tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6684943494377694149.post6347708769277523062..comments2024-01-31T14:45:07.393+05:30Comments on Development Dialogues: Amartya Sen on the land acqusition movementMadhurahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11438159701697487801noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6684943494377694149.post-18666091680524164372007-12-31T17:17:00.000+05:302007-12-31T17:17:00.000+05:30“However, the agriculture-favouring opponents have...“However, the agriculture-favouring opponents have presented some other arguments that are indeed very weighty. Two in particular deserve very serious consideration. Some oppose the diversion of fertile and productive land into industrial use, which applies to some extent to Singur as well, since such land is clearly very useful for agriculture. Another important argument points to the possibility that taking land from agriculture would impoverish the agriculturalists who live on that land, no matter how large an income the new enterprises may actually produce for other people. I have seen various arguments making this point forcefully, including in one case invoking — I believe appropriately — my own concerns about entitlement failures of specific occupation groups and the effects that this might have on starvation of those groups (no matter what happens to the totality of incomes).”<BR/><BR/>Sen raises the issue but does not discuss it. He says he supports “the general economic strategy of industrialization of the government of West Bengal” but he does not defend his position by answering the questions that everyone else is raising and which he points out as well.<BR/><BR/>Sen says that the general economic problem is whether to involve private funds or whether to involve only State funds for industrialisation. However, in my opinion, the main issue of debate over the general economic plan is not whether the funds are from private corporations or the State coffers but how to bring about the necessary level of industrialisation. It is not as if the “agriculture-favouring opponents” oppose industrialisation. Most of them are trying to say that it is not necessary that rapid conversion to industry is the only viable option. Agriculture can also be profitable and since agriculture is more necessary than industry in terms of sustaining human life, ways of making agriculture profitable must be found. Cold storages and transport vehicles with refrigerators are two of the most basic facilities that are not widely available to Indian farmers leading to huge losses for the farmers and farm produce in general and also leading to increased prices for food crops.<BR/><BR/>Sen raises the question of the farmers who have to give up or sell their land. He himself points out that “we also have to see where the new incomes go” but he does not say anything more about it. Is his fear of the “entitlement failures of specific occupation groups and the effects that this might have on starvation of those groups” compatible with his support for the present general economic plan? I fail to see it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com