Forward

Advocate Girish Raut, an Environment activist in Mumbai invited me for a discussion with activists from Ratnagiri district about the possible impact of the ‘Jaitapur Madban Nuclear Power Plant’. Later, I had a detailed discussion with many of these activists and witnessed how the local people as well as the groups from Mumbai opposed the project vehemently and how the government was trying to suppress the people’s struggle aggressively. The Bharatiya Paryavaran Chalval and Janahit Samiti, Madban asked if the Jamsetji Tata Centre for Disaster Management (JTCDM) could do a ‘Social Impact Assessment’ of the project. With its commitment to social justice and environmental sustainability, the institute has always stood by vulnerable people and people in distress. Hence we decided to do a ‘Social Impact Assessment’ of the project. Two students of JTCDM, Mr Deepak Yadav and Mr Shaktisagar Dhole opted to work on this research as part of their internship.

The pilot visit to the Jaitapur Madban was an insightful experience. All along the road, were slogans against the proposed plant. There were a number of black flags hoisted in the houses in these villages and I met quite a few people and local leaders who strongly opposed the project. The land acquisition process had been initiated in the villages by the State government and land acquisition notices were sent to five villages Madban, Varilvada, Nivel, Karel and Mithgawane. The villagers, however, protested against the process of land acquisition and refused to accept the cheques given as compensation. People’s protests have taken the form of Morcha and Dharna, in the villages, the district head quarters as well as in the state capital, Mumbai. Peoples’ opposition was taking the form of a social movement.

During the course of data collection, we understood that there was a lack of transparency and that the government officers were not open to sharing information. Though it was such an important project, not much information was available either on websites or in print. In the given time period, it was not possible to file RTIs to collect information. Hence it was decided to focus on people’s perceptions and making it a people’s report.

This report is thus an outcome of the effort to document people’s perspectives about the impact of the ‘Jaitapur Madban Nuclear Power Project’. It must be noted that this report is based on discussions with villagers in the vicinity and provides an informative situational analysis of the social impact of the project through people’s perspective.

Our sincere thanks

To Bharatiya Paryavaran Chalval and Janahit Samiti, Madban who helped

conceptualize this study.

To the respondents, the people of Ratnagiri and Jaitapur, who shared their stories and

gave us information

To the members of the Gram Panchayats, the local leaders and activists of Rantnagiri,

who aided the completion of this study.

To various activists and scholars from Mumbai --Advocate Girish Raut, Mr. Adwait

Pednekar, Mr. Satyajeet Chavan, Mr. Madu Mohite and many more for their insights on

environmental issues and social justice

To Mr. Shakti Sagar Dhole and Mr. Deepak Yadav, students of Jamsetji Tata Centre for

Disaster Management (JTCDM) for data collection

To Mr Gavankar and his family for facilitating our stay and work in Madban

To Ms. Niti Mishra and Ms Neha Kohli’s for editing and completing this report

To all the staff and faculty members of JTCDM and TISS for their support.

-Mahesh KambleAssistant Professor and officiating Chair, Jamsetji Tata Centre for Disaster ManagementTata Institute of Social Sciences, Deonar, Mumbai 88kamblemahesh@tiss.eduAugust 15, 2010

Location Map(Courtesy: mapsofindia.com)

The proposed Project site for Jaitapur Madban Nuclear

Power Plant

CHAPTER 1

POWER OR DISEMPOWER?

Introducing the Proposed Power Project and the People

1.1 Nuclear Power

The use of nuclear power, its pros and cons have been the subject of considerable debate.

Nuclear power is considered to provide clean fuel.  Unlike coal based thermal power, it does not

emit airborne wastes, polluting particulates such as oxides of sulphur and nitrogen and green

house gases during power generation.  Nuclear power plants do however generate solid waste in

the form of spent fuel and some process chemicals, steam and heated cooling water.  But the

solid waste produced by it is relatively small in mass and volume as compared to the electricity

produced. A nuclear power plant also requires relatively less amount of fuel as compared to a

coal-fired power plant which requires millions of tons of fuel each year (http://www.eia.doe.gov,

13/04/2010; Ramey J, 1973).

However, there is a lobby of scientists and activists who reject this claim, believing that under

the garb of confidentiality, many truths are hidden. They believe that information about nuclear

energy, its impact and costing is not transparent. They are concerned about the long term impacts

of radiation on health and on possible damage due to minor leakages or massive accidents. These

beliefs are strengthened by the experiences of Hiroshima- Nagasaki, Chernobyl, Three Mile

Island, Jadugoda and Pokhran. Environmentalists are also concerned about the disposal of

radioactive waste that is generated by the mining, processing and use of nuclear fuel. To

summarise, the aspects of nuclear power plants which are of prime concern are: the thermal

effects resulting from the discharge of the power plant’s cooling water into a nearby lake, river

or estuary; the controlled release of low level radioactive effluents; the potential release of

radioactivity as a result of a catastrophic reactor accident; and the necessary storage of high level

radioactive wastes. Currently, there are no universally acceptable methods for the storage and

disposal of these wastes and there is concern that buried wastes might leak into groundwater and

eventually make it into surface waters or into drinking water supplies. (http://www.niehs.nih.gov,

13/04/2010; Ramey J, 1973) Thus use of Nuclear Power has been controversial for a long time.

1.2 Nuclear Power in India

The website of the Nuclear Power Company of India chalks out the trajectory of the nuclear

energy sector in India. The Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) was established in

1956 under the administrative control of the Department of Atomic Energy with the objective to

design, construct, operate and maintain nuclear powers stations for the generation of electricity.

The first nuclear power station, Tarapur Atomic Power Station (Maharashtra) was established in

1969. This was followed by a series of nuclear power plants being established in other parts of

the country - Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Karnataka, etc. NPCIL currently operates many

nuclear reactors in the country with a total power generation capacity of 4,120 MW. The

company is planning to set up an additional 2,660 MW capacity through five more reactors. The

Government of India has approved nuclear power plants in various other locations, including

Jaitapur, Ratnagiri in state of Maharashtra. (http://www.npcil.nic.in/, http://www.dae.gov.in/

accessed on 1/4/2010).

1.3 Jaitapur Madban Nuclear Power Plant

A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between NPCIL and the Government of Maharashtra

was signed on 25th September 2006 for the Jaitapur Nuclear Power Plant. India and France

signed a bilateral agreement in September 2009, according to which the two countries have

agreed to work together for ‘peaceful use of nuclear energy’. The NPCIL signed a Memorandum

of Understanding (MoU) with a French company, AREVA for the purpose of setting up a

nuclear plant at Jaitapur. The project proposes to set up six reactors of 1650 MW each for the

plant. According to the terms of agreement, AREVA will supply two European pressurized

reactors which will use uranium oxide or a mixture of uranium and plutonium as fuel. The MoU

provides for the supply of two nuclear reactors, and discusses the setting up of six at a later date.

(http://www.npcil.nic.in/, accessed on 5/4/2010). The total cost of this project was estimated at

over Rs. 50,000 crores. The Government of Maharashtra did a survey for the project and

proposed the site of Jaitapur and surrounding villages. Two villages, Madban and Varilpada were

identified for the project site, and three others, Karel, Niveli and Mithgawane were identified for

township purposes under the project.

Approximately 968 hectares of land will be acquired in five villages for constructing the nuclear

power plant and the township. The rehabilitation for the Project Affected Persons (PAP) will be

done according to the Maharashtra Project Affected People Rehabilitation Act 1999. The

Divisional Commission, Kokan District would issue a notification under the Act to initiate the

proceedings. A baseline survey of the families affected by the land acquisition process has been

proposed to prepare a database of the affected families in the villages. The survey was to be

conducted under the supervision of the District Collector, as per the MoU between the

Government of Maharashtra and NPCIL. The website of NPCIL has sparse information about the

progress of the project. It mentions that pre-project activities for which the Government has

given an in-principle clearance have been initiated at the Jaitapur site and these include activities

related to land acquisition (http://www.npcil.nic.in/, http://www.dae.gov.in/ accessed on

1/4/2010).

1.4 Social Impact Assessment (SIA)

Social Impact Assessment (SIA) is a part of the formal planning and approval process of

developmental projects before they are implemented. It is a process of analyzing, monitoring and

managing the social consequences of policies, programmes and projects

(http://www.proventionconsortium.org accessed on 1/04/2010).

