CHAPTER 2 DISPLACEMENT: THEORETICAL AND EMPIRICAL ANTECEDENTS

Transcription

1 CHAPTER 2 DISPLACEMENT: THEORETICAL AND EMPIRICAL ANTECEDENTS The various socio-economic dimensions of displacement are projected mainly by sociologists. But the fundamental issues in development have been addressed by economic theories and the underpinnings relating to displacement are rooted in development and welfare economics. Hence it is necessary to overview the theoretical and empirical studies of displacement and resettlement in a compact form. This chapter consists of three parts. The first part deals with major theories like Rawlsian Equity, Unbalanced Growth Strategy, and IRR Model etc. The second part deals with the theoretical and empirical studies of the IRR Model. The relevance of the IRR Model in the context of the present study is discussed in the final part. Before getting into these details, it is necessary to delineate the major theories of displacement Major Theories Displacement is a situation in which a person has been forced to leave his/her proper or usual place/country because of war, revolution, natural calamity or due to developmental projects. Anthropologists identify push and pull factors influencing voluntary out-migration. Push factors force people out of their traditional localities. Pull 35

2 factors are factors attracting people to move to new ones. The difference between voluntary and involuntary population movements is that the latter are caused by push factors only. Levels of anxiety and insecurity are therefore, much higher among involuntary resettlers (Guggenhein & Cernea 1993). Another difference between voluntary and involuntary displacement lies in the composition of the displaced population. Voluntary displacement is usually by young families in the early stages of their household life cycle. Here migration is gradual. They maintain socio-economic ties with their villages. If adversity occurs in their new environment they get support from their families. On the contrary, involuntary displacements are forced and indiscriminate. Entire populations are forced to move out. This disrupts the entire social risk-avoidance set-up which acts as a social insurance mechanism in the village life. A review of literature on development and displacement brings out the necessity of examining the impact of displacement and assessing the measures of reestablishment. The first theoretical explanation was given by anthropologists. They were the first to express in detail the impoverishing effects of projects that necessitate resettlement (Brokers and Scudder 1968, Chambers 1970, Colson1971, Rawls 1971, Scudder 1985). Many studies by other social scientists and development analysts appeared later (Dreze et al 1997, Fisher 1995). A substantial idea concerning such impoverishment has also been built up (Cernea, 1990).The impoverishment risks and reconstruction (IRR) model substantively adds to the tools of explaining, diagnosing, predicting, and planning for 36

3 development and thus helps create the knowledge compass needed for complex resettlement situations. In presenting the impoverishment risks and livelihood reconstruction framework, we first emphasize the need for theoretical modeling in resettlement research and briefly review prior models Chamber s Three Stage Model Chamber (1970) identified a three-stage general model in the evolution of land settlement schemes in Africa, namely recruitment, transition and development. Nelson (1973) based on his studies of development-induced displacement issues in tropical lands confirmed this pattern in a synthesis of many experiences with new land settlements in Latin America. The models developed by both Chamber and Nelson generalized the experience of voluntary settlers and conceptualized the institutional/organizational dimensions of managed land settlement programmes John Rawls s General Conception of Justice The ethics of development-induced displacement explained by John Rawls has been called his general conception of justice. It requires that all social values liberty and opportunity, income and wealth, and the bases of self-respect are to be distributed equally unless an unequal distribution of any, or all, of these values is to everyone s advantage (Rawls 1971). With respect to development-induced displacement, Rawls's general conception enables us to recognize some of the problems encountered by the oustees as injustices. An unsuccessful resettlement scheme can not only fail to benefit 37

4 displaced persons and their families, but studies show that it can impoverish them. In Rawlsian terms, it can create new inequalities by depriving people not only of income and wealth but also of social goods in two other categories: liberty and opportunity, and social bases of respect. If Rawls thinking is followed, justice forbids any inequalities unless they work to everyone s advantage. Then these effects of displacement can be seen not only as impoverishing but as unjust. The first contribution of the Rawlsian general conception of justice, then, is to synthesize these various impoverishing effects of bad resettlement plans. The second contribution is to support and somewhat strengthen standards for best practice in treatment of people displaced by development projects. The existing ideas of compensation and mitigation come nowhere close to satisfying this conception of justice. Rawls justice requires that the condition of displaced people should be improved in terms of income and wealth (conceived broadly to include access to land, to productive resources, and to other subsistence resources such as forests, liberty and opportunity (entailing consultation and self-determination for affected communities and individuals) and social bases for respect (including community social organization sufficient for cultural survival). This would suggest an alternative set of principles for justice in resettlement: The community and its members are not to be made worse off in assets or resources (broadly conceived); on the contrary, the outcome is to be advantageous to them. Displacement and resettlement are to be freely negotiated by the community, in a process in which all members are fairly represented. 38

