Of Kondhs, Aluminium and Vedantapur

Dear All: It is my great pleasure to publish this guest post by Anupam Sarwaikar on the Vedanta controversy…Anupam has written previously on the blog…I am sure you will find this post as thought-provoking as his previous one, “Of False Propoganda & Goebbelsian Lies” (on the “Indus Water Treaty”). Comments, thoughts welcome as always…

*** The Vedanta Controversy by Anupam Sarwaikar ***

*** CAUTION: Long Post ***

The recent Vedanta controversy provides some thought provoking observations for those who are interested in India, India’s development and upliftment of India’s poor. Before delving deeper into what happened and possible causes, let’s outline what was happening before the whole controversy erupted, caught media attention and Environmental Ministry blocked the mining project based on a report by four member committee headed by N C Saxena.

Vedanta has set up an aluminium refinery in Lanjigarh at the cost of $5.4 billion with a capacity of producing 1MTPA expandable up to 5 MTPA.  This Zero Discharge System plant was built after almost 6 years of government approval process pertaining to environment, displacement, forest related and other regulations.

Vedanta planned to feed its Lanjigarh plant from the bauxite deposits at Niyamgiri hills which are approximately 5 km away from the plant. Ore was supposed to be transferred using covered pipe conveyor system to avoid heavy truck movement in the area. Alumina was to be transferred to firm’s smelter at Jharsuguda. The close proximity of the refinery & the smelter to the bauxite deposits was expected to give Vedanta a competitive edge, resulting in cheaper production costs of the aluminium.

If Vedanta had succeeded –
According to Tavleen Singh,

If Vedanta had succeeded in making aluminum close to a bauxite source, as it had planned in Orissa, world prices of aluminum could have fallen by half and India may have become an important aluminum producer.

This would have given India an edge in aluminum production and India would have been in position to challenge the world’s largest aluminum producing country, China (China has almost the same amount of bauxite reserves as India does but mines much more and is able to produce far greater quantities [ link ].

As many of you would know, Aluminium is the most widely used non-ferrous metal and has very wide use across the industries. The demand for aluminium is expected to rise due to greater demand in growing economies like India, China and Brazil.

Let’s take a look at the local economic impact now –
This is what Saubhik Chakrabarti writes,

Niyamgiri is in Kalahandi, which is part of the infamous KBK (Koraput-Bolangir-Kalahandi) group of districts: extreme underdevelopment is the KBK signature. KBK districts account for 72 per cent of Orissa’s below the poverty line population. Of the 82 very backward blocks in Orissa, 53 are in KBK. KBK literacy rate is an abysmal 43.3 per cent, while Orissa’s state-wise average is 63.08 per cent*.

These are all figures that tell a dreadfully grim story. And everyone in the Niyamgiri battle, whichever side they are on, agrees.

* Source: 2002 Orissa BPL Census

A mining operation, alumina refinery and a smelter in locality means improved job and business opportunities for locals. Although Vedanta has employed some locals, there are complaints that Vedanta has not done enough for the locals. Here is an excerpt from the same article about the indirect impact of industrial development in the area.

Raju Sahu who came from Bihar to Kalahandi 10 years ago and runs four tea/food stalls on the state highway that links Lanjigarh—where Niyamgiri and the Vedanta factory are situated—to Bhawanipatna, the district HQ. Sahu says his business has more than trebled since Vedanta started operating from here about four years ago. But he complains: what will happen if operations shut down, and why isn’t the state highway in a better condition; his business would be even better then. All along the road and right up to the site of Rahul Gandhi’s rally, tiny businesses run by locals talk of a quantum jump in sales and brood about it all ending

It is not an exaggeration to say that the entire Vedanta operation would have been a win-win for all – the company itself, locals and India..

So what happened?
As always, there is more than one side to the story with any controversy and especially more so in India.

Below are the points made by the anti-Mining proponents:
From the N C Saxena committee report, some excerpts:

The two communities regard the Niyamgiri hills as sacred and believe that their survival is dependent on the integrity of its ecosystem. The PML site is amongst the highest points in the hills and it is considered especially important as a sacred site. All the Dongaria and Kutia Kondh villagers that the Committee conversed with emphasized the connection between their culture and the forests of the Niyamgiri hills.

These villages have been vested with recognizable community and habitat rights by GoI under section 4(1) of the FRA, and the procedure laid down in section 6 of the FRA must be followed by the district authorities.

These rights should have been formalized by now, as the Act came into being more than two years ago on the 1 January, 2008. As holders of these rights, the entire Dongaria Kondh community and Kutia Kondh living close to the four forest blocks are empowered under section 5(c) of the Act to ensure that their habitat is preserved from any form of destructive practices that affects their cultural and ecological heritage. The state government cannot take any action that appropriates a part of their habitat without following the due process of law.

This article by Sudha Ramchandran highlights the anti-Vedanta side of the story. Excerpts

Their opposition to bauxite mining is rooted in environmental and livelihood concerns. Bauxite is water-retentive and its extraction will dry up more than 30 perennial streams in the area, leaving no water for their crops. Two large rivers, the Nagavali and the Vamsadhara, also depend on the Niyamgiri Hills for water flow. Mineral extraction would therefore destroy forests and devastate local ecosystems, wiping out the Dongria Kondhs’ means of livelihood and driving them out of their home.

Sudha Ramchandran also writes about the neglect of tribal population by government after setting up NALCO and HINDALCO in the nearby areas.

A few kilometres out of Koraput town, the destruction of the environment and Adivasi lives is even more apparent. The government-run National Aluminium Company Limited (NALCO) has been extracting bauxite from the surrounding Panchapatmalli hills and operating a bauxite refinery at Damanjodi since 1985. The operations brought huge profits for NALCO – and devastation for the Adivasis, affecting 26 villages directly and more than 690 villages indirectly. When the refinery was set up, it displaced 597 families of which 254 were Adivasi and 56 Dalit. Several of these families were provided rehabilitation packages; some got financial compensation, others were provided land – but these were far from adequate. Some received nothing.

The other side –

B G Verghese counters some of the points raised by N C Saxena committee report in this article.   Excerpts:

The charge that the mining area amounts to a cultural invasion of the sacred abode of the celestial Niyam Raja is contested. Earlier accounts would locate this site several kilometres away atop Hundijali hill.
The Niyamgiri hills extend over 250 square kilometres (sq km) of which only 7 sq km of one hilltop falls within the proposed mining lease area. Of this, only 3.5 sq km or 350 hectares will be mined and backfilled in phases, leaving no more than 20 hectares of exposed mine face at any one time.

The laterite hill tops underlain by a hard bauxite pan do not hold the rain, sustain little forest and are totally uninhabited. Contrary to the assertions by the latest official committees, the removal of the bauxite layer and replacement of the laterite overburden with plantations will, according to the Central Mine Planning and Design Institute, encourage infiltration, recharge the aquifer and improve the water regime to everybody’s benefit. Nalco’s reclaimed Damanjodi mine in Koraput is a classic example of transformation.

And,

The Orissa government’s counter-argument is that the Forest Rights Act only came into force with the promulgation of its Rules in January 2008 and cannot be applied retrospectively. The Saxena committee retorts that the Forest Rights Act was enacted to set right the “historical injustices” suffered by the tribal people. This is valid. But when does history begin? Hirakud, Rourkela, the HAL MiG plant in Koraput and hundreds of other projects, completed and ongoing, are located on tribal lands. Are all these development omelettes to be unscrambled?

And then there is politics and a platform for Rahul Baba to become “sipahi” of poor tribal in Delhi.  Here is an interesting open letter to Rahul Gandhi by a local blogger.

What intrigues me most is the involvement of organizations like Survival International and Church of England. Church of England sold its entire stake in Vedanta in February of 2010, six months before the decision and the eventual fall of Vedanta stocks in August.

Watch this movie clip and the pain taken to make this movie and organize tribal population against mining.
Why did certain NGOs organize the tribal community, who was funding them? Are these NGOs and groups like “Survival International” against the economic development of the area or they really care about the tribes of India? Aren’t these groups first to point out level of poverty and the ghastly conditions these Indian tribes live in?

There are several other “players” involved in the controversy and many unanswered questions:

• What is the role of the powerful International aluminum lobby in this episode?
• What is the background of the NGOs? What about possible funding by the lobby or Missionaries?
• Why are there no clear forest and environmental guidelines?
• Is the controversy a result of Vedanta not doing enough for the community or failed PR?
• Why the media slant – and the remarkable lack of balance in the articles in mainstream media?

What is the way out?

• We need clear and concise rules and regulations related to any industrial activity which impacts forests, local environment and leads to displacement of locals.
• Once the rules are set they cannot be applied retroactively.
• Changes in Rules and Regulation should be based on solid research not on political gains. There has to be a grace period for existing Industries to comply with the changes in the regulations.
• There ought to be clearly defined corporate and social guidelines for industrial projects like these. These guidelines should involve development of local infrastructure, city planning and training and employment opportunities for people affected.

Whose loss is this?

Regardless of which side of the story is true, the controversy and its aftermath – is the loss of India, its aspiring entrepreneurs and the BPL population of the region which lost a little glimmer of hope they had to eat two square meals a day. On one side we talk about urbanization of India (not urban migration ); on the other, we squander an opportunity to create another Jamshedpur.  What India needs is hundreds of Jamshedpur. I don’t mind a Vedantapur either.

Related Post: “Kaam Aadmi” Politics – Can it work?

Kondh Woman Image Courtesy: PICQ (via Wikipedia)