"…. (SIA) includes the processes of analysing, monitoring and managing the intended and

unintended social consequences, both positive and negative, of planned interventions (policies,

programs, plans, projects) and any social change processes invoked by those interventions. Its

primary purpose is to bring about a more sustainable and equitable biophysical and human

environment" (International Association for Impact Assessment).it can  be defined  in  terms  of

efforts  to assess  or  estimate,  in  advance,  the  social consequences  that  are  likely to  follow

specific  policy  actions  (including programs  and  the  adoption of  new  policies),  and  specific

government actions.

 It  is  a  process  that provides  a  framework  for  prioritizing, gathering, analyzing, and

incorporating social  information  and participation  into  the  design  and delivery  of

developmental interventions. It ensures that development interventions take  into  account  key

relevant social  issues and incorporate  a  participation  strategy  for  involving a  wide  range  of

stakeholders. SIA theory accepts that social, economic and biophysical impacts are

interconnected and that change in any one of these domains will lead to changes in the others. It

is for this reason that SIA also has clear linkages to Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and

other forms of impact assessment. It originated as a socio-economic component of EIA, and has

since expanded and developed considerably. Typical applications of SIA include considering the

likely impact of new industrial activities, construction, land use or resource management

practices and so on. SIA often forms part of a broader social analysis or assessment, and can play

an important role in understanding the interactions between projects and environmental hazards

that are crucial in ensuring the sustainability of development gains.

SIA uses a collection of tools and approaches. A wide range of social science methods can be

used in carrying out SIA and a number of data-gathering techniques are employed, depending on

the purpose and context. Most of the evidence is collected via primary data from the affected

area by means of survey research, informant interviews, oral histories and participatory group

exercises. Secondary data also provides valuable information. This includes census data,

geographical data, maps, national and local government statistics, documentation from non-

governmental organizations (NGOs) and community-based organizations, local histories,

newspaper reports and where available, previous social science research

(http://www.proventionconsortium.org/themes/default/pdfs/tools_for_mainstreaming_GN11.pdf

accessed on 1/04/2010).

The proposed Jaitapur nuclear power project spreads over 968 ha of land and its impact will not

be limited to the project site alone but will extend to nearby areas. The project will impact not

only the physical environment but make a long term impact over peoples’ lives, their livelihoods,

market and business, social networks, services, health, socio-cultural practices associated with

the environment and so on. People living in the vicinity have their own understanding of the

impact of the project. One can fairly assume that they are the best judges of assessing the impact

of the project on them and their surroundings. People are not unaware about nuclear energy as it

forms a part of school syllabus. Recently, the media including Marathi newspapers and

magazines have been writing a lot about nuclear energy and its possible impact, and they have

mentioned Chernobyl and Three Miles Islands. People were also aware of environmental and

social movements in India. People have thus formed their perceptions about nuclear power and

its possible impact on the region. These perceptions have a direct impact on their reaction to such

a project. Hence, it is necessary to study their perceptions. Their anxieties, fears and prejudices

are reflected through such an assessment. Due importance should be accorded to people’s

perceptions as they will bear the direct impact- positive or negative- of the project. Moreover, in

a democracy it is the right of the people to participate in the decisions that affect their lives. They

have a right to be heard.

The present report is designed as a ‘peoples’ report’. It has tried to document the impact of the

project on the social life of the people living in the area of impact as the people themselves

perceive it. The emphasis is more on people’s perceptions than on reports by government

entities, institutions and scientists. This calls for a participatory methodology for data collection.

It is very difficult to enumerate and quantify the impact on social and cultural life; hence, the

adoption of qualitative methodology for data collection for this research.

CHAPTER 2

METHODOLOGY

2.1 Introduction

This chapter provides details of the tools and methods used to carry out the study. It also

describes the study area, data collection tools and respondents.

2.2 Objective of the Study

The objectives of this study are

1. To assess the existing social situation and people’s perceptions about the possible impact

of the project on them.

2. To examine the impact of the project on health, livelihood, social networks, etc. of the

people living in the vicinity through the lens of the people

3. To understand and document peoples’ feedback and reactions to the proposed project.

2.3 Study Area

Areas lying in the vicinity of Jaitapur and the Ratnagiri district in Maharashtra have been

covered by the study. These villages are about 60-65 km from Ratnagiri District headquarters.

The following seven villages were covered in particular

1. Madban

2. Mithgavane

3. Niveli

4. Naate

5. Sakhri Naate

6. Chavanwadi and

7. Karel

All these villages are in Ratnagiri district and have many features in common. Ratnagiri is a port

city that lies along the coast of the Arabian Sea. The district is a part of the Konkan region,

which is one of the most beautiful areas on this coast. The State government has declared it a

Horticultural District and special schemes for the development of horticulture have been

implemented. The total population of the district is 15.39 lakhs, majority of whom (91%) reside

in rural areas. The literacy rate in the district is 62.7, according to the 1991 census of India.

Average rainfall in the region is 3225mm due to the South west monsoon winds in the month of

July and August. The Sahyadri Mountains border Ratnagiri on its east. The Ratnagiri district

covers an area of 8249 sq km. The major component of the land is rock and soil made up of

igneous rocks. The soil type is lateritic; which is red in colour and rich in minerals. On an

average, the pH of the soil is slightly acidic.

(http://mdmu.maharashtra.gov.in/pages/dmp/ratnagiriShow.php accessed on, 9/04/2010).

Agriculture is the major source of livelihood and although more than 71% of the land is fit for

cultivation, less than half of it is actually cultivated. Most of the usable land is rendered useless

because of the hilly terrain and influx of salt water due to the numerous creeks. Heavy rainfall

results in high erosion of the land in the coastal region, but fertile alluvial valleys in the region

produce abundant rice, coconuts, cashew nuts, and fruits, including the famous Alphonso

mangoes. Rice is cultivated along the valley floors, while cereals are grown on the cultivable

land on hill tops. Since agriculture alone cannot be the sole source of livelihood, at least one able

person from each household has migrated to Mumbai either for a job or for business. Hence for

many years, Ratnagiri district was said to have a ‘Money Order Economy’.  Mango Plantation is

a major land use category and the Hapus variety in particular is a major export commodity.

Harvesting of the fruit during the summer time involves a large number of casual labourers

(http://mdmu.maharashtra.gov.in/pages/dmp/ratnagiriShow.php accessed on, 9/04/2010). Fishing

is also an important livelihood activity.

Most of the houses are made of bricks out of the local igneous rock. To face the huge rainfall the

district receives, the roofs are sloped. Houses generally are singular structures separate from each

other. The villages are divided into numerous wadis, that is, clusters of houses, based on

geographical locations. Koli, Bhandari and Kunabi are the most commonly found castes. Holi,

Ganesh festival and festival of the Mother Goddess are commonly celebrated.

2.4 Data Collection

Examining social equity and distribution of impacts across different groups is an integral part of

the SIA process. Assessment of social impact includes investigation of social characteristics like

size and location of populations, ecological setting, aspects of the environment seen as resources

or problems, patterns of resource use, livelihoods and income, infrastructure, education, public

health, and cultural sites. As the SIA was done with the purpose of assessing people’s

perceptions and reactions, participation and involvement of communities was of paramount

importance. The advantage of using participatory methods is seen in terms of efficiency,

effectiveness, reliance and coverage. There is general consensus on the usefulness of

participatory methodology in development projects. Willing participation of the people in the

development process is a pre-requisite for attaining the objectives of various development

programs. Public participation is not only important for organizations in the public, private and

non profit sectors, but it also has the potential to change how individuals and communities live

and interact. Taking part in local decision-making or discussing future policy can have a

transformative effect on how people think about themselves and their role in society (ProVention

Consortium 1/04/2010; Kumar, 2002). Moreover, people have a right to participate in making

decisions which impact their lives. Hence the study was conducted by using participatory

methods of data collection.

2.5 Tools for Primary Data Collection

The following tools were used for primary data collection:

(i) Transect walk - A transect walk presents a cross sectional view of the different agro-

ecological zones. It is a method used to explore the spatial dimensions of people’s realities.