5 Relocation should not damage community members social and cultural means of self-respect. A community has the right to refuse displacement provided this does not perpetuate or impose deeper disadvantages upon other communities or other segments of the society. The sort of insight central to Rawls s projects corresponds to a more general insight, that utilitarian thinking is inherently tolerant of social injustice; and this is the starting-point of Rawls s theorizing about social and political justice. One of the most salient results of his analysis, significant to involuntary displacement, is a particular conception of injustice. A scheme or system which creates advantages for some groups of a community is unjust for others unless it creates benefits for all. Injustice, he wrote in 1971, is simply inequalities that are not to the benefit of all (John Rawls, 1971). Rawls emphasised egalitarianism and distributive justice. He favours the right to own private property as one of the basic liberties of the people. These concepts have their relevance to the concepts of involuntary resettlement particularly when we argue for distributive justice, land for land and evaluation of pre- and post- project conditions under involuntary resettlement "Unbalanced Growth Strategy" Most of the problems connected with displacement, resettlement and rehabilitation can be traced to the "Unbalanced Growth Strategy," currently being followed widely for achieving rapid economic development. Unfortunately this strategy 39

6 does not sufficiently take into account the enormous suffering of the poor. Development, which has entailed many large-scale forced evictions of vulnerable populations, without the countervailing presence of policies to assist them to rebuild their lives, has only accentuated the negative aspects of displacement, such as lack of information, failure to prepare in advance a comprehensive plan for rehabilitation, the undervaluation of compensation and its payment in cash, failure to restore lost assets or livelihoods, traumatic and delayed relocation, problems at relocation sites, multiple displacement, and neglect of the special vulnerabilities of the most disadvantaged groups Scudder-Colson Theory Building upon the earlier concepts, Scudder and Colson formulated in 1982 a theoretical model of settlement processes distinguishing four, rather than three, stages: recruitment, transition, development, and incorporation/handing over. The Scudder- Colson diachronic framework was built around the key concept of "stage"; it focused on settlers' stress and their specific behavioral reactions in each stage. Initially, the model was formulated to apply to voluntary settlement processes. Subsequently, Scudder extended it to some involuntary resettlement processes as well, but only to those involuntary relocations that are successful and move through all four stages. The model is not intended to apply to resettlement operations that fail and do not complete the last two stages. 40

7 The authors argue that relocation, whether voluntary or compulsory, is a stressful experience. People undergoing relocation react in predictable and broadly similar ways partly because the stress of relocation limits the range of coping responses of those involved (Scudder 1985). The most stressful period is the early phases the period leading up to the relocation, the transfer itself and the first few years of adjustment. After this, during the final stage the people behave in a more innovative, risk-avoiding way. Their attitudes become increasingly flexible, individualistic and open-ended compared to communities which have not undergone the process of resettlement. This phenomenon is the result of the breakdown of the existing sociocultural organizational system of the community which makes way for new patterns and individual initiatives in the re-established communities. A community is considered to be successfully resettled when it no longer depends on outside management and is integrated into the wide regional setting. Then it attains economic and administrative self-sufficiency and ability. Historically, the majority of involuntary resettlement operations have been unsuccessful. The cumulative impacts of failed resettlements were not modeled in the Scudder- Colson framework of stages. The criticism by scholars like Dewet (1993) is that the Scudder-Colson relocation theory is formulated to explain similarities, rather than differences in people s reaction to involuntary relocation. According to Thangaraj (1996), Scudder s model, built on Robert Chamber s three-stage framework, is restricted to the success or failure of resettlement; in other words, to the limits of the project itself. Hence it is a project-centered model. 41

8 Nevertheless, as a comprehensive socio-economic model, the Scudder-Colson model incorporates the stress dimension and goes farther and deeper, conceptualizing more fully the essence of displacement and recovery. However, according to Cernea, the manifold behaviour patterns of the displaced populations have to be understood and explained with respect to economic, social, and cultural impoverishments. None of the above models has placed the onset of impoverishment at its centre, its unfolding, and the process of escaping impoverishment. In this backdrop, it is more appropriate to examine in detail Cernea s IRR model in the context of involuntary resettlement. The emphasis on these requirements assumes importance because in almost all cases the displaced persons face the risk of impoverishment. Thus it is evident that impoverishment is a key issue in development-induced displacement and resettlement. As an analytical tool for assessing the risk and measures of reestablishment the Impoverishment Risks and Reestablishment Model (IRR Model) has been adapted. The model is discussed below Impoverishment Risks and Reestablishment Model The shift from stress centered model to the impoverishment reestablishment model is the result of methodological evolution in the study of the displacement/ resettlement issue. Now there is a growing concern over the fate of the people who are forced to relocate for the sake of projects for development. Studies across the world over the years have revealed that involuntary relocation has marginalised and 42

