Posts
Land Acquisition
for
Infrastructure and
Industry
The
present land acquisition law has
been
quite hostile to the interests of
the
landowner, as it attempts to make
land
available to industry through
government
at a minimal price
Fast economic
growth in the last two decades has increased demand for land from many sources,
such as infrastructure, industry, resource extraction (such as mining), and
urbanization, including real estate. Even when many of these activities are
funded privately and driven by profit motive, they serve a social purpose, as
employment generation per unit of land is higher in non-agricultural uses than
in agriculture. For instance, a 4000 MW thermal plant may displace about 250
households but would create tens of thousands of new jobs by providing power to
small industry and tubewells that would increase both gross cropped area and
productivity. At present the share of urban dwellers in total population of
India is 32 percent, but they occupy only 6 percent of the total area of the
country. Thus growth through industrialization and urbanisation would not only
increase labour productivity but will reduce pressure on farm land by pulling people away from land to
non-farming occupations. However, land acquisition has emerged as the most
important structural constraint in India to the process of fast
industrialization and improvement in infrastructure. Delays in procuring land
leads to uncertainty and cost escalation, and thus affects development.
Acquisition of land
by government has lately drawn resistance in many cases due to inadequate
compensation for the land and loss of livelihoods of the affected people, as
well as for involuntary displacement without proper rehabilitation. Moreover,
people are not willing to give up their present dwelling and occupation of
farming for a dark future totally dependent on the vagaries of market. The
present land acquisition law has been quite hostile to the interests of the
landowner, as it attempts to make land available to industry through government
at a minimal price. So far the practice in most state governments has been to
coerce people to give up their lands by using the legal powers of eminent
domain, and in some cases even through the use of force. Thus the model followed
has been, ‘let some people lose out so that others (this includes some
enterprising poor too) may gain’. Unfortunately the losers tend to be the
poorest with little skills, often tribals, who are unable to negotiate with the
market forces and cope with the consequences of their forced expulsion from
land, and end up much worse off than before acquisition.
