UNIT 20 PEOPLE’S MOVEMENTS Structure 20.0 Objectives 20.1 Introduction 20.2 Mulshi Satyagraha: The First Struggle against Development Induced Displacement 20.2.1 Mulshi to the Present: Gamut of Issues 20.3 Tawa Dam: Struggle over Fishing Rights in the Reservoir 20.4 Sardar Sarovar Project and Narmada Bachao Andolan: From Rehabilitation to Anti-Dam 20.5 The South Maharashtra Movement: Broadening the Scope of the Struggles of the PAPs through Innovative Demands and Strategies 20.6 Recent Movements against Land Acquisition for Special Economic Zones (SEZs) 20.7 People’s Movements against Displacement: A Summary 20.7.1 Characterisation of the Movements against Displacement 20.7.2 The Issue of Exclusion-Inclusion 20.7.3 Multi-dimensional and Layered Movements 20.7.4 Typology of Movements and Issues 20.7.5 Contestation over Compensation: Who Gets Compensated? 20.7.6 Recognition of Eco-system Damage 20.7.7 Compensation Package: Land for Land 20.7.8 Even Landless to Get Land 20.7.9 Who Should Pay and Where Will the Land Come from? 20.7.10 From Resettlement and Compensation to Rehabilitation 20.7.11 Involvement and Consent of the PAPs 20.7.12 Separate Body for Rehabilitation 20.7.13 Sequencing: Rehabilitation before Construction 20.7.14 Expanding the Rehabilitation Package 20.7.15 Contestation over the Nature of the Project 20.8 Let Us Sum Up 20.9 Cues to Check Your Progress 20.10 Glossary 20.11 References

20.0 OBJECTIVES After going through this Unit, you will be able to: i) get an overview of people’s movements against displacement in India; ii) important issues brought up by the people’s movements; and iii) examine innovative people’s movements by the displaced persons. 20.1 INTRODUCTION This Unit titled “People’s Movements” under the overall theme of “Role of Participation in Sustainable Development” (MRR-102) would mainly focus on a few of the popular people’s movements, which have brought up, as well as tried to re-define, the issue of the role and participation of displaced persons in the planning and implementation of development projects. The overall thrust of this Unit is to show how people’s movements have impacted in expanding the meaning and mode of rehabilitation. 20.2 MULSHI SATYAGRAHA: THE FIRST STRUGGLE AGAINST DEVELOPMENT INDUCED DISPLACEMENT The Mulshi Satyagraha is one of the first struggles against development induced displacement fought in the early 1920s by peasants in Western Maharashtra when they opposed the Mulshi dam built by the Tatas (Vohra 1994). The struggle was led by the young Congressman Senapati Bapat. The Tatas came to Mulshi for the construction of a dam as part of their project to supply power to the city of Bombay. It was also a struggle against the British as the British (Bombay government) had sanctioned the dam. Mulshi Satyagraha is supposed to be one of the longest Satyagraha during the freedom struggle lasting for about four years from 1921 to 1924. Senapati Bapat and his followers succeeded in halting construction of the dam for a year. There was a strong sense of wrong and deep feeling of resentment among the peasantry affected by the project as they were neither consulted on the project, nor their consent was taken. Suspicion and distrust was high in both the government and the company, due mainly to the procedure of acquisition. The peasants were reluctant to part with their land on account of its productivity, the natural facilities of irrigation and nominal amount of land revenue. They were also reluctant to part with ancestral homes, and traditional places of worship and see them submerged under water. They also did not want to emigrate from one place to another (Gadgil and Guha 1995). The Bombay government promulgated an ordinance whereby the Tatas could acquire land on payment of compensation. This verdict of the court split the movement into two factions. The Brahman landlords of Pune, who owned much of the land in the Mulshi valley, were eager to accept compensation. However, the tenants and their leader, Senapati Bapat, were totally opposed to the dam project. With the landlords, the power company and the state all ranged against them, there was little the peasants could do, and the movement collapsed in its third year. In fact Gandhiji had persuaded the satyagrahis to give up fast on July 12, 1923 and it is alleged that Gandhiji did not take an unequivocal stand in support of the demands of the agitationists. Tragically, the landlords pocketed the compensation, and the actual tillers of the soil were left high and dry. Though the movement finally collapsed in 1924, the movement at least succeeded in forcing the Tatas to provide reasonable negotiated compensation for the submerged lands. The movement of the Mulshi dam oustees is an important landmark in the struggles of the project affected persons (PAPs) because it brought out the importance of compensation and consent. 20.2.1 Mulshi to the Present: Gamut of Issues The Mulshi satyagraha was just a beginning. There has been a mushrooming of movements against displacement after independence, especially during the last 20-25 years. Many more issues got involved and they came to be taken up and fought and slowly the nature of rehabilitation for the development induced displacees (DIDs) began to change. These issues could be broadly grouped into three. First is the issue of compensation, including the package and its implementation. Second is the set of issues related to the processes and procedures like prior consultation with the potential displacees, their consent and sequencing of project implementation and rehabilitation. The third is the contestation of the notion of greater common good and the nature of the project itself and here the positions range from no to the project to articulating alternatives, which can bring down the extent of displacement with or without compromising on the envisaged benefits of the original project. Though there are no uniform policies yet and these issues have been incorporated in varying degrees in different struggles and states (policies and rehabilitation packages), there is a clear direction that is emerging and this direction is important. Though there are many pioneering movements of the displaced people that have tried to address the issues that we discussed above, the space and other limits of this Unit would not allow us to get into the details of all of them. There are too many of such movements and volumes can be written about each one of them. Instead, what we would attempt here is to concentrate on just three movements, which we believe can further elaborate the issues that we discussed in section 2 above and have elements in them that can contribute to widen the scope of the overall movement of the displaced. The first one that we would take up is the Tawa struggle in which displaced people could establish their rights over the reservoir for fish production and set up their own co-operative society to manage it. The second one is the famous Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA), probably the best known struggle of the displaced people both in India and outside and which brought to the forefront some of the larger concerns and critiques related to state sponsored “development”. And finally we have the South Maharashtra Movement led by the Shetmajoor Kashtakari Shetkari Sanghattana and Shramik Mukti Dal who have been able to operationalise, to some extent, the principle of adhi vikasansheel punarvasan, mag prakalp (development-oriented rehabilitation first, only then the project) and set up well defined processes and procedures for the same, expand the rehabilitation package by forcing the government to pay the dam oustees pani bhatta (water allowance), organise potential displacees on the basis of a concrete alternative proposals and force the government to at least partially accept it and also organise joint struggles of both the dam affected and drought affected people. 