9 impoverished more people than they have enriched. This is because they have been evicted from their homes or habitat, disrupting their lives and livelihood. They are forced to face the qualms of resettling in unfamiliar and uncongenial locations. The IRR model has been formulated and developed by Michael M. Cernea, Senior Advisor for Sociology and Social Policy of the Department of Environment of the World Bank. During the 1990s, a series of studies [Cernea 1990, 1995b, 1996a, ; World Bank 1994] and research conducted across countries found that the worst consequences of displacement impoverishment and violation of basic human rights- are prevalent. Cernea writes that like becoming a refugee, being forcibly ousted from one s own land and habitat by a dam, reservoir or highway is not only immediately disruptive and painful; it is also fraught with serious long-term risks of becoming poorer than before displacement, more vulnerable economically and disintegrated socially. Cernea s IRR model proposes that a pattern of eight interlinked potential risks are intrinsic to displacement. If proper counteractive action is not taken in time, these potential risks may manifest as actual impoverishment disasters. These risks are: landlessness, joblessness, homelessness, marginalisation, food insecurity, increased morbidity and mortality, loss of access to common property and social disarticulation IRR Model: Theoretical and Empirical Evidence As a theoretical framework, the Impoverishment Risk Model addresses not only the economic but also the social and cultural dimensions of impoverishment. Cernea s model shows that during displacement, people are deprived of natural capital, man- 43

10 made capital, human capital and social capital. This model also shows that during reestablishment they must be able to regain this capital. So this is also a model for the socio economic reconstruction of the displaced persons. This model also provides an insight into the possible outcome, should its warning be ignored. Thus the IRR model provides a matrix directly usable for planning. More specifically it is a technique of preventive planning. It is a working tool for preparing resettlement plans and monitoring their impact. The message from Cernea s research is a hopeful one: impoverishment from displacement is not inevitable, it is preventable. Cernea (1995b) emphasized that his conceptual construct is not limited to cognitive purpose alone. It has operational implications also. In addition it is a research tool. It helps the students of development and resettlement to organize their enquiry, build and test hypothesis and formulate conclusions based on their findings. Social researchers have already made use of the IRR technique. In 1997 Mathur looked at major development sectors such as irrigation, power, drinking water and industrial and mining sectors in Rajasthan. The evidence confirms the existence of impoverishment risks and the processes that contribute to the making of all the eight risk components. The three core fundamental concepts used in the formulation of theoretical model are risk, poverty (impoverishment) and reconstruction (reestablishment). In this model poverty connotes situations in which people s welfare and livelihood worsen as a result of specific intervention. Development programmes are not supposed 44

11 to cause poverty or impoverishment. Unfortunately this happens. So preventing impoverishment must be the central issue in development-induced population displacement and relocations. The model is extracted from multiple processes which have already taken place. It supplies knowledge that infuses the warning with credibility. From this model planners can learn in advance what the specific risks in displacements are, and along which lines impoverishment will surely occur if the risks are not counteracted. For instance, in a socio-economic survey in India, researchers found that about 75per cent of the 20 million people displaced by development programmes for roughly four decades have not been rehabilitated (Fernandez, 1991; Fernandez et al, 1989). Similar findings about impoverishment through resettlement come from many other countries. This risk model alerts the planners of R & R to the kind of targeted actions that are needed. The risks can be minimised if they are seen as risks in the first place. If overlooked, they are certain to become real. Cernea s socio-economic model precisely tells us what must be the heart and soul of any resettlement operation preventing impoverishment and reconstructing livelihoods. The potential risks listed by Cernea are detailed as below Landlessness Expropriation of land removes the main foundation upon which people s productive systems, commercial activities and livelihoods are constructed. This is the principle form of decapitalisation and pauperisation of the displaced people as they lose 45

12 both physical and manmade capital (Cernea, 1995). Loss of land results in people losing their agricultural and homestead land, which provides food and shelter to a large number of people in India. Land expropriation takes away the foundation on which people s basic livelihood systems are constructed. If these livelihood systems are not replaced elsewhere or replaced with steady income-generating employment, landlessness sets in, leading to impoverishment. Balaji Pandey s (1998) study provides an example of landlessness as a result of displacement. He studied four villages - Jambubahali, Hensmul, Brahmanbahal and Laccamanpur in Orissa-where the Thalchar Mining project resulted in large scale displacement. It is found that in each of these villages the number of landless people increased after the displacement. In Brahmanbahal and Jambubahal the number of landless increased from per cent to per cent and from per cent to per cent respectively (Pandey, 1998). In another irrigation project, the Upper Krishna Project (UKP) in Orissa, though land for land option was the main principle followed in the rehabilitation policy, landlessness occurred due to displacement. In the Sand Barrage project, the number of landless has increased from 24 per cent to 38 per cent. In the case of HAL, in the absence of any rehabilitation policy, no step has been taken to prevent landlessness. In the ITPS, NALCO, Ib Valley and Talchar Coal Mine projects in Orissa, which resorted to job-based resettlement, landlessness is quite acute. Studies conducted by Joseph Ota, (1996) on the Maharastra Composite Irrigation Project and the Rengali dam report that the percentage of landless families almost 46

