If the Orissa
government seems to be treading on egg shells while handling protests
against South Korean steel giant Posco, there are valid reasons. This
state government has not run up against opposition to major industrial
projects for the first time.
Orissa possesses some of the largest deposits of iron ore, aluminium,
chrome and nickel in the country. Yet, for the past two decades, this
economically backward state has not been able to cash in on these rich
resources because local inhabitants led by activist groups have opposed
almost every proposed metallurgical mega-project in the state.
A well-organised group has been opposing land acquisition for Posco’s
proposed 12 million tonnes per annum steel project near Jagatsinghpur.
Utkal Alumina International Ltd, a company with big foreign inves-tors
like Alcan, faces stiff opposition from local groups who fear
displacement. On December 16, 2000, policemen deployed at the site had
to open fire on protesters.
Two other big alumina projects face similar hostility. In 2005, Larsen
& Toubro and Dubai Aluminium mooted a joint venture for setting up
a $3.6 billion project in Orissa involving bauxite mining, alumina
refinery and aluminium smelter. However, when a survey team went to the
proposed mine area, it was chased out by the locals.
Earlier, in 2003, Sterlite (now a part of the Vedanta Group) signed an
MoU with the Orissa government for setting up a one-million-tonne
alumina refinery. The state-owned Orissa Mining Corporation was to
supply the bauxite ore for the refinery as a joint venture partner. The
project is yet to be granted a mining lease pending a decision in the
Supreme Court which is hearing a PIL filed by environmentalists who
fear the mining of bauxite in Niyamgiri hills will destroy its
ecosystem.
In January 2006, villagers at Kalinga Nagar in Orissa, whose land had
been acquired by the state government for a steel plant to be put up by
Tata Steel, resisted attempts by the company to start levelling work.
In the ensuing clash with the police, three persons died. That project
is now inordinately delayed.
The Patnaik government is reluctant to resort to force in the case of
the Posco project because it does not want to land up in another police
firing mess.
How does one explain this conflict? According to the agriculture
ministry, in 2000-01, there were 127 million cultivators in the country
for a net sown area of 141 million hectares, which amounts to less than
1.5 hectares per farming family. A combination of small holdings, low
productivity and very poor post-harvest processing infrastructure
leaves the average Indian farmer with low incomes and mounting debt.
In such a situation, one would assume that the farmer would take the
first opportunity to sell out and seek a remunerative non-agricultural
livelihood. But that is not the case. With the high unemployment in the
country, finding an alternative livelihood is not easy. It can only be
found in far-flung urban areas very different from the rural
surroundings that the farmer is familiar with. Besides, land is an
asset in a life of uncertainty.
In the early decades after Independence, the government encountered
little resistance in acquiring large tracts of farm land for
industries, power plants, dams, transport infrastructure and townships.
The farming community then was unaware of its rights. The Rourkela
Steel Plant and NALCO’s aluminium complex could be constructed without
any fuss.
A strong NGO network working with the farming community in the last two
decades and the fragmentation of political power in rural India has led
to reluctance on the part of the agriculturist to part with his land.
In the case of Orissa, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh, most of the minerals
lie in tribal-dominated forest areas which are a hotbed of Naxalite
activity.
What are the possible solutions?
Besides the usual remedies of higher than market rate compensation for
land to be acquired and employment guarantees for the locals, equity
share in the projects for the displaced families could be considered.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Minefield_of_problems/articleshow/2550853.cms
Copyright
© 2007 Times Internet Limited.
