidence, which leads to obdurate resistance to land acquisition by local communities.”
Beginning 2003, both central and the state governments (land is a state subject) have made some efforts at framing policies for R&R. The pace of efforts has quickened over the past one year. Suddenly, there is a deluge of policies and guidelines, from governments, public sector undertakings and private companies. This has brought some clarity—and lots of confusion. In the following two pages, we take you through both.
—Rishi Joshi and Kapil Bajaj
