发展经济学中各种理论的assignment格式

发展经济学中各种理论的assignment/" target="_blank">assignment格式
Various Theories In Development Economics

在过去的几十年里，发展中国家已经看到了一些重大的变化，他们的定义特性。其中，，一个显着的是，放松的资本约束。借助一个不断上升的储蓄率和增加的外国资金供应，确保资本资源已呈现出上升趋势。在这一点上，在大多数发展中国家，剩余劳动力的存在的假设没有得到维持。他们中的许多人现在面临着熟练的劳动力短缺，这已经成为一个重大的发展问题。另一个非常重要的发展，多年来在发展中国家，特别是在亚洲快速增长的经济体，如银川地图和印度，是日益稀缺的土地，特别是非农业使用所需的土地。多年来，印度的土地纠纷数量一直在上升，尽管这个国家有一个广阔的地理区域。最主要的原因是，非农业用途所需的土地，必须满足一定的条件。例如，在住房和房地产所需的土地的情况下，通常是可取的，它在邻近已经存在的城市和城镇的地区。这是因为，现有的城市中心发生的比较遥远的地区相比，有更发达的基础设施，以及城市周围的劳动力更熟悉和城市化的过程中。非农业用地需求的第二个例子可以是，如公路、铁路、电力工程、水坝等基础设施的发展，最后，要求可能是土地的开采，这一定是位于地区，以及具有相同的，有没有自由决定的位置的项目。

However over the last few decades, developing countries have seen some major changes in their defining characteristics. Amongst these, a significant one has been that of relaxation of the capital constraint. Aided by a rising savings rate and increased supply of foreign funds has ensured that the capital resources have been showing an upward trend. Alongside this, the assumption of the existence of excess labor has not been holding ground in most of the developing countries. Many of them are now faced with a shortage of skilled labor and this has come up as a major development problem. Another very important development that has taken place over the years in developing countries, especially in the rapidly growing economies in Asia such as China and India, is that of growing scarcity of land, especially the land required for non agricultural usage. The number of land related disputes has been rising in India over the years despite the fact that the country has a vast geographical area. The prime reason for this is that the land required for non agricultural purposes has to meet certain desired conditions. For instance, in the case of land required for housing and real estate purposes, it is usually desirable to have it in regions contiguous to the already existing cities and towns. This is so because the existing urban centers happen to have more developed infrastructure as compared to far off areas, and the labor available around the cities is more familiar and exposed to the process of urbanization. The second instance of requirement of land for non agricultural purposes can be that for the development of infrastructure like roads, railways, electricity projects, dams etc. Finally, the requirement may be that of land for the purpose of mining and this has necessarily to be located in regions which are well endowed with the same, with there being little freedom to decide upon the location of projects.

What the above discussion implies is that although India seems to be having land in abundance, the land which is 'appropriate' to be used for non agricultural purposes is limited, and thus, we have now reached a situation where land has got segmented into agricultural land, non agricultural land (towns, offices etc) and the land that is currently in possession of the agricultural sector but which the expanding non agricultural activities are seeking to take control over. Most of the third category land belongs to farmers and tribal populations. It happens to be the only source of livelihood and economic security for them. Given the lack of generation of adequate employment opportunities, the farmers are unwilling to part with these lands and this has created a situation of conflict which we have been witnessing recently.

Such a requirement of land for non agricultural uses existed during the earlier years too, particularly in the post independence period when we started setting up the heavy industries. But during those years, the pressure on agricultural lands was low and there were not too many protests. Also, until the nineties, land acquisition did not face too many protests because that period saw the state adopting expansionary fiscal policies, and adequate rural infrastructure development spending implied that growth was much more broad based. Although then also we had the problems of tribal displacement and lack of complete rehabilitation, on the whole, those displaced were more or less able to find jobs as paid labor in the manufacturing sector. Land was acquired both by the public and the private sectors, and whatever protests happened, they were largely confined to the local areas.