It has been popularly used with respect to natural resource management, but can also be

used for depiction of social aspects such as caste and ethnic determinants of settlement

access, control of resources, and gender related dimensions. (Kumar, 2002). The transect

walk was taken in all the seven identified villages along with identified key informants

from each village. These walks were very useful to understand the natural and built

environment of the area and the possible impact this project would have on these villages.

(ii)Participant Observation- One of the most common methods for qualitative data collection

is the use of participant observation. Participant Observation is a field technique used by

anthropologists and sociologists to collect qualitative data and to develop an indepth

understanding of people’s motivations and attitudes. It is based on looking, listening,

asking questions and making detailed field notes. Observation and analysis are

supplemented by desk reviews of secondary sources, and hypotheses about local realities

are checked with key informants. It requires that the researcher be a participant in the

culture and setting of the field of study (UNEP, ‘Social Impact Assessment’;

http://pweb.sophia.ac.jp; www.socialresearchmethods.net). This method was considered an

appropriate tool to assess people’s perceptions and reactions for this study.

(iii) Semi structured interview- Semi-structured interviews are a low-cost, rapid method

for gathering information from individuals or small groups. Interviews are partially

structured by a written guide to ensure that they are focused on the issue at hand, but stay

conversational enough to allow participants to introduce and discuss aspects that they

consider relevant. The guides allow researchers to generate their own questions to develop

interesting areas of inquiry during the interviews. (UNEP, ‘Social Impact Assessment’;

http://pweb.sophia.ac.jp; http://www.usaid.gov/; www.socialresearchmethods.net). For this

study, the semi structured interview was based on the themes identified during the pilot

visit. Various respondents were questioned to understand their perceptions of the project.

The number of respondents interviewed is given in Table 2.1.

(iv) Focus Group Discussions- A focus group discussion is an inexpensive and a rapid

appraisal technique that can provide a wealth of qualitative information on the performance

of development activities, services, and products. A typical focus group lasts about two

hours and covers a range of topics decided beforehand. (UNEP. ‘Social Impact

Assessment’; www.usability.gov/methods; www.socialresearchmethods.net;

www.usaid.gov) A discussion can take place among a group of seven to eleven people

covering their experiences, feelings, and preferences about the project. These dimensions

are also useful to understand the possible reactions this project would generate.

(v) Key Informant Interviews- Key informant interviews are qualitative in-depth interviews

with people who have a say on what is going on in the community. The purpose of key

informant interviews is to collect information from a wide range of people including

community leaders, professionals, representatives of marginalized groups etc, who have

first hand knowledge about the community. These community experts, with their

knowledge and understanding, can provide insights on the nature of problems and

recommend solutions (http://www.healthpolicy.ucla.edu, 13/04/2010,

http://www.socialresearchmethods.net). Thus community leaders, panchayat leaders, heads

of community based organizations and activist groups in the villages were respondents for

the key informant interviews. These interviews provided information about the current

situation and gave a perspective on issues that the villages were facing with regard to the

initiation of the project.

2.6 Secondary Data Sources

Documents and reports about the project and the area to be studied have been used as secondary

sources of information. The internet was sourced for data and information was garnered from

webpages. Statistical information was available on the Maharashtra government websites.

Details about the project were gleaned from the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd

(NPCIL) and Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) websites. RTIs filed by activist villagers,

land acquisition notices and documents of MoU were used.

The following documents were used:

Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between NPCIL and Government of

Maharashtra, Department of R&R, Mumbai.

RTIs filled by villagers, activists on details of the project, rehabilitation details, land

required for the project, etc to officials in Ratnagiri.

Answer by YASHADA to RTI filled by village activists on the status of SIA/baseline

survey to be conducted by the academy.

Notices sent by the district land acquisition officer to the Panchayat, households in

the villages.

Compensation documents regarding acceptance/rejection of the amount offered by

the government.

It may be mentioned here that the project related government data made available to the public is

far from sufficient. Considering the importance of the project, it is essential that the government

maintain an optimum level of transparency. However, the data about the project has been neither

published in the website nor given on personal visit to the collector’s office leading to lack of

reliable and valid information on the project and its impact.

2.7 The Pilot Visit

A pilot visit entails exploring the study area for developing an understanding of the topography

and society of the area. A pilot visit was carried out in all the seven villages. Some themes were

identified from general discussions with the people in the villages. It was found that it was

important to gather people’s perceptions on these themes. The themes identified were

1. Livelihoods

2. Land

3. Agriculture

4. Horticulture

5. Education

6. Electricity

7. Transportation

8. Market

9. Natural Resources

10. Health

2.8 Primary Data Sources

Primary data was collected in February 2010. An interview guide was constructed, which

consisted of questions on the various themes identified in the pilot visit. The interview guide

focused on understanding people’s perceptions about the nuclear power plant and its impact.

Various groups were targeted for discussion through participatory rural appraisal techniques,

semi structured interviews and focus group discussions. They include

Panchayat members

Local leaders

Local government officers

District/ Tehsil officers

NGOs

Representatives of groups and Community based organisations (youth group, self help

group, Mumbai mandals etc.)

Representatives of all castes and religions

Women and widows

People with disabilities

Senior citizens and Children

Fisherfolk and artisans

Landless labourers and migrants

Small shop keepers

Cottage industries

One hundred and twenty three respondents from seven different villages were interviewed. The

number of respondents village-wise is given below:

S. No.

Name of Village

Total no. of Respondents

1 Madban 282 Mithgavane 193 Niveli 104 Naate 265 Sakahri Naate 156 Chavanwadi 167 Karel 9

123

2.9 Data Analysis

The data collected were transcribed and analyzed. Different categories were developed to

document people’s responses and secondary data was used to corroborate or contradict people’s

responses. The draft of the report was shared with key informants and with Bharatiya

Paryavaran Chalval to ensure comprehensiveness. The unavailability of secondary information

was an important facet in the design of the study (conducted for any development project and

area). Comprehensive secondary data was required, which was lacking in this case.

There was a lack of sources to crosscheck and confirm the primary data collected from the field.

Hence, there is a possibility of a marginal scope of error in analysis and interpretation.

CHAPTER 3

IMPACTS AND PERCEPTIONS

Apprehension, Anxiety, Angst and More…..

This chapter explores the perceptions of respondents on the impact of the Jaitapur Madban

Nuclear Power Plant on the resources and services of the study area. The resources that people

were most concerned about were land, agriculture, horticulture, fishing, transportation, and

electricity. This chapter also covers the impact on health, livelihoods and education.

3.1 Land

People believe that the nuclear power plant will affect the temperature of the rocks of the region.

This would happen as fallout of procedures that will be involved in the processing of raw

material in underground tanks. Rocks in the region are also of livelihood significance to the

villagers as they are used in brick making and the construction industry. Even though the

company plans to supplement the tank with a thermal insulator, people are afraid that there will

be harm caused to the the rock properties which will affect the agricultural and horticultural

activity in the region.

According to the government, the region lies in seismic zone three which implies that it would

experience moderate severity of earthquake. All the seven villages have frequently experienced

minor seismic activity1. One of the respondents had filled an RTI asking information about the

frequency and severity of these seismic activities over the years. But he had not received a

response to any of his queries. A respondent says:

“Actually this area comes under seismic zone four but because of our politicians, this

land has been now measured in seismic zone three. But even then, as per the rule,

establishment of nuclear power plants is only allowed in seismic zones one and two.”

People are afraid and insecure about the co-existence of seismic activities and nuclear power

plants, fearing that it may lead to a major catastrophe. The state/NPCIL/AREVA has not talked

about any seismic safety provisions for the reactor structure. According to an activist of the

1 It may be noted that the National Policy on Disaster Management has shown this area as Zone IV for seismicity, i.e. High Damage Risk Zone. (ndmindia.nic.in/NPDM-101209.pdf)

region, the Vengurlekar Committee report in 1972 sets the criteria for establishing nuclear

reactors in seismic regions, going by which nuclear reactors can only be set in areas within

seismic zones one and two.

A resident of this area asked,

“This land is very much prone to earthquakes and in such conditions how can the

government think about establishing a nuclear power plant? If any accident were to

occur, what would be its impact? We are aware that people in Japan are still

experiencing the impact of the nuclear bomb. If any such incident happens here, the effect

will be similar and that includes body deformities and loss of land fertility.”