13 doubled after relocation from 4.6 per cent to 10.9 per cent. A study by Reddy(1997) documents that in the coal mining displacements around Singrauli, the proportion of landless people skyrocketed from 20 per cent before displacement to 72 per cent after. In all these cases the project authorities have failed to address the problem of impoverishment. Landlessness has reduced the income level of all the displaced people in all these projects. In other words the jobs could never compensate for the land they had lost because land is a multi- purpose asset which can be of continuous use for the future. A study by Garg on the Upper Indravati Project in Orissa shows a different side. A multipurpose project submerging 65 villages completely and 32 partially has resettled roughly about displaced people with the usual rehabilitation benefits. In addition they were given future assistance under a more liberal policy. He concludes that if more attention is paid to the problems which the displaced people are likely to face, right at the pre evacuation phase, impoverishment need not follow displacement automatically. A sociological study conducted in Kenya s Kiambere Hydro-power Project found that the average land holdings of the farmers dropped from 13 to 6 hectares, livestock were reduced by more than one third, production of maize decreased by 68 per cent and beans by 75 per cent per hectare. The family income dropped by 82 per cent (Mburugu1993; Cook 1993: M Burugh, 1988). Other examples are that of the Lassaillyjacob s (1996) study on the Kosson dam and other major reservoirs in Africa. Landlessness is reported from Indonesia with respect to the Saguling reservoir project, 47

14 where land ownership decreased by 47 per cent and income was reduced by half (Padjadjaem University 1989). Similar situations are reported from Brazil (Mougeot, 1989). Loss of land has far more severe consequences for farm families than the loss of homestead Joblessness: Loss of wage employment and shift in the occupational pattern is yet another form of economic dispossession faced by the displaced people. It occurs both in rural and the urban displacement. Landless labourers, people working in enterprises or services, workers, artisans and small businessmen lose their means of livelihood if they are displaced from their habitat. But the creation of new jobs or alternate sources of income for them is difficult and requires substantial investments. The delay in investment results in a long period of unemployment or underemployment among the oustees after their physical displacement (Cernea, 1995). The problem is more acute in the case of tribals, especially women. Out of the seven projects surveyed by Balaji Pandey (1988), HAL has no rehabilitation policy; all the oustees lost their old sources of income and did not get any alternate means of livelihood. They were not provided with any job in the project or with land for cultivation. In the Upper Krishna Project (UKP), land oustees were rehabilitated and they benefited. But the artisans, share croppers, landless labourers, those employed in services and small businessmen, who lost their occupation and livelihood, were not recognised as eligible oustees for rehabilitation. In Talchar, Ib 48

15 valley and in NALCO and ITPS one job per displaced family was provided. This meant employment for only one member and the others remained jobless. In the Utpal Aluminium India Ltd in the village of Kucheipadar in Orissa made both the landowners and the landless became jobless due to the inappropriate rehabilitation policy (Yugandhar, 1998). The Manglore Harbour Project commissioned in 1964 in Penambur of Mangalore Taluk made jobless not only the tenant cultivators and fish workers, but also the artisans and service providers like barbers, washerwomen or men, shopkeepers, small workers and small business persons(gagrajan,1970). A study of the displacement process in the Narmada Project showed that the oustees were given only lowly and temporary posts. There was no provision for permanent employment (Singh, Mridula). Occupational shift is another impact of displacement. This can create underemployment that can be psychologically quite traumatic for the affected people. A survey of the Upper Indravati Hydro electricity Project displacement process found that the number of people engaged in wage labour increased after relocation. Before displacement 4719 persons from 2744 families subsisted on wage labour. The number increased to 5248 persons from 2814 families after displacement. The number of families engaged in traditional skilled work came down from 67 to 60 after displacement (Mathur and Marsdsen, 1998). 49

