This article examines the dimensions of land acquisition with respect to establishment of economic zones across India. The enactment of Special Economic Zone (SEZ) Act 2005 allows the government to transfer the land acquired for public purpose under the Land Acquisition Act to the private companies for development. For private firms, land turning into most significant incentive for being part of SEZ scheme and profit maximization. It has been observed that large part of acquired land ends up in the hands of the real estate companies rather than intended productive sectors of industry and infrastructure. Land is the principal source of livelihood in an agrarian economy. Forcible acquisition and transfer of land to corporates leads to large-scale unemployment and displacement, especially when large part of tract remains unutilized. It raises many questions on objective and process of establishment of SEZs. The absence of land use the policy is primarily culprit for faulty diversion of land agriculture along with underutilization of available land. The extreme nature of these SEZs needs to be analyzed through proper policy making.
BanerjeeP. (2006). Land acquisition and peasant resistance at Singur. Economic and Political Weekly, 41(46), 4718–4720.
5.
BasuP. (2007 April 7). Political economy of land grab. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(14), 1281–1287.
6.
BhagwatiJ.PanagriyaA. (2013). India’s tryst with destiny: Debunking myths that undermine progress and addressing new challenges. NY: Harper Collins Publishers.
DesaiM. (2011). Land acquisition law and proposed changes. Economic and Political Weekly, 46(26–27), 95–100.
11.
DevS.M. (2008). Challenges for revival of Indian agriculture: Commission for agricultural costs and prices (CACP). New Delhi: National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research, Government of India.
GhatakM.DilipM. (2011). Land acquisition for industrialization and compensation of displaced farmers. WIDER working paper 2011/035. Helsinki: UNU-WIDER.
14.
GhoshM. (2006). Economic growth and human development in Indian states. Economic and Political Weekly, 40(30), 3321—3329.
15.
Government of India (2009). Draft report of the committee on state agrarian relations and unfinished task of land reforms (Vol. 1). Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India. Retrieved February 12, 2015 from http://www.rd.ap.gov.in/IKPLand/MRD_Committee_Report_V_01_Mar_09.pdf
16.
KurianN.J. (2000 12 February). Widening regional disparities in India: Some indicators. Economic and Political Weekly, 35(7), 538–550.
17.
LevienM. (2011). Special economic zones and accumulation by dispossession in India. Journal of Agrarian Change, 11(4), 454–483.
MukhopadhyayP.PradhanK.C. (2009 March). Location of SEZs policy benefits: What does the data says? CPR Occasional Paper No. 18, Centre for Policy Research (CPR), New Delhi.
21.
National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2001). Social security and Employment. Consultation Paper, NCRWC, Government of India, New Delhi. Retrieved February 13, 2015 from http://lawmin.nic.in/ncrwc/finalreport/v2b1-6.htm
22.
National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO). (2003). National Sample Survey, 59th Round.New Delhi: Government of India.
23.
NielsenKenneth Bo. (2010). Contesting India’s Development? Industrialisation, land acquisition and protest in West Bengal. Forum for Development Studies, 37(2), 145–170.
24.
PandeyV.K.TewariS.K. (1996). Regional agricultural land use: A sectoral aggregate view. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 51(1-2), 260–269.
25.
ParwezS. (2015). Modified labour welfare measure for special economic zone and implications. Shri Ram Centre for Industrial Relations & Human Resources. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 50(3), 386–396.
26.
PasinettiL. (1981). Structural change and economic growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27.
PatnaikU. (2008). Imperialism, resources and food security with reference to the Indian Experience. Human Geography, 1(1), 40–53.
28.
ParwezS. (2015). Agriculture for inclusive and sustainable growth of Indian economy: A developmental perspective. Indian Journal of Social Research, 56(3), 529–540.
29.
PRIA (2000). Export Processing Zones in India and the Status of Labor. Working Paper 02–07, Society for Participatory Research, Centre Processing Zones: ILO, Geneva.
30.
RoyD. (2007). Politics at the margin: A tale of two villages. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(32), 3323–3329.
31.
SarkarA. (2007). Development and displacement: Land acquisition in West Bengal. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(16), 1435–1442.
32.
ShahA.NandaniDJoshiH. (2012). Marginalisation or mainstreaming? Evidence from Special Economic Zones in Gujarat. Working Paper No. 210, Gujarat Institute of Development Research, Ahmedabad.
33.
SharmaE.A.S. (2007 26 May). Help the rich, hurt the poor, case of Special Economic Zone. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(1), 1900–1902.
34.
Swaminathan,M.S. (2007, 15 February). India’s Tryst with Destiny in Agriculture. 8th Agricultural Science Congress, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University.
35.
SwaminathanP. (2005). The trauma of “wage employment” and the “burden of work” for women in India. In KannabiranKalpana (Ed.), The violence of normal times: Essays on women’s lived realities.New Delhi: Women Unlimited.
36.
TantriM.L. (2012). China’s policy for special economic zone: Some critical issues. A Journal of International Affairs, 68(1), 231–250.
37.
Various Reports (2013-20142014-2015). Department of Commerce, Government of India, New Delhi.
38.
VenugopalP.N. (2005 21 August). Special Exploitation Zones. India Together. Retrieved from http://www.indiatogether.org
39.
World Bank FIAS. (2008). Special economic zones, performance, lessons learned and implications for zone development. Washington, DC: World Bank.
