Development and Displacement

Development and Displacement

What is development? – 3 arguments

Dominant development understanding – The dominant development understanding is based on merely economic development. This understanding of development basically emerges from the colonisers who focussed basically on progress, growth, infrastructure basically through industrial development. But this idea of development did not really improve the life structure of the society as a whole rather it benefitted only the rich. This type of development is considered as development from above. Also very rapid industrialisation caused displacement of native and indigenous people and caused lot of ecological disaster.

Hence development should be seen as an social development , such as development in term s of Education, Economy, Health, Housing, Basic amenities, Infrastructure for general security, Ecology and all other related human needs.

Alternative development understanding -  People-centred development, geared to satisfaction of needs, which is endogenous( growth from within and not external forces) , self-reliant, and in harmony with the environment. In this rendition Alternative development incarnates as anti-captialism, green thinking, feminism, eco-feminism, new social  movements, Buddhist economics and post structuralist analysis of development discourse . It is a development from below that is community centred – participatory, self-reliant, endogenous and objectives (geared to basic needs).The main thing is participation; based on local knowledge, and the strategy is decentralisation.

Post development argument - It rejects the very idea of development. According to this argument the term ‘development’ is a western concept which has the binary or opposite understanding as developed and undeveloped. This argument focuses on subsistence communities and truth &  good governance.

The concept of development in India:

The concept of development emerged in India after Independence. Nehru brought this concept inspired by the western development model which was base on industrialisation. According to him “industries are the temples of modern India.” But this type of development made the rich more richer and the poor more poorer. In India top 5 % hold 38% of assets and the bottom 60% holds only 13%. The benefits of all these development projects were only enjoyed by the Landlords, Project Officers, Engineers, Contractors, Beaurocrats, Politicians and outsiders.

While Nehru proposed for industrialisation and urbanisation Gandhi proposed for development in sustaining Indian villages.

Arundhati Roy on Development: Beyond the Nehru/Gandhi debate, Roy’s essay speaks to one of the core issues of development.  Development always involves choices.  Something will be lost and something gained when development occurs  Roy, who insists she is no “anti-development junkie” and aware of “the isolation, the inequity and the potential savagery of” village life, would likely argue that when we engage in development we should at least go in with our eyes open, aware of who will win and who will lose and what costs will be paid (and by whom) and for what benefits (and for whom).  In the particular case of the Narmada, Roy argues the villagers lose everything while the beneficiaries are far away in the cities and in the government.  “India doesn't live in her villages. India dies in her villages.”

Development and poverty in India:

If we say the very meaning of development is for betterment of living , the realities of India will give a different picture.

The latest UNICEF data shows that one in three malnourished children worldwide are found In India, whilst 42 percent of the nation's children under five years of age are underweight. It also shows that a total of 58 percent of children under five surveyed were stunted. Rohini Mukherjee, of the Naadi foundation-one of the NGO's that published the report-stated India is "doing worse than sub-Saharan Africa,".

A study by the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative using a Multi-dimensional Poverty Index (MPI) found that there were 650 million people (53.7% of population) living in poverty in India, of which 340 million people (28.6% of the population) were living in severe poverty, and that a further 198 million people (16.4% of the population) were vulnerable to poverty. 421 million of the poor are concentrated in eight North Indian and East Indian states of Bihar, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal. This number is higher than the 410 million poor living in the 26 poorest African nations. The states are listed below in increasing order of poverty based on the Multi-dimensional Poverty Index.

In India, there are a rising number of protests against compulsory acquisition of land for construction of manufacturing units such as Tata’s Nano car in 13 Singur, in which 997 acres of agricultural land was acquired to set up a factory for one of the cheapest  cars in Asia, (the project was subsequently shifted to  Gujarat) or for developing Special Economic Zone  such as Nandigram or construction of large dams like Sardar Sarovar Dam on the river Narmada, which famously led to a cancellation of grant by World Bank due to protests under the argument that the tribal population was getting displaced under unfair conditions among other reasons such as environmental impact of the project.

6 The effects of displacement spill over to generations in many ways, such as loss of traditional means of employment, change of environment, disrupted community life and relationships, marginalization, a profound psychological trauma and more.

Why do people oppose development projects such as industries, dams and special economic zone (SEZ)?

One must have to go back to the history of displacement to understand that why these people are against of development projects today. One would be shocked to see the data which suggests that after the independence, approximately 3 crore people were displaced for setting up the Power Plants, Irrigation Projects, Mining Companies, Steel Industries and many more development projects in the country. Among them, 40 percent displaced people are tribals and 20 percent are Dalits, which means the 60 percent displaced people are from the marginalized communities, who sacrificed everything for the sake of the "development" but they are still untouched of the development.

The displacement is not just shifting people from one place to another but it is destruction of their livelihood resources, culture and identity which they develop by nourishing for the ages. The resources are sold at market rate and production power of the poor has been changed into service providers. Those who were engaged in producing grains now work as domestic workers, care takers of bigwigs and daily wage labourers therefore it is indeed need of the hour to rethink on the present development model because the "state" is duty bound to create atmosphere where people can enjoy their rights and privilege guaranteed by the constitution of India.

Development-induced displacement is the forcing of communities and individuals out of their homes, often also their homelands, for the purposes of economic development. It is a subset of forced migration. It has been historically associated with the construction of dams for hydroelectric power and irrigation purposes but also appears due to many other activities, such as mining and the creation of military installations, airports, industrial plants, weapon testing grounds, railways, road developments, urbanization, conservation projects, forestry, etc. Development-induced displacement is a social problem affecting multiple levels of human organization, from tribal and village communities to well-developed urban areas.

The Trauma of displacement

The post-independence development-induced displacement has mostly caused downward “spiral of impoverishments”. The long drawn out, dehumanising, disempowering and painful process of displacement has led to widespread traumatic psychological and socio-cultural consequences. It causes dismantling of production systems, desecration of ancestral sacred zones or graves and temples, scattering of kinship groups and family systems, disorganisation of informal social networks that provide.

The entire process of displacement is disempowering because it breaks up socio-political organisations  opposing the project or the development process itself. In the case of tribals, the experience of displacement becomes much more monstrous. They encounter tremendous odds in dealing with the market economy. Their unfamiliarity with modern technology and skills coupled with official indifference to their entry into the mainstream economy, pushes a majority of tribals into conditions of servility and bondage. It is tragic irony that the government - sanctioning authority of development projects - is well aware about these traumas faced by tribals. The Union ministry of home affairs has acknowledged in a report that, “in the tribal areas, where the displaced persons are given only cash compensation, the tendencies to spend the compensation amount by buying consumer goods and becoming destitute are common... In most of the projects, the tribal oustees become listless wanderers without a mooring."

BIBLE :

NABOTH’ VINEYARD

FEEDING OF 5 THOUSAND