An important fact observed was that different sources quoted different quantum of the land that

would be acquired for the project. The MoU between NPCIL and the Maharashtra Government

noted that the required land would be 990 hectares. Another source about details of proposed

land to be acquired sited that approximately 978 hectares of land would be needed. Most

newspaper articles quote 938 hectares, while website sources quote 700 hectares, 968 hectares or

938 hectares. Such confusing figures from different sources only add to the people’s dilemma

about land acquisition and results in a feeling that there is lack of transparency. The atmosphere

is rife with insecurity and a feeling of being cheated.

Farmers have put in huge investment in land development, which entails preparing the land for

cultivation and maintaining it in subsequent years. It includes a lot of labour and capital intensive

activities like levelling, building, water management, soil preservation and so on, which means

that the farmers will have to incur a lot of expenditure. In the first year, one acre of mango

orchard requires an investment of more than 50,000 rupees. Similarly an acre of cashew nut

orchard requires above 1,50,000 rupees. In subsequent years, for the maintenance of an acre,

about 25,000 rupees are required. People believe that the compensation offered will not consider

this additional expenditure which they have incurred on land development and maintenance. It is

an important reason for people’s refusal to accept the compensation package that the government

would offer. People have vehemently raised objections to the land acquisition notices sent to the

villages. In many areas black flags have been hoisted in protest.

Landownership in the area is determined through kulkayada (Tenancy Act). According to this

tenancy act, the tiller is the owner of the land. But the land in these households still continues

under the names of the grandfathers and forefathers (in the 7/12 land document). People attach

emotional value to the land and opt against changing the names in the document. Hence,

officially the tiller’s name may not be there on the document. In some cases, there are no

documents at all. All this goes against the government’s method of determining compensation

and would therefore affect the farmers adversely. Farmers felt a sense of deprivation and anger

as the this was their means of livelihood for generations, and what had been passed on to them

by their forefathers would be lost due to this project.

In Niveli, some people were made to open accounts with the Bank of India. This was done by

taking their signatures on the account opening forms forcibly; this resulted in violence in some

cases. The people of the villages firmly believed that this was done so that the government could

transfer the compensatory amount to these accounts, and then claim that the villagers had

received the amount willingly.

3.2 Agriculture

The villages in the area under study cultivate rice (Oriza sativa) in the rainy season. The land

used for rice cultivation fetches about 40-43kg/gunta, that is approximately 15-20 quintals of rice

per acre. Other crops grown in the region are ragi and spices. A majority of the population is

involved in rice cultivation and quite a few people are involved in horticulture.

According to government records the vast area of land to be acquired for the plant is non

productive. As per the records approximately 633 hectares of land belongs to the potkharab

kshetra (useless/barren) land category, while 268 hectares is under the warkas kshetra (less

usable category), which has been slated for the project. A newspaper article recorded that the

NPCIL has slated 938 hectares of land in five villages for acquisition of which 626.527 hectares

is barren land with no cultivation activity. But people do not agree with this categorisation. This

land that has been described as barren without cultivation activity is actually used by the

villagers for various agricultural purposes. For instance, portions of this land are used as pasture

for grazing animals. Pasture lands are part of the agri-pastural system. There are huge parts of

land which are called ‘baul’ where an excellent quality of rice is cultivated. This is rain fed

cropping in the region. However, the documents have shown these lands as ‘barren’. In addition,

some part of this land also includes cashew and mango orchards. According to a respondent

from Karel village whichever land is going to be acquired for the nuclear power project is

productive as it is used for grazing cattle, as well as for making shade for agricultural work.

People here conveyed a sense of anguish as the land which is used for agriculture and grazing is

shown as barren and useless. They feel that the government is not able to understand the value

of the land that the farmer holds. Angst is most felt in the voice of a respondent from who said,

“If a farmer loses his land, how will he survive? Farming and livestock rearing are

the only sources of income for a farmer.”

3.3 Horticulture

The horticultural importance of the Konkan region is attributed to the famous Hapus or Alphonso

mango which is a special product of the area. Pineapple, cashew nut, coconut, kokum, betel nut

and spices are grown in this region. The fruits from the village orchards are sold to the brokers

by local transporters who export the produce to different markets around the world. The quality

of the fruit and the success of the supply chain have made the Alphonso from Konkan very

popular. Referring to the nuclear power project, a respondent said,

“If a destructive project, such as this, is going to come into the area, then how

will the world taste the Alphonso of Kokan? The world will lose touch with the

Alphonso; and the same will happen with other horticultural products like

cashew.”

Recent government records reflect that the number of trees is insignificant, which is not a

reflection of reality. In the past, Ratnagiri has been declared as a ‘Horticultural district’ by the

Government of Maharashtra. Hence huge plantation areas are seen in the region. As mentioned

earlier, people have spent lakhs of rupees to make the land cultivable and have raised mango and

cashew plantations. Many of them have sought financial help in the form of government schemes

and bank loans. However, these facts have been ignored and the areas have been declared

“barren land”, and records of plantations have been fudged. People claim that the government

has not recorded all the trees on the land to be acquired2.

2 When we requested for such records and data from the agricultural department at the block office, neither data was given nor was a responsible officer available for verification.

Farmers do not own large areas of land for orchard cultivation. The practice of orchard

cultivation or plantation is done in small areas which are easy to manage, such as kitchen

gardens and planting trees near home. The maintenance of these trees is expensive, which is why

plantations are not undertaken on a very large scale. Few partnership patterns of sharing land to

manage the orchards have also existed in the past. A respondent passionately said that a farmer

nurtures each plant as if it were his child and cannot bear to see these trees suffer and die. These

trees are not only a source of income for the farmers but also support the livelihood of the family

and serve as an asset for loan purposes in times of crisis.

The owners of horticultural plantations explained in detail the investment required for

harvesting. For an acre of mango plantation, the first year requires an investment of above Rs.

50,000, depending on the quality and terrain of land. Subsequently, each year there is an

expenditure of above Rs.25,000. This expenditure can continue for about eight to ten years after

which the plants start giving fruit for commercial production. Farmers of the village say that a

well grown mango tree can give an annual income of about Rs.10,000 – 15,000. The

compensation that the government is offering is Rs 9,386 /tree which is far less than what people

normally earn. This grossly inadequate amount that the government has offered makes people

more agitated.

Similar investments are also required for an acre of cashew nut cultivation. In the first year, a

farmer would invest above Rs.1,50,000 and later approximately Rs.25,000 each year for between

three to five years, after which the fruit is ready for commercial production. A cashew nut plant

would give between Rs.4,000 and Rs.5,000 annually after maturity whereas the compensation

offered by the government for this is Rs.1,989 per tree. Here again it is grossly inadequate. Thus

in cases of major horticultural products where people have invested lakhs of rupees towards land

development and are expecting the returns now, the government is grossly under-compensating

them for their loss of income3.

3 Information about compensation was taken from documents available with the farmers in the villages. In spite of persistent requests to learn more about these documents, the Collector’s office did not provide any information.

According to an Right to Information (RTI) application filed by a group of villagers about

compensation, the government had distributed compensation of Rs 1,37,07,000/- for loss of

mango production due to floods in 2007. Nearly 33,283 farmers in the Rajapur block which

includes the villages of Madban, Karel, Mithgavane, and Niveli, received compensation for loss

of mango production in the year 2009. Now, the same government is claiming that this land is

barren! Loss of crop cannot be equated with barrenness! Thus people have reason to believe that

the government reports are forged resulting in loss of investments and benefits to people. People

accuse the government of not only giving inadequate compensation, but also of manipulating

records and declaring land under orchards as barren.

3.4 Awareness about Nuclear Power

The inhabitants of the villages under study do have a strong fear about the harmful effects of

radiation. They are aware about Hiroshima, Chernobyl, Pokharan and Jadugoda where nuclear

radiation has harmed health and environment. They specifically mention body deformity,

cancer, infertility, genetic diseases, etc. as a consequence of exposure to radiation. They also

believe that radiation due to nuclear reactors could harm their crops and that the consumption of

contaminated food will have various long term health impacts. They are worried that their

market and demand for the local produce will decrease after the set up of the nuclear plant. These

factors have made the people apprehensive about the project. With regard to radiation a villager

said,

“We can see smoke but is it possible to see radiations emitted from nuclear power

plant. But that doesn’t make it a clean fuel, as the government claims. Even

though the immediate impact of radiation may not be visible, the long term impact

will affect the crops in the region. The production of the crops will gradually

decrease, which is already suffering becaue of the impact of climate change. Such

projects will also increase the temperature of our climate which will disrupt the

life cycle of crops. Ultimately, all this will be seen as loss in agricultural

production. Consumers or merchants will not prefer to buy produce of this area

because it will be known as the area with a nuclear power plant in its vicinity, and

being aware of the harmful effects of radiation, there will be no demand for the

crop. We read the newspaper, watch television and the news. That is why we know

what is going on around the world and we know how this project will harm our

crops. We are also aware that the next generation could suffer from body

deformities, infertility, and diseases like cancer.”

