Currently, India is basking in the sunshine of well-being with the economy clocking an 8+ per cent average mount for three consecutive years. The economy is categorised as one of the fastest growing economies in the world with projections placing it as the third largest in the world by mid-century. Reflecting the buoyancy, the country is witnessing an unusually strong investment scenario with a flurry of announcements of huge investment plans in SEZ, metallurgical industries, power, metro rail/light rail projects, airports, ports, etc.
But there is growing and sometimes powerful opposition to some projects and even policies towards sector-specific and location-specific projects. Thus, there is growing concern over likely tax revenue sacrifices and charges of prime real estate grabs in respect of SEZ projects which are supposed to crystallise trillions of rupees investment and provide employment to lakhs of people. There are also reports of strong local protests against area allocation and captive iron ore mines for Posco's steel project that was supposed to result in the country's single largest FDI. Opposition by ecological groups, the likes of Narmada Bachao Andolan, has slowed down several irrigation and port projects.
The government that has to face elections lacks firmness in tackling these issues, which result in absence of any unified consistent policy in project investment across sectors and regions. Added to the travails is the era of coalition government at the Centre and in several states. Thus, we find CPI(M)-ruled West Bengal government's policies turning right and at the same time their own leaders do not let go any opportunity of confronting the Central government when it tries to implement similar policies for the country.
In Orissa, in the Posco episode, local Congress leaders work at cross-purpose to their leaders at the Centre. No doubt, while the World Bank and other multilateral agencies voice their concern whenever developmental issues involving project-affected persons are involved, the government answers these issues partially, and sometimes downplays the raised concerns. Moreover, these issues become relevant only when the World Bank assistance is sought for the project.
While there is a perceptible view that all those who oppose projects investment are disrupters to economic progress, the opposition should not be brushed aside so brusquely. For, this might constitute a fine thin line between growth and development. Here, growth and distribution of benefits of growth are both relevant. In case of project investment, when it benefits the largest possible numbers taking care of those adversely affected initially, the growth translates into development.
Thus, if the Indian millionaires rise by 19 per cent, more than twice the national income growth, the economy has obviously made the rich more rich. This is while one is not equally sure of what has happened to the country's vast multitudes that include small farmers and unorganised sector workers in rural and urban areas.
The policy makers should not forget that similar euphoria had prevailed in 2003-04 when the BJP and its allies thought that with 'India Shining', they would easily win elections. But they were sadly mistaken, for the country was shining only for the rich, and the masses were by and large left out. The result? NDA was thrown out of power!

Readers may mail their comments to editor@projectsmonitor.com