20.3 TAWA DAM: STRUGGLE OVER FISHING RIGHTS IN THE RESERVOIR The Tawa dam is on the river Tawa, one of the major left bank tributaries of the Narmada in Kesla block, Hoshangabad district, Madhya Pradesh. The Tawa, constructed in 1975, is the first big dam to be built as part of the Narmada Valley Development Plan (NVDP), which envisages construction of 30 big dams, 135 medium dams and 3000 small dams on the Narmada and its tributaries. The reservoir spread over 21,000 ha submerged forty-four Gond and Korku villages. The evacuees were among the first tribal people to be displaced by ‘development’ in central India. Apparently the displaced persons were given a compensation of 188 to 375 rupees per ha of land (Singh 2007). Most of the oustees had been displaced twice before – once by an ordnance factory and later by a firing range. In fact the construction of the dam went off rather peacefully as there was not much of an agitation by the displaced people. However, conflict arose after the completion of the dam on the question of fishing rights in the reservoir. Once the reservoir was completed the state fisheries corporation took over fishing in the reservoir. It also brought skilled fishermen from both within and outside the state and had them settled in the valley. The displaced tribals, who till the construction of the dam used to catch fish from the river for their domestic consumption all their life suddenly became ‘poachers’. In 1994-95, because of the huge losses, the reservoir was leased to a contractor. The contractor, apart from resorting to indiscriminate and unsustainable practices to maximise profits also spread terror in the area through hired musclemen. It was during this time people from 17 villages in the area, earmarked as Bori Wildlife Sanctuary, were asked to vacate their land under Project Tiger. People from these settlements joined hands with the displaced and thus began a series of protests and demonstrations. As a result of the intense agitations, the State had to finally give in. On December 13, 1996 the State agreed to give the reservoir on lease for a period of five years to a cooperative of the displaced persons. Thus the Tawa Visthapit Adivasi Matsya Utpadan Evam Vipanan Sahkari Sangh – The Tawa Displaced Adivasis Fisheries Production and Marketing Cooperative Federation – (TMS), the first such experiment by the displaced persons in India, was formed and it was given the responsibility to produce (including seeding) and market its products. Six lakh rupees were sanctioned as seed money for the cooperative, half as an interest-free loan and the other half as a grant. The State also agreed not to evict people from the Bori Wildlife Sanctuary or the Satpura National Park against their will. Another innovative development was that the oustees were allowed draw-down cultivation along the sides of the Tawa reservoir and that too with an exception of any levies for a period of five years. The state also agreed to set up two lift-irrigation schemes for the displaced. According to a Sympathiser of TMS “The TMS’s performance in terms of productivity was exceptional. The average annual fish production rose to about 327.63 tonnes, an increase of 274 per cent over the corporation’s performance; the per hectare fish productivity in the reservoir rose from an average of 7.3 kg/yr/ha to 26.95 kg/ha/yr; the average annual income per worker was almost three times what it had been earlier; the number of people employed in organised fishing in the Tawa reservoir grew from an average of 137 to 422; among other factors, one reason for the involvement of a larger number of people was the improved access to nets and boats. In addition, the TMS took a number of other initiatives. These included greater focus on local markets, more fishing days to ensure livelihood security for the workers, use of smaller nets as against the dragnets promoted by the corporation, worker welfare policies like subsidised loans etc.” (Singh 2007) The highest productivity of 32.37 kg/ha/yr achieved in the year 1999-2000 was thrice the national average of 11.43 kg/ha/yr, and more than any other reservoir in the state (for reservoirs greater than 5000 ha in size); this despite constraints like an upstream thermal power plant that casts off its residue in the river, dead trunks of trees from the submerged forest crowding the reservoir etc. Empirical evidence based on relative fish size and species also shows that the cooperative, unlike its predecessors, managed the reservoir in a sustainable way (Gupta 2001 as quoted in Singh 2007). In spite of such spectacular performance, the relationship of TMS with the state became strained as TMS refused to mobilise people for the then ruling party. The TMS again had to resort to agitations for the renewal of the lease and finally the government agreed to renew the lease but under stringent conditions, which, in effect, would have taken away the autonomy of TMS. TMS refused to agree to these conditions and after about six months the TMS was offered a new lease with more or less the same terms as the previous one. It continues to manage fishing operations in the reservoir but the renewed lease expires in 2006-07 and one can expect another round of struggle. Irrespective of the stand off between TMS and the state government and the resultant problems, there is no doubt that TMS has been one of the most innovative responses of the displaced persons in India. It opens up new vistas for rehabilitation and livelihoods of the displaced persons. It is an example to be followed and promoted. “The TMS is an exceptional case: where often such experiments fail it has proved itself a successful workers’ cooperative. Such endeavours need to be encouraged, analysed and made an example of. The Tawa story also offers solutions pertaining to the rehabilitation of those displaced by big dams” (Singh 2007). The relevance of TMS goes much beyond big dams; there are valuable lessons in it for all types of development induced displacement and rehabilitation as it opens up a pathway for more inclusive development. “The Tawa co-operative example shows that when there is genuine people’s control, both productivity as well as sustainability can be ensured along with increase in employment and income for the toilers. Such struggles need to be linked into state-level, even national-level movements that put forward alternative irrigation and rehabilitation policies” (Patankar and Phadke 2007). Of course this is possible, as the Tawa experience shows, only under two conditions: one, the organised strength and resolve of the displaced persons themselves and two an innovative and creative leadership. 