Activists of the region as well as from Mumbai have been protesting against the project and its

impact on the environment and social life of the people. They have used various campaigns,

posters, movies, documentaries, booklets, public discussions, and discussions with experts to

spread awareness about the harmful effects of nuclear energy that this project can generate. The

people are influenced by these campaigns, which have been a source of information about

various topics. Studies, reports, documentaries about nuclear accidents like the Chernobyl

disaster and Three Mile Island have been widely circulated in the villages. Hence, the people of

the region are aware of agitations in various parts of the world with regard to nuclear power

plants. They argue that when European countries have banned such projects, then why the

Government of India should initiate such projects. The respondents admit that though literacy

levels in the villages are not high, they do have access to information about the effects of nuclear

radiation. They believe that many of the European countries are not in favour of nuclear energy

and that there is also a lot of opposition to nuclear power in United States. A medical practitioner

from Mithgavane shared what Dr Homi Bhabha had to say, that nuclear power should be the last

option for human beings to generate energy.

The activists believe that huge quantities of hot water will be emitted from the nuclear power

plant, the temperature of which is 15 degrees celcius higher than that of normal sea water. They

refer to the National Institute of Oceanography report (1989-90), according to which the region

has a large population of diverse fishes which could be adversely impacted by hot water. They

also believe that the Kalpakkam nuclear reactor in Tamil Nadu has resulted in a decrease in the

fish population in the area and related livelihoods due to temperature rise. The capacity of

reactors and radioactive elements in Jaitapur Madban Nuclear Power Plant is much larger than

that of Kalpakkam. Hence, they are worried that it will have a huge impact over fish in this area.

The people are also afraid that if an accident or leakage were to occur, the impact would be

disastrous. It would affect not only the surrounding villages but also areas in the states of

Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, as the national highway is not too far from these villages.4.

4 Incidentally, during the period of this research, there were three consecutive reports about radiation at Kaiga, theft of in Uranium slabs from BARC and leakage in Delhi, which added to the fears and apprehensions of the respondents.

Many of the Gram Panchayat officials of the villages could not take a very clear position about

the response and approach towards the project. They recognize that most of the villagers are

against the project and hence on large village portals, they protest about the setting up of the

project. Some of them do recognise that the project will bring more jobs and financial security to

the villagers and seem to be in favour of the project on these grounds. However, they are in a

minority. Given the level of protest and agitation in the village, these people find it difficult to

express their views. The government or scientist has not approached any of these villages to

learn about people’s opinions and their concerns about the project and to clarify their doubts.

This exclusion from decision making has added to their aggression.

3.5 Education

Harsh geographical conditions have limited the number of functional schools in this area. Almost

all villages have a pre-primary and primary school but there are very few secondary schools.

Children have to travel two km to four km to other villages for secondary schools. To add to this

inconvenience, there is lack of availability of transport. People believe that the project may bring

more schools, but their children may not be the beneficiaries as they may cater to the needs of

the staff working in the nuclear power plant. The improvement in education facilities will only

be for people hired by the company to work in the plant and not for the local population. This

view was expressed by many respondents from Niveli and Karel. A medical practitioner from a

village however felt different and said,

“Definitely there will be an increase in the educational level of the community

because the youth would see sense in working for the plant… not only would it be

nearby but it would also fetch income. For this the youth will seek education to

hone skills that will be required for the plant.”

3.6 Electricity

Generally, this area has about two to four hours of power cut at a fixed time each day with rare

cases of unexpected power cuts. The respondents are of the opinion that comparatively, there is

less load shedding in Ratnagiri than in other rural areas. However, the voltage is very low,

because of which it is impossible to run even a pump set in these areas. Hence setting up of small

scale industries is not possible. People believe that the electricity is diverted and used in urban

and industrial areas which deprive them of much needed electricity supply.

Logically speaking, since this project is expected to generate thousands of mega watts of power,

the villages should benefit. The researchers came across a few villagers who believe that it will

help in creating new opportunities for business and employment. However, majority of villagers

have serious doubts about this as they believe that the power generated from this nuclear power

project will be supplied directly to cities like Mumbai, Pune and Lavasa and that the villages will

be neglected. Many expressed that even if they were to benefit from the project, they would not

be willing to accept it on grounds of being unable to afford it. They maintain that since the

Nuclear Power Corporation India Limited (NPCIL) is investing heavily in this project, the

returns expected from this project would also be more. This strengthens their belief that the

electricity generated will be sent to the metropolitan cities and not to the villages. People show a

sense of satisfaction with the current status of electricity supply and that even if the company

decided to provide electricity to the people, it will be expensive and unaffordable since it will be

privatised. This quote makes the stand of the people loud and clear:

“We know that the electricity from the nuclear plant will be sent to cities and not

to us. They are here for the rich and not for the poor.”

The respondents refer to the Konkan railway project for which lands were taken from Rajapur.

Such development and benefits were also promised to farmers from Rajapur, but all the benefits

have gone to people living in Goa and Mumbai. They believe that the Konkan railway has not

really benefited the people in Rajapur, who had to continue depending on road transport.

People also refer to the adverse impacts of other government development projects, which add to

their agitation against the project. A coal based power plant, in an area nearby, in Ranpar,

Ratnagiri has adversely impacted the surrounding sea, birds and plants. The pollution and impact

of the plant has left the sea appear greenish in colour. The fisher folk in Ranpar complain about

the quality of the catch, while the farmer complains about his dissatisfaction with mango

cultivation.

Another example is that of Finolex in Ratnagiri, which has not brought much benefit for villages

and people in the surrounding area. Here again farmers had to give up land for the the power

plant. A common belief among the respondents is that the government should first try to make

the existing plants work more efficiently rather than initiate new plants.

3.7 Transportation

The modes of public transport available within the villages are state transport buses, auto-

rickshaws, besides private buses which ply to Mumbai and also water transport from Bhatye to

Jaitapur. The hilly terrain makes it difficult for transportation. Besides, the roads are too narrow

for a bus to pass through, and on the whole, the roads are not in good condition. Sea transport is

an important source for transportation in these villages which are surrounded by the sea, on two

sides and sometimes on three sides. There are a few boat owners who charge a small amount for

use. The availablity of this facility is however infrequent. The boats have no safety measures.

The government has proposed to build a marine highway to connect Jaitapur to other areas, work

for which is already in progress. There are a few villages who consider this as an opportunity to

develop trading and business. Majority of the people, however, perceive that improved

transportation will not benefit them, but that it will be useful only to industries and city dwellers.

The Konkan railway project, for instance, has only helped people to travel to Mumbai, and Goa

and not the local people of Rajapur as such. Because of the distance between township and

railway station, availability of transport facilities, availability of quota or seats etc. the people of

Rajapur district have not really benefited from the Konkan railway. They have to depend on

other means like state transport and private buses to reach their villages. People believe that a

similar scenario will also develop in these villages and that they will not gain from the project. In

Niveli people believe that the geographical structure of the village is such that nothing can

improve their transport condition.

3.8 Occupation and Livelihoods

The main occupation of the people in the areas under study is farming and fishing. Some of the

villagers are also engaged in business and services such as automobile mechanics, cashew-

processing units, photo-studios and saloons. Some villagers own auto rickshaws as a source of

livelihood. Farming includes cultivation of the Alphonso mango, cashew, coconut, betel nut,

pineapple and spices. Agro related activities include livestock rearing, poultry and food

processing. A large number of people work as contract laborers or casual laborers in farms.

Extraction of igneous rock for construction business and contract for it is another means of

livelihood. Alcohol making, which is generally done by women of a particular caste, is also a

prominent income generation activity in the region.

