Height of contention: A dammed model of development

In a majority decision, with two judges including the Chief Justice of India in favour of the Narmada project and one member of the apex court dissenting, the Supreme Court has ruled that construction work on the dam up to a height of 90 metres be taken up immediately. Significantly, the reason for clearance of the project is based on the Court's satisfaction at the manner in which the relief and rehabilitation of those ousted by the dam are being undertaken. This is the one issue on which the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) has created a countrywide movement, drawing attention to the misery and plight of those displaced so far and those likely to be ousted with the planned increase in the height of the structure. The NBA needs to be congratulated for bringing to public attention an issue which has generally been neglected in the past while implementing many public and private sector projects. Our record of handling the human problems of resettlement and rehabilitation of people in many projects is pretty dismal. It was just a few years ago that the independent inspection panel of the World Bank made a sharply critical assessment of the manner in which the relatively small number of people displaced by the Singrauli thermal power station were totally neglected by the authorities. It is reported that some ousted families were moved as many as six times, which is a sad commentary on the importance we attach to the human dimensions of a problem, often seen merely as a question of numbers. It is clear that no project in the future and no project authority responsible for it would be able to pursue any such undertaking, even one very much smaller in size, without giving serious attention to the question of rehabilitation. This clearly is the lasting contribution to the methodology of project design and implementation made by the NBA and its supporters. Indeed, if we contrast this with the situation prevailing in China, we ought to count our blessings. The Chinese authorities are pushing ahead with the Three Gorges dam project which will submerge 100,000 hectares of crop land and create saltwater intrusion into the water supply for the city of Shanghai, apart from creating a large number of other adverse impacts. As far back as in 1981 when I first visited China, I was told by Chinese academics that this project was under consideration but would never go through because of negative environmental and human impacts. But these very academics voiced unqualified praise for the scheme 15 years later because the official position on the project had changed, and, therefore, any dissent or adherence to earlier negative positions became out of place. Here, no such heavy-handed doctoring of dissent from individuals or groups can ever be accepted. But, at no stage should this lead us into believing that we can subvert the system, once we have had recourse to all the avenues and opportunities for dissent that the Constitution provides. There are a few aspects of the Narmada project that make this a prominent candidate for dispute and sharply divided perceptions. In general, the Supreme Court judgment of October 18 was hailed throughout Gujarat, which is estimated to receive the bulk of the benefits, particularly in respect of water supply for some of the chronically drought-prone areas of Kutch and Saurashtra. The major negative impacts of the dam will be felt by Madhya Pradesh, which would have to rehabilitate the largest number of persons likely to be displaced. Pro-dam groups dispute the number of persons to be rehabilitated and allege that several persons have been brought into the areas to be submerged only to lend greater political force to opposition to the project. Interestingly, even in the case of China, there has been an increase recently of the affected population in the Three Gorges dam area, because several people have moved in, to corner the monetary compensation and other benefits that they would receive on displacement. The Narmada project also raises a much larger question that goes beyond the specifics of this case. If indeed the only means of getting water in areas of Gujarat and Rajasthan that are chronically water scarce is through this project, then what weightage does one attach to this benefit vis-a-vis the acute misery of being ousted in Madhya Pradesh? There is clearly a case of uneven costs and benefits to which there are no simple answers, and hence the sharply divergent positions on the subject between Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh. The intended purpose of the project, which goes back to the original concept put forward by Sardar Patel in 1946, is related essentially to water supply and flood control. The power generation from the project would hardly be significant with a capacity of 1,450 MW. As against this, the Three Gorges dam will have an installed capacity of 18,200 MW. Sadly, the controversy associated with the Narmada project is never likely to go away, much like the construction of Narita airport in Japan which ousted a community of farmers. Security arrangements at the airport continue to be stringent in view of periodic threats to blow it up. So, it is now for the NBA to channel its energy towards the proper rehabilitation and care of those unfortunate families that are ousted. The Supreme Court has ruled that the project go ahead, and we need to respect and uphold the powers of the judiciary. There is a need to strongly support a hidden cause of a similar nature that goes beyond the Narmada project. Of the 300 million plus population in our towns and cities, perhaps 100 million live in slums and footpaths. Most of them are ousted from their homes in rural areas for want of opportunities to earn a modest livelihood. What kind of development have we pursued in the past 43 years, if these citizens of India are condemned to a sub-human existence? We need a major grassroots effort to turn around the misplaced priorities of our past and present policies. There is a much bigger dam called India's distorted development displacing millions of people each year which unfortunately gets no attention either from activists in the country or the urban intelligentsia whose voices are heard both in India and abroad.