As compared to that phase, what we have been seeing in the recent phase is that the pressure on land resources has increased manifold in the face of higher rates of economic growth; the farmers are much more mobilized, well aware of their rights and are not willing to let go off their lands so easily. Since the early nineties, the employment situation has become a lot worse. In such a scenario, with there being no other alternative to earn livelihoods, peasants are resisting any attempts at dispossessing them of their lands because it is these land holdings which provide them with some sense of livelihood security. Also, the issue of compensation has come to be highlighted so much because land pricing is different from other goods' pricing since land cannot be produced and is available in fixed supply. The value of the same plot of land may vary, depending upon the future values of income streams that it can yield. And the future incomes in turn depend on the various uses to which the land can be put. This is one of the major factors why the farmers have been rising in protest, because they have been seeing the value of their sold plots rise enormously once the real estate developers acquire those lands! Farmers stand to lose not just their precious lands for a pittance, but also the activities which are carried on their sold plots hardly provide them with any employment opportunities.

What we have been witnessing in India recently because of large scale land acquisitions are two different types of reactions from the farmers. Those in the well off states like Maharashtra, Punjab, Haryana have been fighting over the issue of the compensation they are being offered for their lands. These groups of farmers are well organized and have significant economic and political clout, and are thus in a better position to negotiate the land prices. On the other hand, farmers in the Central Indian states of Orissa, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand etc are largely small and marginal farmers who are less willing to part with their lands because that is the only source of livelihood which they have. But they are more often than not made to let go off their lands in return for meager compensations or none at all by using coercive means.

It has been often argued that displacement would inevitably accompany a development strategy. The experience of the now developed countries, particularly Britain, is quoted to put forth the point that industrialization results in a decline in the proportion of farmers and rural laborers in the total population; and that this process has always been associated with evictions. Those losing their lands and livelihoods are gradually absorbed in the industrial and service sectors as jobs expand. But there are two major flaws associated with this argument. The first one is that the rate of employment generation in the industrial sector was not enough to absorb all the people released from the countryside. Why Britain did not see the kind of protests that we have been witnessing in India recently is because of the large scale of out migration of the displaced population, and that is what prevented it from running into political chaos and conflicts. But today, the developing nations do not have that avenue open to them and as a result we see farming populations losing their land rising in protests. Secondly, the rate of growth of the manufacturing sector in Britain was almost twice than what the domestic market could have absorbed. This was made possible by the existence of the colonial markets which were flooded with industrial goods from Britain. But in India today, those losing their lands are in a more serious situation today because the growth of employment opportunities has not been keeping pace, and thus they find it tough to get absorbed elsewhere in the economy.

Major Drivers of Land Acquisition in India: In recent years, state governments are actively engaging themselves in acquiring land for private players, and trying to outsmart each other in terms of offering concessions to the global capital. Meager compensations are being offered to the farmers, and in many instances, the archaic Land Acquisition Act is invoked to acquire land for the so called 'public purpose'. This signifies the latest phase of expansion where the lands are then handed over to private enterprise at throw away prices. The dispossession that this process leads to side by side creates newer market relations as has been happening in the Indian land economy, especially in the tribal areas. Such a dispossession of the communities from the rights over their local resources creates serious livelihood issues for them. Some of the major drivers of the current land acquisition phase are Special Economic Zones, various urbanization projects, and mining related activities. A brief discussion on each of these follows below:

Special Economic Zones: Special Economic Zones were introduced in India in the year 2000, as a part of the Exim Policy. All the existing Economic Processing Zones at that time were converted into SEZs. As per the official guidelines, SEZ is defined as a duty free enclave and is to be treated as a foreign territory as far as the issues of duties, tariffs and trade operations are concerned. The idea behind the introduction of SEZs was to give a boost to infrastructure development and export promotion by providing attractive fiscal packages and minimum official regulations. Amongst the various concessions that have been on offer to the SEZ developers, the major ones are: duty free imports of goods required for the development and operation of SEZ; hundred percent income tax exemption for the first five years; exemptions from Central Sales Tax and Service Tax; single window clearance mechanism; exemptions from state sales tax etc. The major types of SEZs that are being set up in India are multi-product SEZ, sector specific SEZ, port/airport SEZ, and free trading and warehousing SEZ. As of now, there are more than five hundred seventy SEZs that have been accorded formal approval. Since the time of their inception, SEZs have been responsible for the acquisition of vast tracts of land, including cultivable land. It has been estimated that the total land that has been acquired for SEZ projects stands to be around sixty eight thousand hectares.