The main resources used by the villagers for livelihood are fish, cashews, igneous rock, coconut,

pineapple, betel nut, Alphonso mango and spices. There is lack of facilities for the import and

export of these commodities. There are cashew processing units in the villages but the cashew is

mainly sold to brokers or to markets close by, in the vicinity like those in Jaitapur, Rajapur or

Ratnagiri. Similarly coconut, pineapple and betel nut are mainly sold to brokers. For these too,

there are a few smaller markets in Jaitapur, Rajapur and a relatively large one in Ratnagiri. But

most of the commodities have a market and are sold within the villages. Few transporters are

present in the villages to export these commodities to cities like Mumbai, Pune, Kolhapur and

Goa. The igneous rock available in the region is used for construction. This is also sold to the

brokers or transporters by the farmers since there are no immediate buyers or markets for it. The

famous Alphonso Mango is also sold to the brokers.

The practice of selling all these commodities to brokers leaves farmers with an unfair share of

the prices. There are examples of farmers who have a strong network with brokers. These

farmers have a fixed broker for selling their product, and most of the farmers have dealt with the

same broker over a long duration of time, building a level of security. These brokers are known

to be of financial help to the farmers during a crisis. But even in this case, the farmer has to sell

at a fixed rate to the brokers and accept an unfair price from them. Ignorance about the actual

price of the product and lack of markets has resulted in the exploitation of these farmers.

NPCIL has promised employment for the people in the villages. But people believe that since

they are less educated, they will not qualify for the jobs in the plant. The villagers believe that

the nuclear power project would largely be run by trained personnel and scientists and thus, there

would be no space for villagers. They believe that the plant would require specialized people.

While there are ITI and polytechnic institutes in this region to provide the villages with the

required training, they believe that the jobs offered would be menial work such as that of

cleaning, driving and cooking. Previous experiences from projects in nearby areas such as the

Konkan Railway project and the Finolex project show that villagers were not employed in large

numbers. These projects have proved that the job market will not be available for the villages.

A resident had this to say,

“We know that many jobs will be created, but those will not be for us as we are

not educated or skilled. We will be asked to clean their campus or work as their

servants, which we do not want”.

The villagers believe that there will be huge in-migration to this region and their belief is

strengthened by the fact that areas near Chavanwadi have been identified as areas to build

residential colonies for employees of the proposed plant. Some respondents anticipate that with

the new project, the demand for commodities from the villages will increase. This could mean

that local business could flourish since new people working in the plant would need to purchase

goods, assets and services from the local market. With more people coming to stay in this area,

more vegetables, fruits, goods, labourers and services will be required, which will create more

employment and livelihood opportunities. Hence farmers, artisans and labourers could benefit

from this to an extent.

However this does not take away the insecurity that most of the villagers have that most of the

commodities might not be in production due to environmental harm, in terms of high

temperature and dumping of nuclear waste in the sea. The release of hot water from the plant

will lead to migration of fishes to deeper waters, away from the shore. The air pollution would

impact the vegetation and the production of cashew, coconut, pineapple, betel nut, spices and

Alphonso. They are afraid that their health will be affected due to radiation in the area and they

will not be able to make use of any of the ‘opportunities’ created by the project. Many of them

also believe that the ‘outsiders’ will bring their servicemen with them and will not really help the

local market to flourish. They quote a precedent: though the Kendriya Vidyalaya was built in the

vicinity with a lot of children staying there, it has not helped the local market to flourish. Most of

the services that the Kendriya Vidyalaya takes, is through their own network, and has not

benefitted local farmers, labourers and servicemen. Hence, majority of the people do not accept

that the nuclear plant will help create more livelihood and employment opportunities. They

shared sadly that other mega projects in the region like the Konkan railway and Finolex did not

help the markets to flourish in Rajapur and Ratnagiri; thee has never been a boom in the vicinity

of the project area. All these issues strengthen the villagers’ belief that the markets will not grow

to create more livelihood opportunities to the extent that it would benefit the villagers.

3.9 Fishing

For villages located near the coast, fishing becomes another important occupation. In most of the

villages like Madban and Chavanwadi, the catch is sold in villages and nearby areas. Sakhri

Naate is the only village that exports fish to far-off places. More than 90% percent of the people

in Sakhri Naate are engaged in fishing and it is the only source of livelihood for them. The

oysters in this area are quite famous in the fish eating community.

People fear that the project will have a negative impact on fishing. Many respondents believe

that the heated water emitted from the plant will impact the catch and the fishes will be forced to

migrate to deeper waters. The fisherfolk will be left with no option but to fish at distant places.

The current instruments and equipment that they have are not suitable for deep sea fishing. To

travel long distances, bigger boats and storage facilities will be required. Purchasing these would

entail a huge investment. They share that the quantity of fish has already reduced due to global

warming and the catch would be further affected if such projects are to set up here; thus, their

fishing business would be further disrupted.

Their experience of another power project, the Finolex power plant, has added to their doubts.

They shared that the sea water near the plant area changed colour from dark blue to green due to

pollution and this reduced the stock of fish in the area. They are afraid that they are moving

towards a similar scenario. It also has to be noted that associated occupations of making fishing

nets, making and maintaining boats, drying fish and selling fish etc. would be affected. A

common concern of the small fisherfolk is that unlike farmers and people engaged in other

occupations, they do not possess any documents which will establish their claim for

compensation. They fear that they will not be identified as being directly impacted by the project

and hence will not receive any compensation.

To quote a worried fisherman:

“Farmers have a 7/12 document, according to which they will get compensation.

But we don’t have a 7/12 document of the sea! How will the government

compensate us?”

Another threat that the fisherfolk feel is from the security arrangements that will come around

the plant area. They are worried that the project site will be a made into a restricted zone in

which they will not be allowed to fish. They would have to take longer routes for fishing. If, by

mistake, their boats venture in the security border, they would be punished harshly by the

security forces. The people in Sakhri Naate village were most agitated with the project and

expressed fear of physical harm by security personnel of the nuclear power company. The people

shared their fear that if they were to venture into restricted areas, they could be mistaken for

thieves or terrorists, and in that case they could even be killed by the guards of the company.

The worst fear of the fisher folks probably is related with fear of fish getting affected by

radiation. The fisher folk community is basically fish eating community and is worried that the

fish from this part of sea will also be affected by radiation and eating these fish might lead to

various health related concerns of deformities, cancer and so on. If people come to know that the

fish sold is from Jaitapur vicinity, they may not buy it due to fear of radiation, which will also

affect their market and livelihood.

3.10 Health

The impact of the nuclear power project on health is one of the prime concerns of the villagers.

Respondents of every age, from school students to the aged, were concerned about the health

impacts of the project. They felt that the villages lacked health facilities and if any major hazard

were to strike, it would be difficult for people to manage in the absence of the capacity to deal

with it. The villages of Madban, Niveli, Karel and Sakhri Naate do not have a public health

centre or a private health practitioner. The village of Mithgavane has a private health practitioner

upon whom people from nearby villages are also dependant. Jaitapur has a primary health

centre, which is a few kilometres away. The nearest hospital is at the Tehsil in Rajapur, which is

almost 40 kilometres away from the villages.

With regard to the impact on health, people perceive that a nuclear power plant is more

dangerous than coal power plants. People have gained information about the health impacts from

the activists’ campaigns and have seen films and posters about deformities in children at

Jaduguda and Pokhran. They have seen the video footage of those who got affected in the

Jaduguda. With a similar project coming their way, they find it difficult to believe that it is not

hazardous.

“If the project will have no harm, then why do regulations stipulate that houses

be built at a distance from the plant area?”

asked a respondent. They are concerned that even a single episode of radiation could cause

cancer. They believe that since they will be living in the immediate neighbourhood of the project

area, the probability of exposure to radiation will be high. The respondents are aware that nuclear

technology uses materials that emit radiation, and if these materials were to come into contact

with people through small releases during routine plant operation, accidents in nuclear power

plant, accidents in transporting radioactive materials, and escape of radioactive wastes even from

confined systems, could occur. Also, during operation, nuclear power plants routinely release

small quantities of radioactive gases that contaminate the surrounding water and environment.

