In the recent past, two major policy interventions have been made to resettle and rehabilitated persons displaced as a result of acquisition of land for development projects. While the Government of Orrissa brought out its policy in 2006, the Central Government notified a new policy in 2007. Both policies suffer from serious deficits and fail to meet the aspirations of the agitating peasantry and the norms advocated by the civil society groups. This paper highlights these deficits and suggest measures which can bridge them.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Cernea, Michael M. (1997). ‘The Risks and Reconstruction Model for Resettling Displaced Population’ World Development, Vol. (25)No 10.
2.
Cernea, Michael M. (1999). Government of Orrisa (2006): ‘Forward: The Power of Synthesis’, in Mahapatra (1999). Orissa Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy, 2006.
3.
Lok Sabha (2007). Ministry of Rural Development (2003) The Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2007, Bill No. 98 of 2007. National Policy of Resettlement and Rehabilitation for Project Effected Families.
4.
Ministry of Rural Development (2007). The National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy, 2007.
5.
Mathur, H. M. (1998). ‘The Improvement Risk Model and its Use as a Planning Tool’, in Mathur, Hari Mohan and Marsden, David (eds). 1998: Development Projects and Impoverishment Risks.
6.
Mahapatra, L. K. (1999). Resettlement, Impoverishment and Reconstruction in India.
7.
Mathur, Hari Mohan (2008). A New Deal for Displaced People: Orissa's Involuntary Resettlement Policy (in this volume of Social Change).
8.
Mehra, Puja (2007). SEZ Controversy: Course correction” India TodayVol XXXLiNumber 5 January 30-February 5, 2007, Cited in Mathur (2008). •