20.4 SARDAR SAROVAR PROJECT AND NARMADA BACHAO ANDOLAN: FROM REHABILITATION TO ANTI-DAM The struggle against the Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP), spearheaded by Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA), is perhaps one of the most intense, prolonged and visible movements of the displaced of our times. SSP, an interstate project, is the terminal dam on the Narmada and is part of the Narmada Valley Development Plan (NVDP). It has a submergence area of 360 km2, spread largely among Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat states and has been the focus of a conflict from its very inception. The main parties representing the two extreme positions may be summarised as the official establishment comprising the Gujarat Government (and also the Government of India and the governments of the three other participating states of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Rajasthan) and experts and anti dam activists who view big dams generally, and the SSP in particular, as unmitigated environmental, social and economic disasters. In some ways there is also an underlying conflict between the people of the drought prone areas of Gujarat who think the Narmada is their ‘life line’ and the adivasis in the upstream region who stand to lose their land and way of life for an abstract ‘common good’ (Paranjape and Joy 2007). (From details on the Narmada Bachao Andolan see Unit 72, MRR-006). From the point of view of this Unit on people’s movements and the issues they have brought forward the case of SSP and NBA presents a situation in which the movement of the displaced people starts on the issue of rehabilitation, but soon shifts to an anti-dam position and in this process questions the rationale for large dam itself. Today NBA has come to symbolise the fight against the “State sponsored development” and in the words of Sanjai Sangvai, an activist of the NBA, it is a “quest for just and sustainable development” (Sangvai 2007). NBA also provided the inspiration to form the National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM) consisting of many movements, grassroots groups and NGOs working on displacement and sustainable development issues cutting across different ideological strands. The first organised effort to mobilise the potential oustees of SSP took place in the mid-1980s with the formation of the Narmada Dharangrasta Samiti (NDS) – committee or organisation of the Narmada Dam affected – of the affected persons from Maharashtra. The rehabilitation package offered by the Narmada Water Dispute Tribunal (NWDT) is said to be one of the most progressive, may be with the exception of the Maharashtra rehabilitation policy, in India. The package included ‘land for land, community resettlement – at least a year before submergence – and linkage between resettlement and the height of the dam.’ (Sangvai 2007). NDS’s main plank of mobilisation was proper rehabilitation and implementation of the rehabilitation package. In the mid-1980s NDS also participated in a participatory research initiative on low external input based sustainable productivity enhancement in Maharashtra. The idea was that the experience and learnings from this can feed into the rehabilitation process, especially the type of agriculture that would be practiced by the oustees when they get land as part of the rehabilitation. NDS also asked for full information on the project especially for a master plan of community based resettlement and guarantee of land and other natural resources. Soon organisations of the project affected in Gujarat (Narmada Asargrasta Sangharsha Samiti) and Madhya Pradesh (Narmada Ghati Navnirman Samiti) were also formed. Around 1998 NBA was formed by uniting all the three orgnaisaitons. NBA declared its opposition to displacement itself (and this is a shift from the earlier focus on rehabilitation) and also called for a total review of the project. Thus towards the end of the 1990s NBA had taken a complete anti-dam stand mainly because a) it was convinced that proper rehabilitation would not be possible, b) large tracts of forest land would be submerged (environmental reasons) and c) economic non-viability of the project. The Independent Review by the World Bank (Morse Report) in 1992 further consolidated NBA’s stand, as the report was highly critical of the projected benefits and also the status of the rehabilitation. Finally the World Bank withdrew from the project in March 1993 and many consider this as one of the highest points in the NBA struggle. Some of the other orgnaisaitons like Arch Vahini who were part of the wider coalition on the issue of proper rehabilitation did not take an anti-dam stand and instead concentrated their efforts on the R&R issues. Meanwhile the Supreme Court also intervened in 1994 and disallowed the resumption of work for five years (till 1999) taking note of the recommendations of the Five Member Group appointed by the Union Water Resources Ministry to review all the aspects of the project. NBA also had moved the SC in 1994. In its final order in October 2000, the SC allowed construction to proceed with a caveat that periodic review has to be done to see that rehabilitation keeps pace with the construction of the dam. After the SC verdict many people who were concerned about the Narmada issue felt that NBA should change gears and make rehabilitation as their main plank. However, NBA continued with their anti-dam stand as the main plank of mobilisation. This is not to say that NBA was not concerned about rehabilitation but to say that the type of consistent and systematic efforts that should have been put into for rehabilitation was not forthcoming, except may be till very recently. On the ground the construction of the dam went ahead, and by the end of 2005 the height reached nearly 110 meters with many people still remaining to be rehabilitated as highlighted by the recent hunger strike by NBA activists in Delhi. The SC has also given the clearance to raise the height up to 120 meters and at that height the number of displaced families would be more than 35,000. It is a mute question to ask whether the government would be able to rehabilitate such a large number of people as per the NWDT rehabilitation package. Even at a lower height the government in a way had washed its hands off from its responsibility of giving land for land when it declared some years back that the PAPs can buy the land on their own and the government would give the cash. It is admittance on the part of the government that it cannot procure enough land to be distributed amongst the PAPs. The struggle around SSP also saw efforts, for the first time in India, to seriously look at alternatives. The alternatives ranged from soil and water conservation measures or what now-a- days is called micro watershed development and not drawing water from the Narmada (especially to meet the water requirements of Kutch and Saurashtra) to simple height reduction proposals to bring down submergence and displacement especially by S. S. Nadkarni and Vinod Raina to a proposal to restructure SSP on more sustainable and equitable manner by Paranjape and Joy. Most of these alternatives came up in the mid-1990s when the height of the dam was already around 80 meters. The Paranjape-Joy proposal showed that it is possible to reduce the full reservoir level to 107 from the present 138.7 meters without compromising on Gujarat’s share of 9 Million Acre Feet (MAF) of water; bring down submergence and displacement by two-thirds and make rehabilitation tractable; ensure rehabilitation of the PAPs within their own socio-cultural milieu as part of an upstream area development programme; increase the share of water for the drought- prone areas of Kachchh, Saurashtra and North Gujarat; and make the water available on conditions of taking up extensive watershed development, equitable distribution, participatory management and bringing one-third of the service area under permanent vegetative cover. The proposal had claimed that through