Today, there is an increase in the number of rural populations forcibly evicted from their land to make way for large-scale development projects, resulting in a decline in the land available for agriculture. Adding to the existing rural distress is the land grabbing for projects that are harmful to the environment, unhealthy, and unsustainable for the local communities. Land dispossession is proclaimed legal and inevitable, even when it encroaches on many undocumented users’ right to livelihood. The study aims to uncover resistance against the dispossession of communities dependent on a unique ecological system, the Sompeta wetland, a coastal freshwater wetland used as a property of commons for generations in the Srikakulam district of Andhra Pradesh, India. It represents land grabbing for such projects subject to farmers’ resentment. The project-affected population claims that the project was not a development opportunity; instead, it can deepen rural distress led by the state to shift property rights from the communities to the private. The state is misrepresenting the data, criminalising peoples’ resistance by using force and violence, and going by a fallacious understanding of dispossession even though the project is a threat to the environment, health, peoples’ right to livelihood, and their cultural identities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Satpathy et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: