Political Science, asked by s13017, 11 hours ago

what were the reasons for the opposition by the environmentalist despite their opposition why the government was interested in the setting of the Steel plant in Orissa​

Answers

Answered by Anonymous
0

Answer:

The liberalisation process that started in India in the early

1990s has made Orissa potentially the most attractive

destination for large capital-intensive projects by

private-sector firms – typically mineral-based ones.

These projects are facing opposition from the people,

especially those likely to be displaced and those who

will be indirectly affected. At the same time, the state’s

woes – poverty and unemployment – remain to be

addressed. Against this backdrop, this article examines

– both analytically and empirically – the path taken by

the three important sectors of the state: agriculture,

industry, and mining. Based on an inter-district and

inter-state panel analysis, the paper highlights the

serious decline in the Orissa’s agricultural sector – still

the only significant determinant of per capita income in

the state – while the mining sector, be it in production

or exports, has flourished.

I dedicate this article to the memory of activist Rajendra Sarangi, a

younger-brother-like-friend who passed away on 27 March 2008 and

who had encouraged and pushed me – even with data, clippings, and

information – to write this article, after I had pleaded my inability to

get into uncharted waters. I also thank Sakti Padhi, whose death on

2 March 2010 stripped Orissa of its greatest economic thinker and the

most uncompromising economist of the current era, for extensive

discussion and insights.

I acknowledge helpful comments from Birendra Nayak, Sudhir

Pattanaik, Kishor Samal, and other participants at the Third Ashok Babu

Memorial Lecture (2006) organised by Loka Samabaya Pratisthan at

Lohia Academy Trust, Bhubaneswar (where the first version of this paper

was presented) as well as from participants at a talk by the author in

October 2007 at the Ecumenical Centre and International Residence,

Ann Arbor, US.

Banikanta Mishra ([email protected]) teaches finance at the

Xavier Institute of Management, Bhubaneswar. Part of this work was

completed while the author was visiting faculty at the University of

Michigan, Ann Arbor, US

I

n a reasonably sensational revelation, it was disclosed in July

2007 – through a written reply by the Orissa steel and mines

minister in the assembly – that the Bhubaneswar Club in

Orissa – mainly an IAS officers’ recreation club, which is registered

as a company – had bid for the Khandadhar mines in the state.

The club filed its application for Khandadhar around the same

time that Posco signed an MoU with the state government for

establishing a steel facility at Paradeep (Mishra 2007).

Exactly two years later, in July 2009, the “mining scam” created

an uproar in the assembly. “The Government was in the dock

for letting a private company operate in certain mines without

(a) proper lease” (New Indian Express 2009e).

“For years now, mining companies have gotten rich supplying

the raw materials that have fuelled consumer booms from China

and India to Brazil.... The resulting megaminers would have

great influence over the cost of raw materials like iron ore,

copper and uranium – and, by extension, the price of consumer

electronics, cars and new apartment blocks” (Barta and Matthews

2007). And, these megaminers are some of the prominent entities

that want “industrialisation” of India and its states like Orissa,

independent of what their governments want.

People versus Projects

It is in the light of these “power plays” of corporations that one

needs to view events like the Kalinganagar massacre in Orissa at

the outset of 2006, where, in one of the most startling incidents

of state excess under a supposedly democratic government,

12 tribals laid down their lives while protesting specifically

against the beginning of construction work by Tata Steel – but

generally against that area’s reckless “industrialisation” that

entailed their forceful eviction. Barely eight months after that,

in the very same year, Orissa was given the India Today “gold medal”

for, inter alia, being, among the Indian states, the “fastest mover

in prosperity” (Orissadiary 2006a) of the people and the government, despite having the second highest unemployment rate,

both rural and urban, in 2004-05 as per the 61st round of

the National Sample Survey (Government of India 2009b). The

message in the inherent paradox is clear: cherish (big industries)

or perish. One only hopes that the gold medal does not turn into

golden handcuffs, getting Orissa stuck to its current berserk

journey on the path of the dangerous kind of industrialisation,

resistance to which has been raising its head throughout the

state and also in other states.

hope it helps you mate keep smiling good evening

Similar questions