such an integrated approach it is possible to increase the service area from the present 1.8 million ha to more than 4 million ha. The proposal did detail out an alternative plan for power generation mainly through the run of the river system. The alternative also had tried to salvage as much as possible of the construction and expenditure that had already taken place on the project. The proposal could bring together the pro and anti dam camps, address the concerns of the project affected and drought affected people and thus had the strength to break the deadlock around SSP. In the highly polarised and emotionally charged atmosphere of the mid-90s there were no real takers for the alternative, except for Shramik Mukti Dal and a few other organisations and individuals in Maharashtra and outside. The Gujarat Government refused to discuss it. NBA’s stand at best was ambivalent. Thus the alternative proposal remained more as an academic exercise (of course it did contribute to the wider discourse on water sector) and really did not change anything on the ground. Looking back at the 20 years of struggle by NBA one can definitely say that the movement did succeed in bringing some of the wider issues like the role of large dams, nature of development projects, who gains and who loses, community-state and human-nature relationships into development discourse and questioned notions of “eminent domain” and ‘greater common good”. However, while doing so did the immediate interests of the displaced persons in terms of proper rehabilitation get compromised is a question that is not so easy to answer (For a detailed analysis on SSP see Unit 72, MRR-006). 20.5 THE SOUTH MAHARASHTRA MOVEMENT: BROADENING THE SCOPE OF THE STRUGGLES OF THE PAPS THROUGH INNOVATIVE DEMANDS AND STRATEGIES Over the last two decades or so South Maharashtra has witnessed some of the innovative and intense struggles on issues related to drought, equitable water distribution, dams, displacement and rehabilitation. There have been systematic efforts to organise the PAPs in South Maharashtra mainly in the districts of Satara, Sangli and Kolhapur. This region has a number of large and medium dams and the famous Koyna dam is also located in this region. Efforts were made to organise the PAPs of both the old or already completed projects like Koyna, Warna, etc. and also the new ones like Urmodi, Wang–Marathwadi, Karli or Uttar-Mand dams and Uchangi that are coming up in the region. Each of these dams has its own orgnisation of the PAPs and they are part of Maharashtra Rajya Dharan Va Prakalpagrasth Shetkari Parishad – an all Maharashtra federated body of movements of PAPs in the state. The South Maharashtra Movements of the PAPs are led by the Shetmajoor Kashtakari Shetkari Sanghattana, an organisation of the rural toilers, which is working amongst both the drought affected and project affected persons in the region and Shramik Mukti Dal, which is a new left political organisation active in Maharashtra for the last 20 years or so. Over the last 15 years or so the movement has made very important gains. One of the first things that the movement has been able to do was to get access to information and data with regard to both projects as well as rehabilitation plans. As we all know, by and large, the project authorities do not part with any information about the projects (and very often they take the cover of secrecy) to the organisation of the PAPs. The movement tried to sort this out and made it a part of the rights of the PAPs to get access to information. This was done even before the Right to Information Act came into existence and till now the movement has not taken the help of this Act to get access to information. It has been able to get the information it wants on the basis of its own organisational strength. Secondly, the movement forced the government to implement the slogan ‘adhi vikasansheel punarvasan, mag prakalp’ (development-oriented rehabilitation first, only then the project), which is a part of the Maharashtra rehabilitation policy. The movement forced the district authorities to streamline the entire process and procedures of rehabilitation. Project-wise timetable for rehabilitation and construction is drawn up for each of the project and monthly review meetings are held in each of the district to review the implementation of the mutually agreed upon time frame and follow up actions. The district collector, the district rehabilitation officer, district heads of all other concerned departments involved in the provision of the required civic amenities to the rehabilitation sites and representatives of the various oustees organisations participate in these review meetings. If the government goes back on its commitment then the people forcefully stop the construction of the dam. Under no circumstances they allow gorge filling and thus does not allow impounding of water unless and until the government delivers on the rehabilitation. The ability to physically stop the construction of the project is the most effective weapon the PAPs’ organisation has to get its demands accepted. The movement consciously tried to bring both the project affected and drought affected people in the region together on one platform. They now organise joint struggles supporting each others’ demands. By and large these social sections are seen, and also organised, as inimical to each other. The ruling classes are also interested to see these social sections pitted against each other. Unfortunately this is what has happened in the context of Sardar Sarovar Project. It is the belief of the leading sections of this movement that one needs to go beyond the large versus small debate through integration that underpins this alliance. The alliance is rooted in a framework, which says, among other things, that, one, drought prone regions require limited but assured quantities of water from exogenous, larger sources to stabilise livelihood needs in these regions, two, integration of sources is the way to overcome the limitations of both the large and the small systems, three, water stored in the dams with enormous amount of sacrifice on the side of the project affected has to be distributed equitably, four, large dams should be planned only as a last option and alternatives need to be explored including reduction in the height and dispersal of storages, and five, no compromise on the principle of ‘adhi vikasansheel punarvasan, mag prakalp’ (development-oriented rehabilitation first, only then the project). The experience of the South Maharashtra movement shows that equitable distribution of water is a common issue that can help build such an alliance. Here, dam-oustees have supported the demand of the drought affected for equitable distribution of water, because as PAPs, equitable distribution can get them water for their plot of land in the command area. This united movement of the drought-affected and dam- affected has forced the government of Maharashtra to adopt a policy of equitable water distribution regarding many dams on the Krishna and its tributaries such as Urmodi, Wang–Marathwadi, Karli or Uttar-Mand dams (Patankar and Phadke 2007). One of the major gains of the movement was when it forced the government to agree to pay Rs. 600 per family per month for the project affected people as compensatory irrigation allowance or better kwon as pani bhatta. The logic for this demand was simple. As per the Maharashtra rehabilitation policy the PAPs are supposed to get irrigated land in the command area as compensation. The