Given the large scale land acquisition that the SEZs involve, it becomes imperative to look at to what extent have the claims made in support of these projects been materialized. On the employment front, it was claimed that these projects would be generating around fifteen lakh jobs. But given the fact that the approvals which have been given so far largely involve projects that are not labor intensive, it is doubtful that the employment claims being made in support of SEZ promotion would get materialized. It is not just that the total number of jobs being created are far below those anticipated, but also that the employment generation claim does not factor in the fact that there are livelihood losses associated with setting up an SEZ. If the SEZs were to come up on wastelands, it would be a different matter. But the fact remains that many of these projects are acquiring agricultural lands, and in the process uprooting forests and villages, thus destroying livelihoods. The farmers and villagers that are being displaced by such projects would hardly get employed on these because the nature of jobs being created in SEZs are mainly of skilled nature, and those displaced would thus be forced to work as casual laborers. Regarding their contribution to exports, most of the exports from SEZs constitutes of IT sector products, leading to a domination of these industries in the export promotion zones. This has the tendency to lead to a narrowing down of the export basket rather than diversifying it, thus making our exports more vulnerable to fluctuations in the world market. Even without taking into consideration the large scale land acquisition being associated with setting up of SEZs, the whole concept of basing our growth on exports to the world market can have serious repercussions for the home economy in case of volatility in the international markets. Given the huge domestic market advantage that we seem to have, preference should be given to a strategy of economic growth and development that focuses on the home market because domestic consumption still remains the main source for our industrial development. As far as the contribution to infrastructure development is concerned, SEZs seem to be adding to the regional imbalances by remaining concentrated in areas that already have well developed infrastructure. Most of these seem to be concentrated in states like Gujarat, Maharashtra and other states in the south which already have quite well developed infrastructure.

The development of SEZs has been opposed largely on the issue of land acquisition and eviction of land owners. The 'public purpose' clause has been repeatedly invoked to gain access to lands for private commercial projects. The development of SEZs has involved replacement of farming on agricultural lands by industrial enclaves, resulting in the loss of livelihoods and creating additional pressures on the land resources. Even if the land owners are adequately compensated for the lands acquired, it would not be enough to make up for the loss they suffer on account of loss of livelihood earning assets and disruption of their cultures and rural life. For the last one decade, SEZ projects have been associated with diverting agricultural lands on a large scale. In most of the cases, it has been observed that the government has been acquiring land for private corporations because they find it difficult to acquire contiguous areas with adequate infrastructure that they require to set up the SEZ projects. When the state machinery gets involved to provide land for private ventures, it becomes almost inevitable that a land scam gets developed. Those who stand to benefit from these projects would have the incentive to garner state support by any means when the state starts to intervene in land acquisition for private players. A very serious issue with SEZ development is the fact that in almost all the projects, land that has been acquired is much in access of what is actually required for the venture. According to the SEZ Act, only thirty five percent of the total acquired land has to be for the manufacturing purposes and the rest can be used for other purposes like housing, recreation centers etc. This effectively amounts to acquiring fertile agricultural lands for serving private interests. A significant proportion of the land acquired for SEZ projects happens to be double or triple cropped land, which can have the impact of reducing the food grain production. The commodification of land which the SEZs have led to can pose a serious threat to land sovereignty because the Act does not specify any upper ceiling on the extent of land that can be acquired. Some of the major SEZ projects which have been widely disputed are discussed below:

Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh: Kakinada is the district headquarters town of East Godavari district on the east coast of Andhra Pradesh. The district is located in the delta of the Godavari river, implying that the rural lands are quite fertile. The Government of Andhra Pradesh recommended the setting up of an SEZ at Kakinada in 2002 with private sector investment. About one thousand acres of land had to be acquired for this purpose. In August 2004, Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC), Kakinada Sea Ports Ltd (KSPL) and the Infrastructure Finance & Leasing Services Limited (IL&FS) entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to set up an oil refinery and a port-based Special Economic Zone (SEZ) at Kakinada with ONGC as the single largest shareholder. As soon as the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued notification for acquisition, the farmers started protesting vigorously, disputing the government's claim that the land being acquired was dry and unfit for cultivation. Even as the protests were growing, thousands of acres of land has been forcibly sold/taken from the farmers. Most of the lands that have been acquired in the two mandals of Kothapalli and Thondangi are very fertile. The ground water level in this area is at six or seven feet. In fact large parts of Thondangi mandal are under tank irrigation; these tanks are filled by the left canal of Dhawaleswaram project. Besides paddy, commercial crops like cashew, casuarinas, mango, coconut are also grown on them. The farmers were forced to sell their lands otherwise threatening them of denying/withdrawing the welfare schemes. In August 2007 nearly a thousand policemen tear-gassed and arrested the leaders from Raivarithota and Srirampuram villages. A case was filed in the State Human Right Commission against the arrest of leaders from villages. SHRC ordered police to vacate the villages and to release the leaders and the farmers. The SHRC also gave a midterm order prohibiting acquisition of fertile lands. The people who were resisting SEZs also forcibly removed the fences erected around the acquired lands. A former government official-turned contractor, K.V. Rao, initially entered the picture as a promoter of KSPL, but most of the land acquired has been registered in his name rather than in the name of KSPL. After the ONGC's exit, the GMR Group, an infrastructure major, entered the KSEZ with 51 per cent equity. While the original plan was to develop an SEZ and oil refinery, the GMR was interested in building a huge thermal power plant on the acquired lands. GMR plans to invest an estimated Rs30,000 crore to set up a refinery-cum-petrochemicals complex. The refinery will be part of the petroleum, chemical and petro-chemical investment region in the Visakhapatnam-Kakinada belt along the east coast of the country. The agitation against the KSEZ is picking up again with the thermal plant coming to the fore. About 4750 acres of land is still in the possession of the farmers though it was forcibly sold to K.V Rao and the money was received. The farmers are refusing to part with their lands.

Gagret, Himachal Pradesh: The state of Himachal Pradesh has, like most of the states in India, recorded a decline in the net sown area over the last two decades. In 2006, the Himachal Pradesh government proposed the Gagret SEZ for the development of an airport, which would be constructed by SKIL infrastructures limited in Una district. This area is located around the Punjab border and constitutes largely of fertile land, with agriculture being the primary occupation of the local residents. Some of the land proposed to be covered under the project also included village commons and forest land. More than twenty five villages, with a population of about eighty thousand are likely to be affected by the project. It was claimed by the sources that the land to be acquired is just 4000 acres whereas nearly 11,500 acres is to be acquired. Also, the land to be acquired is amongst the most fertile area of the state of Himachal Pradesh. Around twenty five villages and a population of more than eighty thousand people would be affected by the project. It was claimed that the peasants would get the best rates in the market but any new sale deeds have been disallowed in the area alleging that the peasants jack up the prices of land so that a good bargain can be had from the company. The rates offered are not even one fifth the price the peasants got in other areas as compensation. The present SEZ goes against the basic understanding that fertile agricultural land must not be occupied. The land that is being targeted is not only fertile also happens to be multi-crop land. Himachal Pradesh is mostly a hilly state, and Una is one of the rare places in the state that is a plain and where agricultural operations are carried out. Acquiring such fertile lands would not only threaten the local food grain production but also have adverse impacts on the livelihood of many.

Polepally, Andhra Pradesh: Polepally is the site of an SEZ project covering over 1000 acres. Land acquisition for the SEZ started in 2001 and peaked in 2005. The land acquisition has had a disproportionate effect on different social groups. Land losers and landless households have primarily been scheduled castes, muslims and backward castes. Around 1150 acres were acquired for the SEZ from the three villages, Polepally, Gundlagadda Thanda and Mudireddipally. In Polepally, about seven hundred acres of land was acquired. About one hundred fifty families lost land that was allocated to them under the previous land reform programme of the government. Such lands are known as "assigned lands". Under government rules, such land reform beneficiaries receive only token compensation (that is not even claimed to be the market price for the land in question) as the land is considered still to be owned by the government. The great majority of those who lost "assigned land" were from Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward communities. There seems to have been no clearly stated rehabilitation and resettlement policy. At the initial stages of land acquisitions, it was promised to the villagers that their land would be acquired for a Green park and they would be able to continue earning a living from it. The villagers were told that although they would have to forego ownership of the land, they would be allowed to work as wage labourers in orchards or at a farm research station that the proposed SEZ was supposed to represent. They were also told that a housing colony would be constructed, and that the acquisition of land would commence only after relocation of the affected families to the new colony. In reality, the rehabilitation policy adopted in Polepally SEZ was ad-hoc. Compensation has been for the loss of land, not for the loss of livelihoods. Compensation for lands acquired was not based on the value of the incomes accruing from the lands but on the legal status of the lands. A large proportion of the acquired land was classed as "assigned land", having been redistributed to land-poor households among the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes under the land reform policy. These assigned lands, irrespective of the quality of the soil, the crops cultivated, or the infrastructure in place such as irrigation equipment, were priced uniformly. Lands belonging to upper castes were exempted from land acquisition. Despite the eviction process going ahead, peaking in 2004 and 2005, the promised housing colony was not constructed. No members of the affected families were provided with any vocational training so that they could be engaged in the SEZ on a regular and ongoing basis. The SEZ has had an adverse impact on the farmland in the affected villages and threatened food security. It has caused landlessness amongst a large section of the residents in Polepally. While some of the land losers have turned into farmers with smaller land holdings, many have become landless laborers. Those who had no non-farm skills and used to work as agricultural laborers, now have lesser farm employment opportunities in the region, and this has resulted in forced migrations.

Mangalore Special Economic Zone Limited: This project was notified in 2007, and is a joint venture between the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC), India's largest oil producer, and the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB), infrastructure financing firm, Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services and Kanara Chamber of Commerce and Industry (KCCI). KIADB has twenty six percent stake in the project and is the chief promoter of the project where as the respective stakes of KCCI, MRPL-ONGC and ILFS are two percent, twenty three percent and forty nine percent. The preliminary notification for acquiring around three thousand acres was issued in 2004-05. Of the 3,000 acres, a final notification for the acquisition of 1,800 acres was issued after farmers agreed to give up their land. A preliminary notification for acquiring about two thousand acres had also been issued for the multi-purpose industrial SEZ. In response to protests, the state government denotified around one thousand nine hundred acres earmarked for acquisition. The project has affected farmers and agricultural laborers in the region. Most of those affected include Christians, Dalits and Kudubi tribals. The residents have been carrying out a strong agitation and their demands mainly include that all the agricultural lands that have been acquired for the project should be denotified, SEZ promoter should deal with only those willing to sell their lands, and the farmers should be provided with special packages to enable them to sustain their livelihoods.

Dahej, Gujarat: Dahej SEZ is located in Bharuch district, Gujarat. It is well connected by road and railway. The project was notified in December, 2006 and is spread over around seventeen hundred hectares of land. The villages covered under the project include Dahej, Ambheta, Luvara, Suva Lakhigam and Jageshwar. SEZ is a part of Dahej Petroleum, Chemicals and Petrochemicals Investment Region (PCPIR) and is within Delhi-Mumbai Investment Corridor (DMIC). The SEZ is being developed by GIDC and ONGC through an SPV called Dahej SEZ (DSL). Initially, five companies including Pidilite, Godrej & Boyce, ABG Shipyard and Saraswati Industrial had been allotted land by the government. In 2010, when the project got environmental clearance, close to fifty new companies proposed to invest in the SEZ. By the end of 2010, the Dahej SEZ had allotted eighty percent of its land to forty companies. The project has impacted the lives of the salt pan workers and farmers in the region. Pollution from existing industries and ground water extraction has reduced water level in the sixteen surrounding villages. More than fifty percent of the land in the area is under cultivation and has been acquired for the project. The main crops grown in the region include wheat, cotton, lentils. The region also has a thick cover of mangroves spread over about two hundred fifty hectares, which also stands threatened by the project.

Urbanization Projects: The rapid urbanization spree going on since nineties has been having its impact on the land utility. As the landsaround the cities are getting occupied, forests and arable lands surrounding the cities are facing the increased pressure of urbanization. The development of real estate which is being fueled by the urban expansion has led to increased commodification of land and poses a serious threat to the prime agricultural land around the cities. By making formerly agricultural land unavailable for cultivation, indiscriminate urbanization also poses a threat to food security. The last two decades have seen a rapid rise of the organized real estate business in India. Land values around the cities have risen sharply and the growing interest of real estate sector has been putting severe pressure on the land resources. The real estate sector has been marred by various land scams in the recent years, pointing out to the illegal means being employed by the real estate barons to get hold of even larger tracts of land so as to reap huge speculative gains. Land scam associated with the recently held Commonwealth Games in Delhi, the Adarsh Housing Scam in Mumbai, controversies in the Yamuna expressway project and many more such stories bring forth the point that the urban land mafia in collusion with the public agencies is reaping huge benefits from acquiring prime agricultural land at throwaway prices and destroying lives and livelihood in the process. In this context, case studies related to land acquisition for the creation of greater Mohali in Punjab, DLF Cyber City Gurgaon and Naya Raipur in Chhattisgarh are summarized below:

Greater Mohali, Punjab: Greater Mohali is spread over one thousand square kilometers and is a newly carved out district from Mohali. The region is being developed with the aim of easing the burden of residential and commercial areas in Chandigarh and Mohali. Punjab Urban development Authority is the agency implementing the project. In the process, precious land of farmers will be acquired and turned into concrete jungles in the next couple of years. PUDA has been acquiring vast tracts of fertile land under the provisions of the land acquisition act of 1894. Most of the farming families in the region own about one or a half acre of land and with the compensation that is being provided by PUDA, they cannot even buy an equal amount of the land in the adjoining area. Thus, these families have been forced to look for other manual jobs like agricultural laborers. PUDA has been acquiring farm lands and selling them at high prices to make huge profits at the cost of livelihoods of small farmers. Since 2001, the farmers have been organizing themselves into committees and legally challenging the acquisition process of PUDA. With their constant struggles, the farmers have been able to develop public opinion in the villages at the periphery and have been able to save their lands. Some of the major demands being made by the farmers include that they be made partners in the residential area developed by PUDA to save them from unemployment;that the landless be provided with livelihood option in case the agricultural land they worked on is acquired by the agency.

Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh: Naya Raipur is proposed to be the new capital city of Chhattisgarh. It is to serve both as the administrative capital and also address the infrastructure development for industrial and trade promotion in the region. The proposed new city is located between two national highways. Naya Raipur Development Authority is the promoter of the project. It has about eight thousand hectares of land for the project, and an additional 22000 hectares as buffer and green zones. The project is spread over forty one villages, with about twenty seven forming the core. The project is the bone of contention between the affected farmers and state government in the Naya Raipur region. Most of the opposition is not against the project as such but against the magnitude of compensation being offered. Since the project has taken over a large part of agricultural land, the farmers want a good rate as compensation for the land and a handsome rehabilitation package. The farmers want to use the money to continue with their traditional profession of agriculture farming. With the compensation amount, the farmers were planning to purchase agriculture land elsewhere in the state and continue with the agriculture work. The displaced farmers of the Naya Raipur capital region have threatened to rage a full-fledged agitation against alleged unlawful land acquisition policies for development of the new capital.

DLF Cyber City, Gurgaon: The notification for this project was issued in 2003-04 by the Haryana Government. The project involved land acquisition of up to a hundred acres. Out of this, twenty acres of prime agricultural land was acquired by the Haryana government in Nathupur village, citing public purpose as the reason for land acquisition. This land was later handed over to the real estate giant DLF. The residents of Nathupur village filed a petition in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, challenging the land acquisition. The villagers alleged that they were not adequately compensated by the state government. The petitioners had stated before the court that land in their village was very valuable because of its proximity to Delhi and that every real estate company had its eye on it. DLF had approached the gram panchayat, seeking village land, but the company's offer was refused. DLF then approached the Haryana government for acquisition of the land. The government issued a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act in January 2003 to acquire about 20 acres of land for public purposes. Thereafter, in 2003, the government announced the awarding of Rs 3.91 crore for the land. The state government then sold the land to DLF for approximately fifty crore rupees. In October 2010, dubbing the action "an act of fraud on the public", a Division Bench not only quashed the acquisition notification of 2003, but also the conveyance deed between the state and DLF for transfer of the twenty acres of acquired land in Nathupur village. The Bench stated that the land in question had been acquired on the pretext of a public purpose of setting up a Cyber City with the real object of handing it over to DLF. Such an action of the state amounted to colourable exercise of power. It is evident from the record DLF applied for setting up Cyber City on measuring over 70 acres. The land was sufficient to meet the modified norms of 50 acres as against the earlier norms of 100 acres. The norm was re-fixed and the DLF could have easily been granted license for establishing the Cyber City. The process of acquisition of land in 2003, which culminated in the announcement of award in 2004 is nothing else but an act of arbitrary exercise of power. The reason for acquisition of land and then handing it over to DLF appears to be that the land is extremely valuable. The DLF wanted to grab it and having failed to purchase it from the gram panchayat by private negotiation, it had suggested to the government that the land be acquired as they required the land for services. The High Court termed the acquisition as mala fide. DLF challenged the judgement in the Supreme Court and in January 2012, the Apex Court passed an order, staying the High Court judgement. The matter is subjudice at the moment.