People are afraid that they would become vulnerable to leukemia and genetic diseases. A doctor

from vicinity said,

“Development will surely take place in the village but people have to face cancer

for that. This is a development at the cost of the people’s lives. Sterility, deformity,

hair-fall and early aging will be a common phenomenon after the arrival of the

project.”

People are afraid of accidents that could occur at the nuclear reactor site. They agree that there

will be some defence mechanism implemented for their protection, but they are also aware that

there have been several incidents of accidents worldwide and that very high exposure can

damage and kill sufficient number of cells to destroy organs, thereby causing a breakdown in

vital body functions, leading to severe disability or death within a short period of time. A villager

said,

“They (Project Officials) may take security measures to protect people from the

radiation and its harmful impacts, but we do not trust them.”

The company has promised regular health check ups in the area. Instead of reducing fear, it has

added to the peoples’ perception of risk. People question the need for health check ups if the

government is sure that there will be no health impacts. Also, the company has assured them of

monthly checks of food, fish, meat, crops etc in the surrounding area. This has only added to

their fear. There must be a possibility of harmful impact, otherwise, why would the company

check all these on a regular basis, they ask. People believe that the government is not transparent

in providing information to the people and that there has been no initiative from the government

and the stakeholders to comfort the people and look into their grievances.

3.10 Environment and Biodiversity

This area lies in the Konkan belt with a long seashore, creeks and dense deciduous forests,

which makes the area rich in natural resources. The project is known to hamper not only access

to these resources,. but threaten the resources themselves. The area has more than 150 species of

birds, and more than 300 species of plants. Some rare species of birds and plants are also seen in

this area including those that are on the verge of extinction. People believe that such power

projects will change the ecological properties of the area. The respondents said that the

government has already established and proposes to establish many more energy producing

plants in places in this area, such as Dapoli (Bhopan) GMR energy coal plant, Guhagar

(Dhopave) National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) coal plant, Guhagar (Dabhol) Ratnagiri

Gas and Power Private Limited (RGPPL) gas plant, Ratnagiri (Jaigad) JSW Energy Limited

(JSWEL) coal plant and Goa Bombay Marine Highway. The list goes up to more than 12 power

plants. The Madban seashore has been designated the twelfth spot on the Konkan tourism map;

the region also borders the tourism district of Sindhudurg. Respondents feel that if Konkan’s

biodiversity must be appreciated by setting up government projects, it should be done via eco-

friendly tourism projects and not by setting up power plants.

People say that they are concerned about the impact of urbanization and pollution along the

Konkan coast. They feel saddened at the thought of depriving their children of the calm

untouched environment. A respondent adds that even tourists would stop visiting these areas if

pollution were to increase. A respondent mentioned,

“Use an indigenous technology for power production, why do we need to import

foreign costly technology which has already been banned in several countries

because it is not ecofriendly. Why does our governtment call this a green

project?”

The respondents believe that the government should establish ecofriendly projects for energy

generation, and instead of initiating a nuclear plant, the government should explore the idea of

electricity generation from tidal waves and wind mills.

A respondent suggested:

“This area has a long sea shore which should be explored for its tidal potential.

Also, the area has large plain lands where wind speeds are sufficient to tap

energy. Then why not explore tidal and wind energy for electricity generation.”

The law requires any mega power project to conduct an environmental and social impact

assessment of the project on the villages. An EIA was supposed to be conducted by National

Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) for two reactors in this area, but now the

plan has been extended to six projects. However no such assessment has been available for

public review5. Instead the government claims that the environmental clearance has already been

issued. This questions the accountability and transparency of the nuclear power project company

and the government. A baseline survey for the rehabilitation of villages was to be conducted, but

this was obstructed by people’s protests. The project should ideally be implemented only after

the basic impact studies have been done. People said that if the government gives clearance to

these projects based on incorrect evidence, then the government is deceiving people. They

maintain that people have the right to know the impact and consequence of a project that is being

implemented on the land that they own.

A villager said in a strident voice:

“Our Konkan has the blessing of god and that’s why our land is so rich. God has

given green fabric to this area. However, coal and nuclear power plants will strip

us of this fabric, leaving us naked. But we won’t let this happen.”

5 Later, we learnt from the newspaper that NEERI’s report was made available for viewing. But the people were still agitated as this huge report drafted in English was available at district headquarters and that too, only for viewing. There were no efforts to translate it or make it easily available and understandable. This added to people’s claims about lack of transparency and cheating resulting in further insecurity and agitation.

CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Perceptions as shared by the people about the project bring out some stark realities about

people’s reservations against it. It will be a big mistake to understand these reservations as tactics

for negotiation of higher compensation. These people are not asking only for compensation;

much larger level issues are being raised. The fundamental question one needs to address is that

in a democracy, do people have any say about the decisions which concern their lives and

whether or not the ‘welfare state’ is duty bound to address peoples’ concerns.

The people, majority of them, strongly believe that the proposed project is going to harm their

environment and lives. The huge part of land that is proposed to be acquired for the project is

used for agricultural purpose as well as for grazing. Horticulturists have spent lakhs of rupees to

make the land cultivable and the government supported them to do so. Now when the time has

come for them to reap their investments, they are afraid of loosing their land which is being

taken for the proposed plant, under the pretext that it is ‘barren land’. The major activity of rock

extraction is not even recognised as a livelihood activity that will be affected. Fishing is another

livelihood activity that will be affected. The fear that the fishes will migrate to deeper waters due

to release of hot water from the reactors is not unjustifiable. The fear of assault if they ‘illegally’

venture into reserved areas is not addressed to the satisfaction of the fisher folk. Apart from

direct fishing activities, other allied activities of repairing and maintaining boats and nets, drying

fish, selling etc will also be affected.

Apart from this direct impact on livelihood due to land acquisition, there is a strong need to

address the fear of radiation. People are afraid that radiation will harm agriculture and

horticulture in the area and that they will not be able to survive in the absence of these primary

occupations which are being followed for generations. People who have been living in harmony

with the environment and preserving their environment, (which is the major source of their

livelihood), will obviously feel threatened when their environment is at stake due to possibility

of radiation. Fear of radiation and of eating the agricultural products, fruits and fish affected by

radiation leads to fear of health hazards like cancer and other deformities, which were widely

seen in Jadugoda.

People are well aware of the ill effects of nuclear reactors and radiation. They have studied about

nuclear energy while schooling and have heard of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Jadugoda and Three

Miles Island, and have seen a few photographs and clips of these areas. All these have created a

horrific image of nuclearisation in their minds. They believe that they and their families are

being pushed into risky situations for addressing the so called needs of urban centres in India.

Are these real ‘needs’ and whether they have to be fulfilled by compromising environmental

sustainability is the question that has been raised. These questions are not only about their health,

environment and livelihood but on the model of development that this project subscribes to.

Another issue of concern is the lack of transparency in dissemination of information about the

project on the part of the government and the company. If the project is important and is

affecting lives of people, it is necessary that the government ensure full transparency in

implementation. Unfortunately, there is not much information available, either on their websites

or in print. The only access to information that people have is the use of RTI, which leads to a

feeling of antagonism. With this lack of transparency, people seem to be losing faith in the

government. There is lack of clarity on the exact amount of land that has been slated for

acquisition. People need to know which land will be used for construction of reactors, which

land for colonies, channels for water circulation, which land for disposal of nuclear waste and

storage of raw material… but this information is not shared with them. All this has led to a

feeling of anxiety amongst the people which can lead to misunderstandings and doubts leading to

more disturbances. There has been no meeting or interaction between the people, the company

and the government to address these issues. The people have been promised compensation and

rehabilitation, but even that is not clear. For instance, the fisherfolk do not know whether they

are considered Project Affected Persons (PAPs) and are given the benefits of compensation or

not. All these doubts and worries are fuelling peoples’ agitations against the project.

It is not only lack of information, but manipulation of information that disturbs people. People

claim that the land under horticulture is being shown as barren, in contrast to government

documents of the recent past. Notification of area from high severity earthquake zone to

moderate seismic severity zone seems to be a manipulation of records. This has made people

believe that the government is not only hiding facts but is manipulating facts to make sure that

the project comes through. Hence, they have lost faith in the government and the information

provided. This antagonism and hatred towards government is a cause of concern.