experience is that by and large irrigation facilities never reach the land given to them. The movement, therefore, demanded that the government should compensate for the difference of productivity between dry land agriculture and irrigated agriculture till they received irrigation. The oustees of Marathwadi dam forcibly halted the construction of the dam for 20 days in the crucial pre-monsoon period. Other oustee organisations, with support from the drought affected people, also threatened to halt construction on other dams. Finally, the government gave in. It gave a written assurance that it would give Rs. 600 per family per month to the oustees till their land got irrigation. Of course, the movement had to organise struggles every now and then to force the government implement this decision. Finally, the movement in some cases also questioned the nature of the projects and tried to work out alternatives. At least in one case, in the case of Uchangi dam, the movement was partially successful. Uchangi dam is a medium irrigation dam in Kolhapur district under construction, which would impound about 660 million cubic feet of water. It would submerge, either partially or fully, six villages (Phadke 2000). The local people, especially those who would be displaced, questioned the rationale for the dam as most of the potential service area is already getting water through some of the traditional structures on the stream. A systematic study of the area in the form of participatory resource mapping (PRM) was undertaken with the help of experts from Society for Promoting Participative Ecosystem Management (SOPPECOM), Pune. Based on this study an alternative plan was developed. This alternative plan basically argued for dispersing the storage into three small dams instead of one at Uchangi and combining it with extensive watershed development work in the area and equitable distribution of the stored water the alternative proposal could double the irrigation benefits. Since the storage would be dispersed over three sites, the height of the Uchangi dam could be reduced bringing down the submergence and displacement substantially. The important thing is that the alternative suggested better rehabilitation options and means of reducing submergence without compromising on the area irrigated. After a long and protracted struggle and negotiation the government took up the survey of the two new sites – Khetoba and Dhamanshet – suggested in the alternative. Finally the government agreed to reduce the height of the Uchangi dam by two meters saving the houses in the village settlement (especially in Chaphawade village, which is the most affected) from submergence and also to construct a smaller structure at Khetoba, the site suggested in the alternative, to make up for the reduction in the storage at Uchangi. The government rejected the Dhamanshet site saying that it would not fit into the benefit-cost norms. The movement had to wage many agitations, some even lasting a few weeks, to make the government implement its own decisions. Then that is the learning world over. In the absence of organised struggles, innovative strategies and demands, creative leadership and systematic follow up is crucial for rehabilitation of the PAPs. 20.6 RECENT MOVEMENTS AGAINST LAND ACQUISITION FOR SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONES (SEZs) At present following the policy change towards establishing of SEZs; movements have emerged against the Land Acquisition. Famous cases of such movements have taken place in Nandigram and Singur in West Bengal, where the people’s movement though lasting for few days have forced the state government to rethink and revise its policy. Check Your Progress 1 i) Explain the contribution of the Mulshi Satyagaraha in today’s context. ii) What was the main difference in the movement against the Sardar Sarovar project after formation of the NBA? iii) What is the main contribution of the NBA towards the larger issue of DID? iv) Explain the most tangible gains of the South Maharashtra movement. 20.7 PEOPLE’S MOVEMENTS AGAINST DISPLACEMENT: A SUMMARY 20.7.1 Characterisation of the Movements against Displacement Though popular media reports on people’s resistance against different types of development induced displacements (DIDs) are plenty, systematic documentation and analysis of movements is few and far between. Also the struggles against DIDs is seen differently – some see these struggles as part of the wider human rights movement. According to them, the basic human right of ‘right to life and livelihoods’ are under threat. There are also attempts to see these struggles as part of the tribal movements, or the peasant resistance or as part of the resistance by the urban poor depending on the location of the displacement. There are also attempts to characterise these movements as part of the broader environmental movements (Shah 2004, Andharia and Sengupta 1998) because very often they are displaced from their resource base like forest and lands and/or these struggles attempt to re-define the relationship of the community with its environment (human-nature relationship) mediated through state- sponsored development. 20.7.2 The Issue of Exclusion-Inclusion The issue of exclusion and inclusion is at the root of development induced displacement (DID). Tied to this is the notion of greater common good, which means that the interests of a small number of people (or minority) can be sacrificed to serve the interests of the larger masses. The notions of “greater common good” and “eminent domain” are being increasingly challenged by the movements of the DIDs. Resettlement resistance movements directly challenge governance by calling into question the state’s hegemony over its people and territory (Oliver-Smith 1996 as given in Phadke 1999). 20.7.3 Multi-dimensional and Layered Movements The movements against DIDs are multi-dimensional or the issues they bring forward are multi-pronged. There are different layers of issues that come to the forefront as the movement progresses over time. Though the starting point of these struggles very often are issues related to proper resettlement and rehabilitation (and issues of livelihood), very often the movements drift into much wider arenas. The nature of the project, discourse on development, ethnicity, autonomy, community-state and human-nature relationships are all brought to bear on the movements. One of the prominent exceptions to this general trend is the movement against the Silent Valley Project in Kerala by the Kerala Shastra Sahitya Parishad (KSSP) as it did not start with issues of displacement and rehabilitation. Right from the beginning the movement against Silent Valley Project was primarily centered on environmental concerns. In fact most of these struggles combine the ‘red’ (issues of livelihoods) and ‘green’ (environmental issues) issues. 20.6.4 Typology of Movements and Issues Andharia and Sengupta (1998) have provided a broad typology of movements and the issues they represented. They categorise the entire gamut of environmental movements into five categories and development induced displacement is one of these five categories. Under the category of development projects they have included dams and irrigation projects, power projects, mining, industrial plants/ railway/airports, military bases, wildlife sanctuaries and national parks, and tourism. The following table gives details of the different categories of movements, the issues raised and some of the prominent examples of the movements.