Mining: In recent years, mining has been promoted on a large scale and even been argued to be a major driver of the country's economic growth in the coming years. India is rich in minerals like manganese, iron ore, bauxite, copper, gold and silver; and most of these are concentrated in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Jharkhand, Orissa, Tamil Nadu, Chhattisgarh. Over the last two decades, these states have been witnessing some serious loot and plunder being carried out for profit generation. Indiscriminate attempts at mining have seen thousands of people getting displaced in these mineral rich regions, devastation of the local ecology and ecosystem, and in fact, some of the richest regions in India in terms of their mineral wealth have ended up being the poorest in economic terms because of the widespread loot for profits that is going on. A major proportion of the mineral reserves in India happens to be located in areas covered by dense forests and inhabited by tribal populations, fishing communities and adivasis. Of the total number of people that have so far been displaced by mining and mining related activities, less than one-fourth have been rehabilitated till now. Keeping aside the huge costs that mining activities have been imposing on the economy in terms of land acquisition, loss of livelihood etc, the very model of promoting mining as a major driver of economic growth in the mineral rich regions seems to miss the point that mining is largely based on an "enclave economy" model. There are usually little backward linkages to the overall economy. These are largely capital intensive activities, accompanied by huge costs as far as the non renewable resource use is concerned. On the employment front, the scale of employment generation has been far lower than what is claimed, and even within that, most of the jobs happen to be on a contractual basis with little regards to the workers' rights. It has been observed that the value of mineral production has been rising steeply, largely benefiting the mining mafia. But employment generation in mining has in fact been declining over the years. With huge costs that it imposes on the local population and ecology, and the benefits being highly concentrated in the hands of a few, mining promotes non-inclusive kind of growth. Moreover, the overall contribution of mining to economic growth has been minimal over the years.

Inhabitants of the Central Indian states, who largely constitute of agricultural communities and marginalized population, have in a way been paying a huge price for the invaluable natural resource base which their regions are endowed with. More often than not, it has been the profit considerations that have been given preference over the customary rights of the local populations. Many of the mining projects have been relying on legal manipulations to increase the profit volumes and in the process, and have led to large scale land dispossession. Mining barons have been accumulating huge benefits on account of deregulation and speculative activities, mostly in collusion with the local government apparatus. The number of players involved in the mining business has been increasing over the years, attracted by the huge profits and near absence of any effective legal regulations. Over the years, the mining lobby has grown in political power and influence. Summarized below are the case studies from Niyamgiri, Kalinganagar, and Hazira, which point out to the broad irregularities that have been going on in the mineral rich states, and the indiscriminate land acquisitions that have accompanied them:

Niyamgiri, Orissa: The Niyamgiri Hills are located in Kalahandi and Rayagada districts of Orissa and are home to various tribal communities like Dongria, Kutia, Jharania Kondh. These tribes have been peacefully living here since centuries. The region is protected by the forest laws.

In 2003, Vedanta signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Orissa state government for the construction of a refinery for alumina production, a coal-based power plant, and mining development at Lanjigarh in the district of Kalahandi. While applying for environmental clearance, the company provided wrong information that the setting up of the refinery would not require the clearing of any forest lands. In September 2004, environmental clearance was granted, independent of the mining project. Plans to mine for bauxite at Niyamgiri have met with local opposition. The twelve villages surrounding the refinery are inhabited by dalit and tribal populations. The project is being opposed on the grounds that it poses a threat to the existence of the local adivasis. The Dongria Kondh and other tribes inhabiting the Niyamgiri forests have been resisting the mining activities on these mountains. The land on which the refinery has been set up used to be farming land. This land was forcibly acquired in 2002 and 2004. More than a hundred families were displaced in the process and about a thousand sold their lands for the refinery project. The refinery expansion and mining project have serious implications for the human rights of local communities, including their rights to water, food, health, work and an adequate standard of living. In addition to the rich biodiversity, the Niyamgiri forests serve as an important link between the forest of Kalahandi and Koraput districts. Niyamgiri hills and the many streams flowing through them are a source of livelihood for the Dongaria and Kutia tribes. This region comes under the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution, and the tribes are eligible for special protection. The rich natural wealth of the region is a source of livelihood for these tribes and has been serving as their natural habitat for centuries. The proposed mining operations would have huge environmental costs as well. The project spread over more than seven square kilometers would cause serious ecological loss in terms of the number of trees that would be felled and the shrubs that would be cleared to make way for the project. If permitted, mining would have serious repercussions for the survival of the Dongaria Kondh community. The forest cover loss would adversely impact the economic well being of the Dongaria and Kutia Kondh tribes because they are heavily dependent on produce from the forests for their livelihoods. Mining-related activities such as blasting, road building etc would restrict their access to the forests and its produce. The tribes in this region have historically enjoyed traditional rights in the areas where mining activity is proposed to be carried out. They would cease to have access to the forests if mining activity is allowed in the region and this can adversely impact their livelihood earning avenues. In August 2010, the Union Forest and Environment Ministry had withdrawn Stage II forest clearance for bauxite mining in Niyamgiri area after N.C. Saxena panel recommended that mining in Niyamgiri hills would drastically affect ecology as well the primitive tribal group of Dongaria Kondhs living on the mountain slopes. It also withdrew the earlier permission given to Vedanta for the expansion of its one million tonne alumina refinery to six million tonne at Lanjigarh.

