Introduction This case study highlights the ethical dilemma of development-induced displacement, where vulnerable communities bear the brunt of progress while others reap the benefits. The recent debates surrounding the acquisition of tribal lands for mining in Odisha exemplify this issue, raising questions of distributive justice. The Social Contract Theory, particularly John Rawls's concept of justice as fairness, provides a strong framework for addressing this dilemma.

Stakeholder Identification Displaced Adivasi, hill dwellers, and rural communities; Mining companies, dam developers, and other project proponents; Government agencies responsible for land acquisition and rehabilitation; Local communities near project sites; The general public benefiting from the projects.

Answers

1. Addressing the Injustice: The current compensation model, focusing solely on monetary compensation, often fails to address the long-term well-being of displaced communities and perpetuates social injustice. A more just approach requires recognizing land as not just a commodity but as a source of livelihood, cultural identity, and community. The rights approach, emphasizing the right to livelihood and cultural preservation, must be central to any new policy.

2. Comprehensive Rehabilitation: The policy should move beyond mere compensation to comprehensive rehabilitation encompassing livelihood restoration, skill development, and social inclusion. This includes providing vocational training aligned with local market demands, ensuring access to healthcare and education, and facilitating community resettlement that respects their cultural practices. This aligns with the common good approach, aiming to create conditions for all to flourish.

3. Community Participation and Consent: The policy must prioritize free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) of the affected communities, ensuring their active participation in the decision-making process. This respects their autonomy and addresses the power imbalance inherent in such projects. This reflects the ethics of care, emphasizing relational autonomy and collaborative decision-making.

4. Sustainable Development: The policy should promote sustainable development by ensuring that projects minimize environmental damage and contribute to the long-term well-being of both displaced communities and the wider region. This might involve exploring alternative project designs, investing in environmental restoration, and promoting local resource management. This reflects a utilitarian approach by maximizing overall well-being while minimizing harm.

5. Transparency and Accountability: The entire process of land acquisition and rehabilitation should be transparent and accountable, with clear guidelines, grievance mechanisms, and independent oversight. This helps prevent corruption and ensures that the rights of displaced communities are protected. This upholds the justice approach by ensuring fairness and equity in the process.

6. Long-Term Support: The policy should provide long-term support to displaced communities, recognizing that the impacts of displacement can extend across generations. This might involve creating community development funds, providing ongoing social services, and monitoring the long-term well-being of resettled communities. This addresses the transfer of burden from the present to future generations and promotes intergenerational equity.

7. Legal and Institutional Framework: The policy should be backed by a strong legal and institutional framework, with clear responsibilities and enforcement mechanisms. This might involve amending existing land acquisition laws, establishing dedicated rehabilitation agencies, and strengthening judicial oversight. This aligns with the deontological principle of upholding the rule of law and ensuring that justice is not just an abstract ideal but a lived reality.

Examples: The Forest Rights Act of 2006, while imperfect, provides a framework for recognizing community forest rights and has been used in some cases to challenge displacement. The successful resettlement and rehabilitation of communities affected by the Sardar Sarovar Dam, although controversial, offers lessons in community participation and long-term support.

Conclusion Development-induced displacement presents a complex ethical challenge, requiring a shift from a purely economic approach to one that prioritizes human rights, social justice, and sustainable development. The Posco steel plant project in Odisha, ultimately abandoned after years of protests, highlights the importance of community consent and the need for a more ethical approach to development. Moving forward, a just and equitable compensation-cum-rehabilitation policy must prioritize the well-being of displaced communities, ensuring their active participation, respecting their rights, and promoting sustainable development for all.