Table 22.1 Typology of movements and issues

Sr. Development Issues Some Examples No. Projects

1 Dams and irrigation Protection of tropical forests Silent Valley Movement by KSSP projects Ecological balance Narmada Bachao Andolan Destructive development Rehabilitation & resettlement of Tehri Bandh Virodhi Samiti the displaced The Koshi Gandhak Bodhghat and Destructive development Bedthi Movement against Bhopalpatnam and Ichampalli in Alternative use of the water the west body The Tungabadra, Malaprabha and Ghatprabha schemes in the south Koyna project affected committee

2 Power projects Ecological balance Jan Andolan in Dabhol against Enron Rehabilitation & resettlement High costs Koel-Karo Jan Sanghatana in Bihar

3 Mining Depletion of natural resources Anti-mine project in Doon Valley Anti-Bauxite mine movement (Balco Project) in Orissa

4 Industrial Land degradation Protests and demands of Kakana plants/Railways Railway Realignment Action projects/Airport Ecological imbalance Committee projects Realignment Citizen’s Group against Dupont Rehabilitation & resettlement of Nylon 6.6 Goa Amaravati Bachao the displaced Abhyan against a large chemical complex

5 Military bases Ecological balance Anti missile test range in Baliapal Rehabilitation and at Netrahat, Bihar Resettlement and safety

6 Wild-life Displacement, rehabilitation & Ekjoot in Bhimashnakar region of sanctuaries, national resettlement Maharashtra parks Loss of livelihood Shramik Mukti Andolan in Sanjay Gandhi National Park, Bombay

7 Tourism Displacement Himachal Bachao Andolan Cultural changes Bailancho Saad, Goa Social ills (Source: Andharia and Sengupta 1998, as quoted in Shah 2004)

The above table brings out the wide variety of movements against displacement and also the issues they cover and helps us to get an overview of issues involved. The table clearly shows that almost all of these movements are multi-dimensional and multi-pronged and issues of resettlement and rehabilitation and loss of livelihoods are common to almost all movements. Of course, the table only gives an indicative list of movements and issues. For example it has not captured some of the movements like movement against nuclear power plants or movement against ports. For example the movement against the Kaiga nuclear plant in Karnataka, which brought to the forefront the issue of nuclear safety, health hazards and damage to the environment, has not been mentioned. Similarly the intense struggle against Nhava-Seva port in Maharashtra (as a representative case of movements against displacement caused by ports) also does not find a place in the typology. Roads and express highways is another infrastructure sector that have become a displacer in the recent times and there are many groups fighting for the rehabilitation of the people displaced by them. Also the struggles against mining has not only concentrated on depletion of natural resources (as mentioned in the above table), but has also brought out the impact on health. There are also good examples of people’s movements that have gone beyond the conventional demands and have organised the oustees on a positive programme. The struggle of the Tawa dam oustees over fishing rights in the reservoir and they forming the Tawa Visthapit Adivasi Matsya Utpadan Evam Vipanan Sahkari Sangh – The Tawa Displaced Adivasis Fisheries Production and Marketing Cooperative Federation – (TMS) to take up fish production and marketing is an example of this. Thus there is a need to build on the typology provided by Andharia and Sengupta. 20.7.5 Contestation over Compensation: Who gets Compensated? The first issue is who gets compensated and compensation for what? Though compensation is given, by and large, for the loss of property, it should be more tied to the loss of livelihoods. This change in perception is an important one brought about by people’s movements. Thus even though the landless persons may not lose any landed property they also have to be compensated for their loss of livelihoods. The same is the case with communities dependent more on forests for their livelihoods. 20.7.6 Recognition of Eco-system Damage Over the years there has been an increasing awareness and sensitivity to the ecosystem damage either due to the submergence of forests because of dams or because of extensive mining activities and the need to compensate in some way. Reforestation or compensatory afforestation components are built into project designs. There are also suggestions that access to irrigation water from dams should be made conditional on the users agreeing to bring one-third of the service area under permanent vegetative cover (Paranjape and Joy 1995). Of course all these cannot fully compensate for the loss of natural forests and one cannot recreate the natural forests through afforestation programmes. 20.7.7 Compensation Package: Land for Land One of the important issues here is the emphasis on land-based rehabilitation. Most of the movements have said no to cash compensation, and instead have asked for land for land. Also, in the case displacement due to irrigation projects the authorities are supposed to provide irrigation facilities to the land. In Maharashtra the practice is to acquire land in the command or service area of the project, which is above the stipulated ceiling level. This acquired land is distributed to the displaced persons. Thus land for land has become a widely acceptable condition for rehabilitation (and most of the rehabilitation policies have included this provision) and this could be said as a major gain of the movements. 20.7.8 Even Landless to Get Land Related to the issue of land for land is the question of how much should be the compensation. The earlier rulings were that the PAPs should be compensated on the basis of property based market value (or at a rate decided by the state on the basis of their assets like land, etc.). However, now the aim is increasingly shifting to assurance of livelihood. Thus there is a ceiling for compensation. For example land above a certain quantum does not get compensation and on the other side even landless families and marginal farmers are also eligible to get land as part of compensation irrespective of their ownership (or size of holding) at the time of displacement. This is one of the most progressive steps as there is an element of land re-distribution inbuilt into the rehabilitation programme. The rehabilitation policy of Maharashtra and the rehabilitation package of SSP contain such a provision. 20.7.9 Who Should Pay and Where Will the Land Come from? Related to the land question is who should give the land and from where the land is to be pooled. The debate is whether the land should be given in the command or in the upstream areas of the project. The general practice is to pool land from the beneficiaries of the project itself. The government comes up with a ceiling on the size of holding in the command or service area of the project on the rationale that the irrigation is going to increase the productivity of the land. The excess land over the ceiling limit is acquired and then distributed to the PAPs. Though the spirit behind such a measure is to be appreciated as it essentially says that the PAPs should also have a share in the benefits by getting land in the command area of the project, experience shows that this is rather difficult to implement because of class and other interests. The larger or richer farmers resort to all sorts of measures to escape the ceiling limit. The other view is to rehabilitate the PAPS in the upstream, influence zone of the project itself as part of an upstream area development programme with assured water from the project itself. This way the PAPs can be rehabilitated in the same socio-economic-cultural and agro-climatic milieu from, which they come from. 20.7.10 From Resettlement and Compensation to Rehabilitation Resettlement should be treated as a first step towards long term rehabilitation of the PAPs and in this process the issue of resettlement as a community is important. This essentially means that the entire (displaced) village should be resettled as one unit and not disperse or fragment them. They should be able to function as a community the way they used to function prior to their displacement. Provision of certain minimum civic amenities as part of the resettlement and rehabilitation (R&R) package is another issue that has been forced by the movements. Over the years the movements have been able to articulate the minimum set of civic amenities