Kalinganagar, Orissa: Kalinganagar, about a hundred kilometers from the state capital, is being sought to be promoted as the industrial hub in the region. The region has seen the setting up of a large number of steel and iron ore mining plants since the nineties. The region is dominated by dalit and tribal populations. In the last eight years, the state government has signed more than fifty MoUs for setting up steel plants in the state, and since then, Kalinganagar region is being projected as the steel hub of Orissa. The Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation of Orissa (IDCO) was the agency that was responsible for the development of infrastructure facilities for Kalinganagar industrial complex. Although IDCO started to acquire land in the early nineties, as late as the middle of the last decade, most of the land remained in the possession of the farmers. This was so because not many industrial houses were coming forward to set up their units despite having signed MoUs with the state governments. Post 2005, with the revival of the domestic steel market, industrial activities picked up in the region.

Tatas signed the MoU in 2004 for setting up a six million tonne per annum steel plant in Kalinganagar in two phases. The land acquisition for Kalinganagar had started since early nineties by IDCO. By 2005, about thirteen thousand acres of land had already been acquired for the project. During the initial years, people handed over their lands without too many protests, believing that the project would usher in development in the region and provide employment opportunities for the displaced people. When the land acquisition physically started in the year 1997, only those who had documented rights over the land were compensated while many others who had been traditionally using the land but had not documented rights over it were left uncompensated. The sharecroppers too did not receive any compensation. After acquiring the land, IDCO sold it to various industrial houses at much higher prices. When it was realized that the displacement being caused by the acquisition was not being accompanied by job creation, the protests started. Since then, the region has been witness to two major incidents of clashes between the police and protesting villagers. The area has been heavily deployed with security forces to provide security to the industrial activity being carried out by the private corporations. This points to a serious flaw in the approach towards land related disputes that has been adopted till now. The legitimate aspirations of the people have been seen as a law and order problem and rather than taking them into confidence, a high handed approach has been followed.

Essar Steel Plant, Hazira (Gujarat): This project, requiring a total of two fifty hectares was notified by the Gujarat government in the year 2006. As per SEZ rules, when application is filed for granting of SEZ status, the piece of land in question should be vacant. In this case, despite the fact that this condition was not met, the project was given the required clearance. The project has had an adverse impact on the lives of the Khalasis and Halpatis communities that dominate the region. These are predominantly small farmers and have hadto lose their lands which were used for agriculture and farming practices. The region had large stretches of land that used to serve as the grazing commons, but those too have been acquired for the project. In addition to all this, the location of the project has blocked the residents' access to the sea which was vital for their livelihoods. The environmental impacts of the project have included issues such as ground water salination in the region and increased pollution. Due to the loss of agricultural land, the already serious problem of out migration as casual labor from the region has got worsened. The problems have further been compounded by the expansion of the scale of activities in the year 2010. The fact that the company has control over almost all the panchayats in the region explains the lack of any organized resistance to the project.

Although land acquisition for non agriculture is going to be an inevitable part of the development strategy, land banks comprising of land not suitable for agriculture ought to be created in each state, and such lands should be used for setting up industries. In cases where the acquisition of cultivable land becomes inevitable, farmers losing their lands should be treated as partners in the proposed industrial unit and must be provided with shares in that unit, in addition to the payment for the loss of land.