16 Cernea s studies on the Madagascar Tana Plain Project shows that the people displaced in 1993 lost their jobs in small private enterprises like workshops, food stalls, artisan s units etc. They were not entitled to any compensation under the local law. Some resettlers were given vocational training. This can provide skills, but not necessarily jobs. Similar findings are available from developed countries. In the Churchill Nelson Hydro Project in Manitoba in Canada, the indigenous economic activities like fisheries, waterfowl capture, fur processing etc. were curtailed. Joblessness may occur after some delay because in the short run an employment boom is created by the new construction, which severely drops towards the end of the project. This compounds the incidence of chronic or temporary joblessness among the displaced. Evidence for this is available from dam projects in Brazil, India, Togo, China etc. (Cernea, 2000) Homelessness Loss of house and shelter may be only temporary for most of the displaced during the transition period. But for some, homelessness remains a chronic problem. In a broader cultural sense, homelessness is also placelessness, loss of the group s cultural space and identity, or cultural impoverishment as argued by Downing (1994) and by the students of place attachment (Low and Altman, 1992). In India in the early 1970s R & R policy provided only homestead plots. This created a state of homelessness for the displaced as in the case of Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd (BHEL) in Andhra Pradesh and the Bokaro Steel Plant in Jharkhand etc (Asif, 1997). In certain other cases the project authorities had not made provision for enough homestead plots for all the oustees and 50

17 the houses were of low quality. Evidences of such cases are reported from the resettlement sites of Sardar Sarovar dam (Singh). In all the seven projects studied by Balaji Pandey, the compensation paid for the houses was not at all at their replacement value. NALCO and ITPS provided the displaced families with houses in the resettlement colony. In NALCO one-room houses were allotted while in ITPS two- roomhouses with more space were given. In the Ib Valley and in UKP coal mining projects sizable homestead plots have been provided to each family. They were able to build their own houses. In the Kukadi-Krishna irrigation sub-projects in Maharastra almost 604 of the displaced families (59 per cent) were living in temporary / semi permanent houses even after ten to fifteen years of relocation. Karnataka s sad experience with Almatty and Narayanpur dams has demonstrated that the emergency housing centers or relocation camps tend to make homelessness chronic. At the Foum-Gleita irrigation project in Mauritania, only 200 out of the 881 displaced families reconstructed their houses. The others lived precariously for two years or more in tents or under tarpaulins. A 1990 World Bank report on the Cameroon- Douala Urban resettlement project found that over 2000 displaced families were not able to set up permanent houses. At China s Danjiangkau reservoir about 20 per cent of the relocatees became homeless and destitute. China s tragic experience with Danjiangkau and Sanmenxia Dam displacements in the 1960s led to the adoption of new and better resettlement policies that transformed resettlement into an opportunity 51

18 for development. Impoverishment through homelessness can be definitely be avoided by proper planning, by combining replacement cost compensation with housing grants, timely preparation and by mobilising the participation and the energy of the resettlers Marginalisation Marginalisation occurs when families lose economic power and slide down on a downward mobility path: middle-income farm households do not become landless, but become small landholders. Craftsmen downsize and fall below poverty thresholds. Economic marginalization is often accompanied by social and psychological marginalization, expressed in a drop in social status, loss of confidence in society and in themselves (Cernea, 1995). Marginalisation exists since many individuals cannot use their previously acquired skills at the new location. Relative economic deprivation and marginalization begins prior to actual displacement, as new investments in infrastructure and services are discontinued in these areas long before the projects start. When high productivity farmers are relocated from very fertile valley soil to uphill inferior soil, they become marginalized. For instance a study on Nepal Kulekhani Hydroelectric Project found that the majority of the displaced people were worse off socially and economically due to the lower productivity of the new lands and less diversified production (Bjonnes1983, Pockharel1995). The loss of off-farm income sources also results in marginalisation. Such a situation is found in Srilanka s Kotmale Project, co-financed by Sweden (Soeftestad 1999) and at many other sites. 52

19 The story of the Rihand dam oustees, particularly the tribals, is a case of the process of marginalisation. The oustees lost their land and the common property. They fell into the cycle of increasing debt bondage, destitution etc. Over time they were thrown out of their employment as contract labourers in coal mines (Jain 1995 and Mathur and Marsdsen 1998). The stories of the women of Laaguabeda, Sagadipal and Bolangi of the Rengali Barrage Project at Samd (Orissa) are classic examples of women s impoverishment (Mathur and Marsdsen 1998). In the process of displacement, children are also a very vulnerable group. Dislocation and relocation often interrupts schooling and some children never return to school. In the studies by Pandey, marginalisation is observed through the changes in the land holding patterns of the displaced persons. For instance in the Talchar Coal Mining Project, before displacement 11.1per cent of the oustees were landless, 61.1per cent marginal farmers, 17.8per cent small farmers, 7.8 per cent middle farmers and 2.2 per cent large farmers. After displacement the status-wise composition of the oustees changed drastically. The number of landless people changed to 22.2 per cent, marginal farmers to 45.5 per cent, small farmers to 15.5 per cent, middle farmers to 11.1 per cent and large farmers to one per cent. Thus the proportion of the landless category doubled. Serious marginalisation has been seen in other projects like ITPS, UKP, and NALCO and HAL. In the HAL area the number of landless has gone up from 15.6% to 58.8%. There is a corresponding decrease in the number of marginal, small, middle and big farmers. Moreover, the oustees were victims of multiple displacements first by HAL 53

