It is not always that the “people” of this country get to hear good news. And let’s, for once, exclude the privileged like us (who are fortunate to have been born in cities and read these glossies) when we talk of people. Let’s shift our gaze to the heartland, where the “real” India probably lives. It is an India that is rich and poor at the same time.
Take a set of maps – that of the country’s forests, minerals, rivers, poor, and tribals together, and superimpose them. You will be taken by surprise to see that most of these areas actually overlap. Then use your head – and you will realise that this is also the area that is where Maoists rule the roost. If you are the thinking kind, this will not come as a surprise.
Indeed, India’s richest areas in terms of forests and minerals are also the ones that are home to extremely poor tribals. These areas of the country have been plundered for decades by the country’s politicians and corporates. What we are left with is the Radical Left. It is not without reason that Maoists hold sway over the heartland of India. Maoists are not the malaise – they are the symptoms of a disease. And that malaise is that of exploitation.
This truism is not unique to India alone – it is seen the world over. The idea that natural resources might be more an economic curse than a blessing began emerged din the 1980s. In 1993 economist Richard Auty gave a name to this phenomenon. He coined the term “resource curse” to describe how countries rich in natural resources were unable to use that wealth to boost their economies and how, counter-intuitively, these countries had lower economic growth than countries without an abundance of natural resources.
The idea caught on. Numerous studies were subsequently conducted by researchers who found an inextricable link between natural resource abundance and poor economic growth. Though the concept was developed to talk about nations, it has been seen that the logic can be carried forward to within nations as well. The truth stares at us starkly in the face in India too.
The city-centric Shining India has been growing, for much of its part, by exploiting the natural resources of the country. And the poor here (in the mineral, forest-rich areas) have been only standing and staring. With frustration on their minds, and anger in their hearts. It was this deep-seated resentment that has been cashed in by Maoists. That’s right, the resource curse theory also talks of conflict that develops in such situations.
So how do you tackle the situation? The panacea that is invariably offered is “development”. But what does development mean? And, certainly, whose development are we talking about?
After all, development is what we have got in the 20 years of economic liberalisation, isn’t it? We need to understand that this development and economic growth has come at a price – and someone, somewhere in this country has paid a heavy price for it. How? The answer would lie in the fact that the manufacturing sector of industry does not grow by itself. It needs resources and these come from the same exploited regions that we talk about.
For the last two decades, the forests in these areas have been denuded for the benefits of industries and mines. The cities grew richer at the cost of the tribal lands.
This being a huge canvas, let’s restrict ourselves only to the issue of mining. It is only now that two major mining scams (that of Bellary and in Orissa) have come to light. The scams were not the exploitation, they were only the symptoms of what we call crony capitalism. Even if the money had come to the government, the poor in these areas would have still remained poor.
So when someone says let’s give development to these poor sods, it does not mean anything. Paying them up would, arguably, make better sense.
It is in this backdrop that the September 30 decision of the Union Cabinet calling for funding local schools, hospitals and roads using profits and royalties from reluctant mining firms needs to be seen. The Bill, which must now win parliamentary approval, calls on coal miners to share a maximum 26 per cent of their profits with local communities and for other miners to pay an amount equivalent to royalties. The Bill has its flaws, but is welcome nevertheless.
The stock markets immediately saw shares of mineral and metal companies falling, even though not drastically. Higher royalties mean higher production costs and less dividends. Obviously, no one wants to share their profits. Certainly, not with the poor.
The mining Bill can be the first step towards removing the resource curse.