that have to be provided at the resettlement sites. For example the Maharashtra rehabilitation (R&R) policy stipulates 13 such civic amenities to be provided which includes fully developed village settlement in terms of roads, drinking water, electricity, Gram Panchayat and other institutional space, etc. Another important issue regarding rehabilitation is related to the economic activities. Along with the land for land, the movements have also brought up the issue of provision of employment to at least one person per family. This is an important demand because very often there is a lead period of at least a couple of years to make the new land productive. The experience is that very often the displaced persons have to work as daily wage labourers either on the farms of farmers in the resettled villages or migrate to nearby small towns. There has been also the demand for opportunities for skill upgradation or learning new skills so that they can engage in other livelihood and income generation activities like processing, etc. But this demand has not got any firm policy support yet. Apparently in some of the externally aided projects there is the practice of taking note of the existing skills of the affected persons, and this information is used for planning the income restoration activities. 20.7.11 Involvement and Consent of the PAPs Here the first level of issue is access to information and data regarding the project including details of costs, benefits, extent of displacement, the rehabilitation package and the time table, potential sites for resettlement, facilities, etc. Even to get access to this basic information organisations have to resort to agitational means. The second level of issue is prior consultation with the potential oustees. Experience shows this never happens for the dam projects, although ‘consultation’ seems to be carried out these days for externally funded infrastructure projects. Finally there is the issue of informed consent of the PAPs. This has never been even thought of and only recently even the movements of the oustees have taken up this demand. After reviewing about eight to ten case studies of dams and displacement across the country, which have been documented by the Forum for Policy Dialogue on Water Conflicts in India, Patankar and Pahdke say, “In all the projects discussed in these studies, the PAPs were not taken into confidence and had no say in the overall decision making or design of the project. The elected representatives of the people are supposed to be party to the decisions about developmental projects, but there is no proper mechanism to involve the PAP in the decision making process” (Patankar and Phadke 2007). In fact the report of the World Commission on Dams has stressed the need for the informed consent of the PAPs as a pre-condition for sanction of projects (World Commission on Dams 2000). The new draft rehabilitation policy of the government of India has also a provision for consent and it says that at least 80% of the potential oustees should give their consent. The informed consent of the PAPs and their involvement is a precondition even for the proper and efficient resettlement and rehabilitation. The involvement of the organisation of the PAPs is also a precondition for the real consent of the PAPs, otherwise it would be only a “paper consent”. 20.7.12 Separate Body for Rehabilitation In Maharashtra the government has set up the Punarvasan Pradhikaran, Maharashtra (Rehabilitation Authority, Maharashtra) for the proper and speedy implementation of rehabilitation. Apart from the government representatives the Authority has representation from the movements of the PAPs. In fact this had been one of the demands of Maharashtra Rajya Dharagrasth Va Shetkari Parishad, an umbrella organisation of all dam oustees’ orgnaisations in Maharashtra. 20.7.13 Sequencing: Rehabilitation before Construction The slogan ‘adhi vikasansheel punarvasan, mag prakalp’ (development-oriented rehabilitation first, only then the project) has become increasingly acceptable even in policy prescriptions. But the issue is how to ground this principle. For example, in South Maharashtra they have been able to set up this process to some extent. In the case of new projects a timetable is worked out for both rehabilitation and construction of the project. Every month there is a review meeting chaired by the Collector and attended by the District Rehabilitation officer, all the heads of the concerned departments for the 13 civic amenities and also the representatives of the oustees organisations. In case the government goes back on its commitment on rehabilitation or the timetable is not adhered to then the PAPs do not allow the construction to proceed especially gorge filling. 20.7.14 Expanding the Rehabilitation Package There have been efforts by different movements to expand the rehabilitation package in many different ways. For example the Tawa oustees movement fought and got the right over the reservoir for fish production and it opened up an interesting livelihood option for the PAPs. In South Maharashtra the oustees movement forced the government to pay pani batha (water allowance) to the dam oustees. Their logic was simple. The government is supposed to provide land with irrigation facilities as part of rehabilitation. However the experience is that even though land is provided it is often of very low quality and without irrigation facilities. Hence the movement demanded that the government should compensate the project affected persons for the difference in productivity between irrigated agriculture and non- irrigated, dry land cultivation. After very intense and prolonged struggles the government agreed to pay Rs. 600 per family per month as some sort of a water allowance for the oustees. Of course, the movement had to organise struggles time and again even to implement this decision. 20.7.15 Contestation over the Nature of the Project Though movements against development projects have contested the desirability of a particular project (for example there have been movements against nuclear power projects in India like Kaiga in Karnataka), the NBA struggles over SSP brought this issue at the centrestage of development discourse. Along with this, notions of “greater common good”, “eminent domain”, community-state and human- nature relationships have also been problematised. Though we may not go into the details here it is important to take note of this as it has given an added (and important) dimension to the movement of the development induced displaced people. It has taken a range of options – from a complete no to the project (as in the case of some of the large dams like SSP, Polavaram, Tehri, etc., or some of the atomic plants like Kaiga or the recent struggles over mining in Orissa, etc.) to articulating different types of alternatives. In the case of dams it has meant local watershed options (example: NBA’s alternative of local water and soil conservation works to be taken up in Kachch and Saurashtra) to a reduced height of dam to dispersal of storages (Uchangi in Kolhapur is an example).

Check Your Progress 2 i) List out some of the related issues that have emerged as part of people’s movements against DID? ii) What are the various issues brought out during a movement against DID? iii) How do movements against involuntary displacement impact upon the movement to save the ecosystem? 