20 and then by UKP (Pandey, 1998). Marginalisation can be counteracted through measures taken for avoiding landlessness Food Insecurity Forced uprooting increases the risk that people will fall into temporary or chronic undernourishment and food insecurity, defined as caloric protein intake levels below the minimum necessary for normal growth and work. Sudden drops in food crops and incomes are predictable during physical relocation and hunger or undernourishment tends to linger as long-term effects (Cernea, 1995). In our agrarian society, crops are grown that provide food to the family for the entire year. But land acquisition destroys this self-sufficiency. They have to spend money to purchase food grains and vegetables after displacement. Green (2000) provides an extensive overview of the food-related risks for both refugees and resettlers, in spite of significant differences between them. In HAL no rehabilitation policy was undertaken. Joblessness resulted in food insecurity. In UKP, the poor quality of the land given to the displaced persons aggravated the problem of food insecurity. In NALCO, ITPS, Thalchar and Ib valley coal mining projects, the displaced bought food from the market with the salary of the only person in the family. Besides, many families diverted their income to electronic items like TV, VCR and motor cycles. Alcoholism also accounts for the high expenditure among the evictees (Pandey, 1998). Hakim (2000) documents these risks and consequences in her insightful analysis of the resettlement of Gujarat s Vasava tribe, which was compelled to shift from food crops to cash crops. At Sri Lanka s Victoria Dam Project, about 55 per cent of the resettled faced food insecurity (Rew and Driver, 1986). In the Bailiambe 54

21 reservoir in China, since the area of cultivated land per head decreased after acquisition, local food production became insufficient and 75,000 tonnes of annual food relief had to be provided for several years. (Cernea, 1995). Food security can be attained only by overcoming the primary causes of impoverishment landlessness and joblessness. Nutrition-related risks reinforce morbidity and mortality risks and largely depend on whether the primary risks of landlessness and joblessness are effectively counteracted Increased Morbidity and Mortality Serious decline in health levels results from displacement-induced social stress, insecurity, the outbreak of relocation-related diseases and psychological trauma caused by displacement. Health status is a sensitive indicator of development. The weaker segments of the demographic spectrum infants, children and the elderly are the most vulnerable to diseases (Cernea, 1995). Without preventive health measures relocationrelated diseases, such as diarrhoea and dysentery, and particularly parasitic and vectorborne diseases such as malaria and schistosomiasis, occur due to poor hygiene, unsafe water supply and inadequate sewage system. Empirical research shows that displaced people experience higher levels of exposure and vulnerability to illness and severe disease than before to displacement. The study of Nagarjunasagar Dam has shown that creation of large water bodies due the construction of the dam resulted in the spread of water-borne diseases like knock-knee in the area (Thukral, 1989). Pandey s study showed that ITPS, IB valley and Thalchar coal mining projects (cases of pollution- caused by dust), NALCO and HAL have either 55

22 water-borne diseases or pollution-caused problems. But there have been no report of such diseases from UKP. In all the projects the health care and the medical facilities that have been provided by the authorities are not at all adequate to meet the needs of the displaced persons. At Akosombo in Ghana, the prevalence of schistosomiasis around the reservoir rose from 1.8 per cent to 75 per cent among adult lakeside dwellers and close to 100 per cent among their children, within a few years after impoundment in the 1960s. Similar problems have been reported from Foum-Gleita irrigation project, Mauritania, the Nampong Dam in Thailand, Victoria Dam reservoir in Srilanka (Rew and Driver, 1986). Lack of proper information and precautionary measures resulted in 106 deaths by drowning at Saguling Lake (Indonesia) during the first 14 months of operation; at the Cirata Reservoir (Indonesia). Ten persons drowned in the first ten months after impounding. (Padjadjaran University, 1989). At Nam Pong reservoir in Thailand, monitoring confirmed that local rates of morbidity were higher than provincial levels, due to deteriorated living conditions and poor waste-disposal practices. Exposure to the social stress inherent in forced relocation was highlighted as having differential consequences on mental health across age, gender, and marital and occupational status (Scudder and Colson 1982; Turner and Associates, 1995) Loss of Access to Common Property and Services For the displaced people particularly for the landless and the assetless poor, loss of access to common property assets (forests, pastures, water bodies etc.) that earlier belonged to the relocated communities results in significant deterioration in income and livelihood levels. (Cernea, 1995). Usually, governments do not compensate losses of 56

