Resettlement and rehabilitation of the dam displaced people is one of the great concerns for the policy makers to provide the sustainable entitlements to this vulnerable group. The vulnerability is generated on the cost of benefits to other. Though many agencies, institutes, organizations, states and countries are still trying to provide such suitable policy frame work in which the security for the entitlements of these vulnerable groups must be maximum. The two hydroelectric projects viz., Narmada and Tehri hydroelectric project’s affected population and the resettlement and rehabilitation policy for these two vulnerable groups provide some scope to implement and add new paradigm for the resettlement and rehabilitation policy for these vulnerable groups.
Flaws in R&R Policy Formulation
The agencies and the institutions which are dealing in the formulation of the policies for these dam displaced people have some flaws. No survey of big dams in India would be complete without reference to the resistance put up by local people to such projects. Gradually in recent decades, such resistance has been more organised, sustained and has succeeded in building powerful alliances. To coin better phase these struggles have had deep influence on the entire discussion of dams, displacement and development.
•Dearth of Advance R&R Planning
•Disproportionate Compensation
•Failure in Handle Monetary Compensation
•Disappointment in Getting Alternate Cultivable Lands
•Disturbing Strained and Delayed Relocation
•Multiple Dislocations
•Troubles at Resettlement Sites
•Manipulating the Right to Compensation
To make an ideal plan, we have enough scope to incorporate new policies for the betterment of the dam displaced people; the new vulnerability generated due to development work can be reduced if we have ideal model planning for these target groups. Policy to reduce the losses and aim of rehabilitation to safeguard their entitlement of land-for-land. Like the state Policy of Gujarat for the R&R resettlers must be clearly defined on the issue of resettlement with training an alternate livelihood opportunities to them. For the resettlement purpose the following frame work is made on the basis of previous work of the researchers for the R&R plan. Benchmark survey should be carried out by a team, on which representatives of the displaced persons and Non Government Organizations (NGOs) should be compulsorily represented to collect the following information about each family-
•Individual resource base of each family.
•Economic status of each individual member of the family.
•Possession of property-impermanent and permanent.
•Denial of property including lands, structures, trees, and houses either occupied or owned with tenancy rights or even as encroachers or those de-facto in ownership.
•Denial of means of income due to stagnation of developmental activities soon after the project, loss of property, loss of access to clientele, loss of jobs due to physical re-location, loss of paid employment, loss of access to income generating resources.
•Denial of public life, public properties and resource base, the public amenities and services, socio-cultural value.
•Thrashing of habitats and lands, degradation of land and water resources, environmental degradation, adverse impact on health etc. as an after effect of the project.
•Complete particulars of land proposed to be acquired along with registration numbers and other details;
•Complete details of land likely to be affected by the project but which is not being acquired;
•Reason for which acquirement is planned with full details including the specific use to which each part of land is probable to be put to;
•Reasons why the size of land planned to be acquired is essential and defensible in relation to the rationale of the project;
•Particulars of all options measured and reasons why the projected attainment is the least displacing choice available
•Complete details together with plot numbers of land-for-land and resettlement sites, capacity building and employment and phasing of the rehabilitation plan in consonance with the national rehabilitation policy;
•Complete details of social impacts on host community in area of resettlement;
•Full time-table with details on phasing of resettlement and rehabilitation; and
•Full details of the expected environmental impacts-both short and long-term especially its impact on public health and on the forests, water, air and mineral resources.
Compensation to the Resettlers
`Compensation’, `reparation’, `resettlement’ and `rehabilitation’ are sometimes used interchangeably, but often different social scientists and policy documents use the terms with variations in emphasis and meaning. This confusion is serious not merely because of lack of academic precision, but because speaking of compensation interchangeably with rehabilitation can be used in effect to diminish the extent of rehabilitation.
One can understand `compensation’ as packages in cash or kind, for persons unswervingly or ultimately badly exaggerated by developmental projects, as compensation for their recognized losses, not only of property but also of livelihoods, common resources, shelter and habitat. The `resettlement’ as the packages and processes provided in new resettlement sites in addition to compensation, for those who are physically dislocated from their original habitations as a result of any developmental project. Finally, `rehabilitation’ may be seen as packages and processes provided in addition to those for compensation and resettlement, in order to ensure that persons affected by projects and their offspring are sustainably better off as a result of the project. The three concepts may be understood in terms of a series of concentric circles, in the sense that rehabilitation is inclusive of packages and processes for compensation and resettlement, but contains more.
Policy for Evaluation and Payment of Compensation
If the guiding principle of rehabilitation is that displaced persons should become better off than they were in the past, one condition that needs to be firmly implanted in the law is that compensation must be paid not at market but at replacement value. There should be transparent and judiciable mechanisms to calculate the replacement value, and the date for calculation should not be the date of original notification, but instead the date on which the compensation was actually disbursed. The second guiding principle for assessment and payment of compensation should be that it is not only the loss of assets but also, far more significantly, the loss of livelihoods that must be compensated. In this way, the loss of hundreds of acres of agricultural land by a family of absentee landlords would entail little obligation for rehabilitation beyond the payment of cash compensation. On the other hand, the loss of livelihood of extremely vulnerable landless workers, tenants and small encroachers, of ferry oarspersons displaced by the building of a bridge across a river, of tribal hunters and gatherers displaced by submergence of forests, of livestock-rearers displaced by submergence of traditional grazing lands, must entail a comprehensive responsibility to replace and rebuild sustainably the lost livelihood base.
The key issues which must be accounted for the dam affected people in the policy are-
•The beneficiaries from the dam and the vulnerable groups must gain equal benefits;
•The development efforts specifically designed for Project Affected Peoples (PAPs) needs to be introduced in way so that the degree of vulnerability reduces to certain low level at the beginning of the project and the PAPs will get enough time to settle in new circumstances;
•The rehabilitation plan at the time of project approval must be as an integral part of the totality of studies of the project so that affected population must come under direct umbrella of the funding agency ;
•The people’s participation at the grass-roots level as well as at the level of policy decision-making is necessary otherwise the real problems and needs of PAPs do not reach to the higher authorities. Thus policies and packages designed are not according to need of these people;
•The rehabilitation expenditure should be considered an integral part of the project but the limit for this expenditure must be defined according to the population size and the basic amenities which are needed for these vulnerable groups; and
•For the proper implementation and monitoring of the progress and expenditure on the R&R it is but essential that an independent agency (to monitor and evaluate the compensation) be given the lash (which is not in control or pressure of any institute, organization and government) for ensuring that desired benefits reach the vulnerable population.
Link:http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=Hishmi+Husain&x=10&y=18
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment