Q: The problem of displacement is inherent in the idea of development. Analyze the statement critically.

Model Answer:

Displacement & Development

Displacement refers not only to physical uprooting from habitat, but also to loss of livelihood, community ties and cultural identity. In India, Walter Fernandes estimates over 50 million people displaced since Independence, largely by state-led development projects. The issue is central to understanding the contradictions of “development” in a democratic, welfare-oriented society.

Why displacement appears inherent in dominant development models

1. Modernization and statist paradigm
• Post-independence planning, influenced by modernization theory, equated development with rapid industrialisation, big dams and mining. Nehru’s “temples of modern India” meant large projects needing vast land, forests and rivers.
• A.R. Desai saw the Indian state as a “developmental bourgeois” state that facilitates capitalist accumulation, making displacement of peasants, tribals and the urban poor almost built-in to development.

2. Class, caste and tribal dimensions
• David Harvey’s idea of “accumulation by dispossession” explains how SEZs, expressways, mining and real-estate projects convert common and peasant lands into capital.
• Displacement disproportionately affects STs and SCs; André Béteille and Nandini Sundar highlight how adivasi homelands become sacrifice zones for energy and mineral projects (Narmada, Singrauli, POSCO, Vedanta).

3. Structural impoverishment
• Michael Cernea’s Impoverishment Risks and Reconstruction (IRR) model shows displacement creates landlessness, joblessness, homelessness, marginalisation, food insecurity and social disarticulation.
• Such recurring patterns suggest that, within the prevailing growth-centric model, displacement is not accidental but structurally generated.

Critical view: Is displacement inevitable?

1. Alternative conceptions of development
• Amartya Sen’s capability approach and human development thinking redefine development as expansion of freedoms, not just GDP or mega-projects. This allows for growth without, or with minimal, forced displacement.

2. Empirical counter-tendencies
• Decentralised, small-scale initiatives (rainwater harvesting in Alwar, community forestry in Odisha, micro-hydel projects) show resource use without mass relocation.
• Participatory planning (Kerala’s People’s Plan, Gram Sabhas under PESA; in-situ slum upgrading in Ahmedabad) indicates that people-centred planning can limit displacement.

3. Rights-based and movement politics
• Laws like FRA 2006 and LARR 2013 (consent, social impact assessment, R&R) and movements such as Narmada Bachao Andolan and anti-POSCO struggles push “development with justice”, questioning inevitability of displacement.

Conclusion
Displacement is inherent in India’s current growth-centric paradigm, but not in development per se; redefining development around rights, participation and sustainability can significantly reduce forced uprooting.