23 common property assets. Studies across projects show that a significant share of the income of poor households comes from edible forest products, firewood, common grazing areas, and public quarries in all regions. Empirical study by Kibreab (1996) offers a conceptual analysis of the linkages between CPRs, poverty, and impoverishment risks. Loss of CPRs leaves a big gap in the earning capacity of the vulnerable sections and has a ravaging long-term consequence on their livelihoods and social standing. In India, in seven projects in Orissa between 1950 and 1954, no compensation was paid for common properties (Pandey and Associates 1998).In the Rengali Dm area in India, all families had access to common grazing lands and burial grounds before displacement. After relocation only 23.7 per cent and 17.5 per cent respectively has access to these facilities. In its absence the displaced people tend to encroach on the reserved forests or to increase the pressure on the CPRs of the host population. This leads to social tensions and increased environmental deterioration. In UKP, the host populations do not allow the oustees to use their grazing land. In NALCO the host population denies the oustees to use the natural spring that flows close to their village. Research conducted by Sequeira (1994) in the semi-arid regions of Indi revealed that between 91 and 100 per cent of firewood, between66 and 89 per cent of domestic fuel, and between 69 and 80 per cent grazing needs of poor households are supplied by 57

24 CPRs. Resettlement planning should be done with a sense of social justice, both in terms of natural resources and in terms of public services Social Disarticulation Forced displacement tears apart the existing social fabric and disperses and fragments communities, dismantles production systems, often scatters kinship groups and family systems, disrupts local labour markets and puts at risk people s sense of cultural identity. Life-sustaining informal social networks of mutual help among local people, voluntary associations, self-organised service arrangements etc are dispersed and rendered inactive. This is a net loss of valuable social capital that compounds the loss of natural, physical and human capital. All these represent a massive loss of unquantified and uncompensated facilities. Such elusive disintegration processes undermine livelihood in ways unaccounted by the planners (Cernea, 1995). Such loss is higher in projects that relocate people in a dispersed manner rather than as social groups and units. In such cases, it is very difficult for the oustees to reconstitute similar social structures and networks. The experience of the oustees of the Rangali dam project in Orissa gives an evidence of social disarticulation at the kinship system level (Pandey, 1998). Social disintegration has been a major impoverishment risk in all the projects studied by Balaji Pandey (1996). In UKP, the displaced persons are resettled about 65 km away from the original place. This has dismantled social networks, kinships and social relationships. In ITPS, NALCO and Ib valley although the displaced persons were rehabilitated in resettlement colonies, studies reveal that labour exchange relationships, production-oriented informal organisation and other socio-economic 58

25 relationships like informal loans, exchange of food etc, mutual help with farming and caring for children have been totally disrupted. Displacement leads to the dismantling of such multifunctional, yet virtually invisible social networks. This acts as one of the hidden and serious causes of impoverishment. It is difficult and time-consuming to reconstitute similar social networks among resettlers and their hosts. A monograph on the Hirakud dam oustees in India found that displaced households did not become properly integrated in the host villages for many years after relocation (Baboo 1992). The people may physically persist, but the community as it was before is no more (Downing 1996a). Historians of migration have also concluded convergently that the cost of population relocation generally goes much beyond simply the financial costs because the displaced have to face new economic and social uncertainties in a strange land (Sowell 1996). Mathur s study identified one more impoverishment factor in addition to the eight risk factors pointed out by Cernea. This is loss of access to basic public services. In the resettlement colonies, the basic services like school, clinics, street lights, public taps, transport facilities etc are usually not provided as promised. This contributes further to their continuing impoverishment (Mathur, Hari Mohan 1998). Cernea also discusses the risks to hosts. These risks are not comparable with the risks to the displaced in substance or intensity. But they are related to them and may also result in impoverishment implications. The inflow of the resettlers increases 59

26 pressure on local resources and scarce social services, as well as competition for employment. Cultural clashes and social tensions tend to continue for long. Hence host populations are a major factor with a stake in good resettlement, particularly with mass displacements. Recognising the specific risks to hosts is integral to using the risks and reconstruction model and approach. (Cernea, 1995). The most effective safeguard for the interest of the host is an adequately designed and financed recovery plan for the resettlers. The appropriate time for considering the risks to both the displaced and the hosts is when relocation sites and host-area populations are identified. When special opportunities are made available to the displaced, it is wise to allow these to the hosts also, whenever possible. Experience has proved that this minimizes tensions and competition between the two populations (Cernea, 1995). In Cernea s IRR model, while he warns of the risks of unplanned relocation, at the same time he suggests measures of reconstruction. The ensuing part is a look into the reconstruction measures suggested by Cernea Reconstruction Measures The significance of Cernea s model is that the conceptual representation of impoverishment through displacement is not just a model of inescapable gloom. Cernea has enclosed directions for the socio-economic reconstruction of the displaced. If the risk model is reversed, it tells what positive actions are to be taken to restore or to improve the livelihood and the income of the displaced. The reconstruction actions are 60

