States across India are bypassing land acquisition laws by introducing land pooling schemes to speed up the process and lower the costs of land acquisition for developmental projects. In light of this, critically evaluate the pros and cons of land pooling.

States across India are bypassing land acquisition laws by introducing land pooling schemes to speed up the process and lower the costs of land acquisition for developmental projects. In light of this, critically evaluate the pros and cons of land pooling. 

(10 marks, 150 words) Answer:

Given the pressing need for urban development in India, land acquisition by States has persistently been a key issue. The central land acquisition law makes it very difficult and expensive to acquire land and delays important projects. Problems related to land acquisition accounted for at least 15 per cent of stalled projects in India, including flagship development projects like the Ahmedabad-Mumbai Bullet Train project and Navi Mumbai International Airport.

To overcome this, States across India are bypassing land acquisition laws by introducing land pooling schemes to speed up industrial and development projects. States including Rajasthan, Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh have introduced their own laws allowing land pooling. In Andhra Pradesh, the country's largest exercise in land pooling is under way to develop the new capital city Amaravati with 38,000 acres of land.

Land pooling:

Land pooling involves pooling of contiguous small land parcels into large parcels, and returning a percentage of redeveloped land to owners after development is complete while the remaining land remains with state agency. The landowners would be paid a portion of the compensation sum upfront.

Pros:

•        Lower costs for government: Fiscally conservative scheme for Government as there is no need to pay land acquisition cost.

•        Fairer to original land owners: As they do not lose all land and get developed land with substantially better infrastructure and elevated price.

•        Equitable: By not taking away all land, it is more equitable than the central land legislation that often sees protests, displacement of residents, delays and lengthy court battles.

•        Expediting projects: Through voluntary consent of landowners and packaging other forms of compensation (eg. for loss of crops), land pooling fast-tracks the land acquisition process.

•        Development: Through mixed land use, the model fosters more planned development.

Cons

•        Lacking clarity:  Often, the schemes have no clarity on what the owner will get after project is complete. Often, people are largely unaware of what they are getting into.

•        Lack of consent: Owners may come under pressure from the community or the state to participate. To speed up the process, sometimes land pooling made mandatory. Eg. Navi Mumbai airport project

•        Tenants lose out: Poor tenant farmers and agriculture labourers who are being displaced are often given no recourse to compensation or very little compensation.

•        Delays in land development: Track record of delays in implementation of projects by government authorities may cause suffering for the owners who gave away their land.

Conclusion:

More work needs to be done to both study and fine-tune land pooling, including ensuring compensation and resettlement provisions extend to tenant farmers and agricultural labourers. Done well, land pooling can possibly enjoy greater legitimacy and trust among stakeholders than conventional land acquisition, truly allowing India to have inclusive development where all can benefit.