Suresh Prabhu

-------------------------
Land and the disputes
( Suresh Prabhu,MP
Former Union Minister, Government of India)

Singur is simmering. It's in national news for last more than a month. The acquisition of land for power projects like Dadri in UP or to house the Special Economic Zones in many states is facing similar opposition. Several development projects have not yet taken off owing to hurdles created by opponents of these projects in land acquisition. Now, is this only a problem created by illiterate farmers instigated by shortsighted politicians and supported by ill informed public? Or is the problem much deeper and thus needs more application of mind of our macro planners?

India has only 2.2% of the land mass of the world. This landmass caters to the country's burgeoning population, which constitutes almost 16% of the global population... The need of the hour therefore, is to plan all our developmental projects keeping this reality in mind. In other words one needs to take a holistic approach while planning such projects to avoid lopsided development. Individual ministries at the centre plan for their own projects for irrigation, power generation, roads, housing, industry, etc. State governments again have similar activities going on in all these and many more sectors.

The Government of India (GOI) had appointed a commission under chairmanship of Justice Kripal to suggest the means of attaining 33% forest cover for India. This has been our country's national goal for a long time. The report has already been submitted. To ensure ecological security, if we really want to attain this much cherished goal, we are left with only 2/3 rd of the 2.2% land for using it for other purposes.

India's population is likely to be 1.5 to 1.8 billion by 2050 depending upon our success in family planning. It means in the next 4 decades or so we need more land to harbor at least 50% more people than what we have today. It is a different matter that the increase in population will not bring about a corresponding augmentation of the finite natural capital like water and land. Indeed, the development is likely to drastically reduce our natural resources on per capita basis. This is reality and this should provide enough fodder to subscribers of the school of opinion that India will reap rich harvest in years to come due to "demographic dividends" its younger population is likely to offer.

GOI must use satellite imagery; Geographical Information System (GIS) type sophisticated tools for 'land use pattern analysis' that is to decide what landmass should be reserved for what purpose. After having demarcated the forest land boundaries, remainder should be classified as cultivable and non-cultivable land. As far as possible, industry, housing, irrigation, power projects should be housed only on a terrain, which is not suitable for cultivation. Further analysis thus needs to be done to classify cultivable land then as suitable for a particular crop. The cropping pattern should be decided on the basis of this as well as the agro-climatic conditions to ensure better yield; optimum use of water based on land and climate and food security. This system may in a way, address our water stressed issues.

Our development is indeed lopsided. While on one hand we are planning new irrigation projects, on the other hand we are diverting already irrigated land for non-agricultural purposes. Shortsightedness of our policymakers has already resulted in a large mass of land having been allocated for a purpose not necessarily compatible with the best suitable and desirable use. Since such large chunks of land have already been occupied, under the circumstances, the best possible solution that GOI may seek to ameliorate this condition, is to devise a scheme of incentives and dis- incentives for an ideal switch over of land use.

We also need to ensure that we have proper siting laws to ensure scientific planning of our landmass for a variety of activities. The society may demand certain activities for modernization and growth. These may cause pollution of some type but still required for meeting our daily needs. However, through better planning such activities could be located at a place where it could cause least damage to our natural resources, thus minimizing its adverse impact on the environment. We also must have a second look at laws of land acquisition, compensation etc.

Our track record in the department of Rehabilitation and Resettlement (R & R) is deplorable, to put it mildly. We need to change the way we handle R&R... The Project Implementing Agency (PIA) must set up a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) to handle R&R issues. The full cost of R&R, as calculated by a judicial or quasi judicial committee, must be handed over to this SPV before commencement of any project work by PIA. The SPV should be manned by some NGOs enjoying the confidence of Project Affected Persons (PAP) and thus should be free from PIA, which as the past experience shows, looses interest in R&R and PAPs as soon as it obtains permission to start their core work. The dedicated SPV will address this issue and the engagement of civil society will at least to some extent, reduce possibility of corruption. Use of Information Technology (IT) can reduce this possibility further by bringing in more transparency.

The planners must take land and water as limiting factors and build our plan around these resources. States should be taken on board and necessary incentives could be offered to them to ensure this. The message of Singur is better panning at national level of these macro issues and not fault finding with those who agitate.