27 From landlessness to land-based resettlement From joblessness to re- employment From homelessness to house reconstruction From food insecurity to safe nutrition From increased morbidity to better health care From social disarticulation to social reconstruction From marginalization to social inclusion From loss of common property rights to access to public utilities. The use of the IRR model is not only academic, it is practical too. Planners can use it as a compass for planning and for justly considering resettlers rights and needs. However, it is pathetic to note that even when adverse consequences occured, many countries including India either overlooked or underestimated its use in planning. This legitimately raises the basic social justice question: Development for Whom? (Mahapatra, 1991). 2.4 IRR in the present study Huge investments leading to large scale displacement raises economic, environmental, social and other issues. Theories of development formulated by economists consider only economic issues. Hence, theories formulated by them cannot explicitly answer to a social issue like displacement. Social impacts of displacement are the major concern of anthropologists and sociologists. 61

28 An overview of different theories of development induced-displacement shows that the theories of Chamber, Rawls, Scudder or Colson or that of Unbalanced Growth Strategy do not explain the full process of the trauma of involuntary relocation and rehabilitation. While Chamber s theory is for voluntary resettlers, Rawls emphasizes injustice resulting from involuntary displacement if the condition of the displaced is not improved in terms of income and wealth. The Unbalanced Growth Strategy is more significant as a theory of development, as this tells how investment in basic infrastructure can promote economic development of a country as a whole. Hence large investment in power projects can be justified as it promotes the economic capital. But the negative impact of development-induced displacement is borne by the DPs and PAPs, for which there is no answer in the theory. Scudder-Colson theory based on Chamber model is more relevant in successful resettlement. In most situations where displacement is involuntary, resettlement is least successful. Thus the earlier theorists emphasized only one or another aspect of displacement trauma faced by evictees at different phases of relocation. These theories cannot be considered as complete in themselves. An appraisal of these theories reveals that they do not take an in-depth look into the overall problems faced by the victims of involuntary displacement. The superiority of Cernea s model is that, being a social scientist, he foresees the possible impoverishing factors of compulsory relocation and also suggests measures of reconstruction also. The theory is a socio-economic reconstruction model. Recent researches by Alagh, Mathur, Ota, Pandey and Agarwal bring to light Cernea s 62

29 awareness of the displacement situation in India. Application of the IRR model to different projects gives interesting feedback on it (Thangraj, 1996). After studying a number of World Bank-assisted projects with IRR technique, concludes that this model provides the necessary conceptual framework for planning. Reddy s analysis of families affected by Singrauli and Rihand (NTPC projects) and Agarwal s study of NTPC projects bring out the existence of impoverishment risks in displacement and the applicability of IRR technique in planning and preventing the risk of impoverishment. Thangraj found that this model, which is considered as a tool for planning, was also used as a Participatory Rural Appraisal tool in India. Agarwal observed its applicability at different stages of a project. To him, Impoverishment Risk Analysis (IRA) can be an efficient and effective decision-making tool at the project inception stage. While preparing Rehabilitation Action Plan (RAP), IRR can ensure its social obligation and decision support system. This can help to focus on the marginalised who suffer the impact of impoverishment. The applicability of IRA would be risky when the R & R benefits are extended to PAPs also. This needs the expertise of an Impoverishment Risk Analyst with special skills, knowledge and experience. Further, Agarwal asserts that all those who come forward to get the resettlement compensation package are not necessarily from among the impoverished. Often they are the rich local landlords and the educated people living far away from the project area. The Ramagundam Super Thermal Power Project provides a good example. Cernea s work has significance in India s NPRR (2007) as many provisions of the policy are very close 63

30 to his views. It is with this understanding that Cernea s IRR Model is adopted as the theoretical frame work for the present study. The analysis of displacement and rehabilitation in the Kayamkulam thermal power project is guided by the Impoverishment Risk and Reconstruction Model discussed above. The socio-economic data collected on displacement and rehabilitation in the said project are examined on the basis of eight risk factors as in Cernea s IRR Model in the sixth chapter. It is time now to consider the profile of NTPC, of the project area and R&R policy. This is the concern of the next chapter. 64