A mega project like this would also have the potential to bring a lot of developmental

opportunities in an underdeveloped area like Jaitapur Madban. It will improve transportation,

educational facilities, employment and livelihood opportunities and the local market. The local

people shall be able to look at the possible benefits of this project and use this as an opportunity

to improve their lot. There are only a few people who believe in this. They feel that this project

will bring a lot of opportunities for the locals. However, they are too small in number. Their

voices are not really heard in the villages. Thought they may support the project in individual

discussions, they are afraid to come out publicly for two reasons. One, that the majority is in

opposition of the project and this minority cannot really raise any voice against the majority.

Two, even this minority does not seem to be fully convinced that the company or government

will be able to give them the full share of development or that the project will not harm the

health and livelihood of people living in the area. With lack of trust in the government and

company, it is impossible for this minority to raise its voice.

The government had proposed a baseline survey for the Social impact Assessment (SIA) and

rehabilitation of PAPs, which had to be done by the Yaswantrao Chavan Academy of

Development Administration (YASHADA). The survey has not yet started due to protests by the

local villagers. Similarly, the final Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report from NEERI

is also not available to people. There is no information whether a Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA)

of the proposed project is done at all. In the absence of all this background work, the people

believe that the government is starting the project in too much of a hurry. If the government is

not sure about the impact of this project, how can it even think of kick starting the project, and

how is the rehabilitation package arrived at? These are questions that people are asking. The

government has to address the question, whether it can start a project in a welfare state without

proper SIA, EIA and CBA.

Peoples’ past experiences about other mega projects around the area is another important factor

that has led to protests against the project. They share their experiences of Konkan Railway

Project, Finolex, wind energy project in Deogad etc. They believe that these projects are not

running to their optimal capacity and have not given any major benefits to the villagers, but have

actually worked to the loss of livelihood. People believe that these projects have provided more

benefits to people living in metros and cities rather than to those in villages and this is exactly

what the proposed project is going to do to them.

Thus, people are vehemently opposing the proposed project. Not only villagers in the vicinity,

but their relatives in Mumbai are organizing opposition to the project and are supported by

various activists working on issues of environment, social justice and predatory growth led

models of development. The people have opposed YASHADA for SIA, they have opposed

NEERI for EIA, they have opposed the revenue officers for land surveys, they have opposed the

banks from disbursement of compensation amounts and so on. Their opposition has taken

different forms-- agitations, demonstrations and dharnas. Instead of listening to their concerns

and addressing them, the government has reacted by suppressing their agitation by use of police

force and unfair means like opening bank accounts by cheating. This has increased the insecurity

and rage amongst the people, making them lose trust in the state. Discussions with the people

clearly reflects their anguish against the state. Fortunately, their social behaviour and value base

is shaped by Leaders like Barrister Nath Pai and Madhu Dandavate. The influence of these

socialist leaders has stopped people from becoming violent and they are expressing their rage

through non violent ways of protest. However, the government must recognize these feelings and

act before the people resort to violent means of expressing their anger.

The expression of their anguish is not limited to protest against the proposed plant. They are

raising some fundamental questions about the model of development that the project promotes

and are suggesting alternatives.

People strongly believe that the power generated through these huge projects will on priority be

supplied to big cities to generate more employment leading to more migration. It will hardly

benefit the poor and marginalized staying in remote areas and vulnerable locations. This

inequitable distribution which we have witnessed over the last few years leads to more and more

discrimination and increasing vulnerability of the rural poor. Incidentally, quite a few people in

this region have worked in mills in Mumbai which offered jobs to lakhs of people and have shut

down now leaving them unemployed. They have witnessed how the land under mills is being

used for big malls which are basically for entertainment and recreation purposes rather than to

generate employment. Do metropolitan cities really ‘need’ so much of power, is the question that

needs to be addressed. Alternate models of development which focus more on micro level need

assessment and addressing those needs with optimum use of available resources is what needs

experimentation. The questions people are raising are the ones raised by Mahatma Gandhi when

he spoke about ‘Gram Swaraj’, and a model of development at the micro level. Does the state

really ‘need’ a lot of power or is it ‘greed’ towards more and more use of power. One looks at

shopping malls and entertainment centres in the city and notices so much of wastage of power.

Their question, whether this type of growth can really be called ‘development’ is justifiable and

the government which claims to be a ‘welfare state’ must address it.

People expect the government to explore other renewable and alternate sources of power like

tidal energy and wind mills as opposed to nuclear energy. If the need for power generation is so

critical, the government should explore more eco friendly and sustainable technology, which will

help generate power as well as employment at the micro level. The focus of development needs

to shift from mega projects to micro projects which are more environment friendly and geared

towards an equitable distribution of wealth. Thus, the whole issue of Jaitapur Madban Nuclear

Power Plant is not restricted to its impact on the people, but it raises fundamental questions about

the model of development that a welfare state should adopt.

Recommendations

First, the government has to recognize that these people are free citizens of a democratic country

with a right to opine and that the government has to listen to them. It will be a mistake to

understand this peoples’ struggle as a struggle for higher compensation. Higher compensation

and better packages are not going to pacify them. The issues are much more complex and

peoples’ concerns are raising some fundamental questions about so called ‘development’.

Meeting people and listening to them about their concerns, being empathetic towards their

feelings and insecurities is most important. Unfortunately no peoples’ representative has done

that so far. The government is unaware of the reasons why people are opposing the project and

that the people do not trust the state any more. The government has to regain their trust to

address this issue further which is possible only through this recognition of peoples’ feelings.

People’s concerns are related to possible impacts on their health, environment, livelihoods and so

on. The company must be made responsible to address these concerns to people’s satisfaction.

The state has an obligatory role towards protecting human rights of the citizens if the company is

likely to violate them. The government and peoples’ representatives must ensure that the project

is not forced on to the people without addressing their concerns. However, it is not an easy task

as peoples’ opposition is very strong and lack of trust is quite evident.

As far as compensation is concerned, instead of working on the conventional rehabilitation

package, the government may think of some innovative ways of compensation. Considering

people as ‘partners’ in the project, making them share holders, involving their representatives in

drafting the proposals is the need of the hour. However, it will be impossible to do it in the

current milieu of distrust and agitations. Secondly, all this needs a strong database which will be

available only after a detailed EIA, SIA and CBA. These exercises are critical steps in taking any

decision about implementation or even initiation of the proposed plant. The government must

make these as priority issues and ensure that these are done in a fully transparent and

participatory manner.

One important decision that the government needs to take in this context is whether the project

should be pushed despite the opposition of the local residents. In the given context of insecurity,

lack of trust and protest, we strongly recommend that the government shall not force the project

on the people. It would be a better option to pause the project till these primary exercises of EIA,

SIA and CBA are done. Doing these exercises in participatory and transparent manner is a

critical step in deciding future of the project. It will assure the people that the exercise is done

without prejudice and will also help the government to gain their trust. It will be an important

gesture to tell the people that the government respects their rights and is willing to listen to them.

However, it may be noted that the proposed project and the peoples’ opposition to it is not an

issue limited to Jaitapur Madban vicinity. The concerns are leading to some fundamental debates

on what model of development should be adhered to. Development which harms the

environment, which gives benefits to privileged groups at the cost of the health and livelihood of

the underprivileged, which increases the gap between the haves and have nots is not what the

fathers of the nation envisaged. There have to be larger level deliberations on how to balance

between ‘development’ and environment and biodiversity and how to make sure that the fruits of

development are equitably shared by the vulnerable and marginalized groups. The Jaitapur-

Madban Plant has raised these issues and created an opportunity to reflect on them. Larger level

debates between the government, planners, academicians and activists will help address these

issues to some extent and help move towards sustainable development.

Annexure

Location map and areas from where information for the research was collected

Villages visited Total no. of wadies Total wadies visitedMADBAN 4 All- khalchivadi, madhalivadi,varachivadi,

dhanivarevadiMITHGAVANE 13 Sadewadi, kasabevadi, sundarvadi,

lingayatvadi, kanchan vadi, kulamboushi,suvarnvadi.

NIVELI No adi Group-Gram Panchayat of six villages.NAATE No vadi group

Gram Panchayat of 3 villages

Naate

SAKAHRI NAATE No Sakahri naateCHAVANWADI 2 All KAREL No wadi

Group-Gram Panchayat of six villages

Karel

MADBAN

MITHGAVANE

NIVELI

NAATE

SAKHARI NAATE

CHAVANWADI

KAREL