20.8 LET US SUM UP The above Unit shows how people’s movements over the years have fought for R&R issues. The Mulshi satyagraha was the trendsetter and movements have followed after it, which has forced the government to take notice if not take stand on the issues faced by the PAPs. 20.9 CUES TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS Check Your Progress 1 i) The Mulshi satyagraha was the trendsetter of movements against displacement after independence, especially during the last 20-25 years. Many more issues got involved and they came to be taken up and fought and slowly the nature of rehabilitation for the development induced displacees (DIDs) began to change. These issues could be broadly grouped into three. First is the issue of compensation itself including both the package and its implementation. Second is the set of issues related to processes and procedures like prior consultation with the potential displacees, their consent and sequencing of project implementation and rehabilitation. The third is the contestation of the notion of greater common good and the nature of the project itself and here the positions range from no to the project to articulating alternatives, which can bring down the extent of displacement with or without compromising on the envisaged benefits of the original project. Though there are no uniform policies yet and these issues have been incorporated in varying degrees in different struggles and states (policies and rehabilitation packages), there is a clear direction that is emerging and this direction is important. ii) After it was formally launched in 1998, NBA declared its opposition to displacement itself (and this is a shift from the earlier focus on rehabilitation) and also called for a total review of the project. Thus towards the end of the 1990s NBA had taken a complete anti-dam stand mainly because a) it was convinced that proper rehabilitation would not be possible, b) large tracts of forest land would be submerged (environmental reasons) and c) economic non-viability of the project. The Independent Review by the World Bank (Morse Report) in 1992 further consolidated NBA’s stand as the report was highly critical of the projected benefits and also the status of the rehabilitation. Finally the World Bank withdrew from the project in March 1993 and many consider this as one of the highest points in the NBA struggle. Some of the other organisations like Arch Vahini who were part of the wider coalition on the issue of proper rehabilitation did not take an anti-dam stand and instead concentrated their efforts on the R&R issues. iii) The NBA has succeeded in bringing some of the wider issues like the role of large dams, nature of development projects, who gains and who loses, community-state and human-nature relationships into development discourse and questioned notions of “eminent domain” and ‘greater common good”. However, while doing so did the immediate interests of the displaced persons in terms of proper rehabilitation get compromised is a question that is not so easy to answer. iv) One of the major gains of the movement was when it forced the government to agree to pay Rs. 600 per family per month for the project affected people as compensatory irrigation allowance or better kwon as pani bhatta. The logic for this demand was simple. As per the Maharashtra rehabilitation policy the PAPs are supposed to get irrigated land in the command area as compensation. The experience is that by and large irrigation facilities never reach the land given to them. The movement, therefore, demanded that the government should compensate for the difference of productivity between dry land agriculture and irrigated agriculture till they received irrigation. The oustees of Marathwadi dam forcibly halted the construction of the dam for 20 days in the crucial pre-monsoon period. Other oustee organisations, with support from the drought affected people, also threatened to halt construction on other dams. Finally the government gave in. It gave a written assurance it would give Rs. 600 per family per month to the oustees till their land gets irrigation facility. The movement had to organise struggles every now and then to force the government implement this decision. Check Your Progress 2 i) Some of the related issues that have emerged as part of the people’s movements against DID are: a) Protection of tropical forests b) Ecological balance Destructive development Rehabilitation & resettlement of the displaced c) Alternative use of the water body d) Ecological balance e) Depletion of natural resources f) Land degradation g) Ecological imbalance h) Realignment ii) The movements against DIDs are multi-dimensional or the issues they bring forward are multi- pronged. There are different layers of issues that come to the forefront as the movement progresses over time. Though the starting point of these struggles very often are issues related to proper resettlement and rehabilitation (and issues of livelihood), very often the movements drift into much wider arenas. The nature of the projects, discourse on development, ethnicity, autonomy, community- state and human-nature relationships are all brought to bear on the movements. iii) Over the years there has been an increasing awareness and sensitivity to the ecosystem damage either due to the submergence of forests because of dams or because of extensive mining activities and the need to compensate in some way. Reforestation or compensatory afforestation components are built into project designs. There are also suggestions that access to irrigation water from dams should be made conditional on the users agreeing to bring one-third of the service area under permanent vegetative cover. These cannot completely compensate for the loss of natural forests and one cannot recreate the natural forests through afforestation programmes alone. 20.10 GLOSSARY DID : Development Induced Displacement PAP : Project Affected Persons SOPPECOM : Society for Promoting Participative Ecosystem Management Multi-dimensional : Having many aspects KSSP : Kerala Shastra Sahitya Parishad Depletion : reduction 20.11 REFERENCES Andharia, Janki and Chandan Sengupta, 1998. ‘The Environmental Movement: Global Issues and the Indian Reality’,.The Indian Journal of Social Work, 59 (1), pp. 429-31 IN Ghanshyam Shah, 2004, Social Movements in India: A Review of Literature, Second and Enlarged Edition, New Delhi, Sage. Baviskar, A., 1995. In the Belly of the River: Tribal Conflicts over Development in the Narmada Valley, Delhi,:Oxford University Press. Decentralised Natural Resource Management list, [email protected] Gadgil, Madhav and Guha Ramachandran, 1995. Ecology and Equity: The Use and Abuse of Nature in Contemporary India, New Delhi :Penguin Books Janu, C. K., 2005.Speech at the Vth World Parks Congress, Durban, first people first Lama, Mahendra P, 2000.“Internal displacement in India: causes, protection and dilemmas”, FMR 8 Paranjape, Suhas and K. J. Joy, 1995. Sustainable Technology: Making the Sardar Sarovar Project Viable - A Comprehensive Proposal to Modify the Project for Greater Equity and Ecological Sustainability, Centre for Environment Education, Ahmedabad. Paranjape, Suhas and K. J. Joy, 2007.“Alternative Restructuring of the Sardar Sarovar Project: Breaking the Deadlock”, in Joy et al (Ed.), Water Conflicts in India: A Million Revolts in the Making, Routledge, New Delhi Patankar, Bharat and Ananat Phadke, 2007.“Dams and Displacement: A Review”, in Joy et al (Ed.), Water Conflicts in India: A Million Revolts in the Making, Routledge, New Delhi. Patwardhan, Amrita, (undated), “Dams and Tribal People in India”, one of 126 contributing papers to the World Commission on Dams, Prepared for Thematic Review I.2: Dams, Indigenous People and vulnerable ethnic minorities, http://www.dams.org/ Phadke Anant R. S., 2000.‘Dam Oustees’ Movement in South Maharashtra’, Economic and Political Weekly, November 18, 2000. Phadke, Roopali, 1999. Dams, Displacement and Community Reconstruction: An Annotated Bibliography and Reference Guide, Berkeley Workshop on Environmental Politics, Institute of International Studies, University of California, Berkeley. RESETTLEMENT News, published twice a year in January and July reports on current operational, research and capacity building work in resettlement from around the world. Robinson, W. Courtland, 2003.“Risks and Rights: The Causes, Consequences, and Challenges of Development-Induced Displacement”, An Occasional Paper, The Brookings Institution-SAIS Project on Internal Displacement, Massachusetts Roy, A., 1999.“The Greater Common Good,” Frontline, Vol 16 (11), June 4. Sangvai, Sanjai, 2007.“People’s Struggle in the Narmada Valley: Quest for Just and Sustainable Development “ IN Joy et al (Ed.), Water Conflicts in India: A Million Revolts in the Making, Routledge, New Delhi Singh, Vikas, 2007. ‘Struggle over Reservoir Rights in Madhya Pradesh: The Tawa Fishing Co-operative and the State’, in Joy et al (Ed.), Water Conflicts in India: A Million Revolts in the Making, Routledge, New Delhi. Vohra, R., 1994. Mulshi Satyagraha, Pune, Pratima Prakashan. World Commission on Dams, 2000. Dams and Development: A New Framework for Decision Making, London & Sterling: Earthscan. This write up on Tawa heavily draws on a case study by Vikas Singh titled, “Struggle over Reservoir Rights in Madhya Pradesh The Tawa Fishing Co-operative and the State”. To get a full understanding of the Tawa experiment the readers could go though this case study. It is part of the book by Joy et al (Ed.), 2007. Water Conflicts in India: A Million Revolts in the Making Routledge, New Delhi.