Equitable land-use policy? Indigenous peoples’ resistance to mining-induced deforestation

A 2019 study stated that mining districts in India have lost an average of 450 square kilometres more forest cover, impacting Indigenous people who live in these areas and make up 8.6 per cent of India's population. Although 90 per cent of India's mineral wealth comes from such areas, the people who here disproportionately bear the burden of this economic development with little benefit.

In response to global protests by Indigenous communities, the United Nations adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in 2007 which mentioned that states must obtain Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) from Indigenous communities before approving any natural resource projects on their lands. FPIC, a key human right, ensures self-determination and sustainable practices, with ‘Free’ meaning no coercion, ‘Prior’ requiring advance consent, and ‘Informed’ ensuring comprehensive information is provided before consent. However, as a voluntary guideline, its success depends on how effectively extractive industries and the state adhere to the standards.

The first case study in the paper looks at Sundergarh, an industrial district in Odisha.  In the study village, most people lacked formal land titles and held an average of only half an acre of farmland. Focus group discussions revealed that land acquisition by Rungta Mines company was seen as unilateral, with villagers pressured into agreements without proper consent or compensation. Resistance against mining grew around 2015, but government restrictions hindered protests. Rungta Mines constructed boundary walls, fragmenting the community further and exacerbating tensions. People from the village also reported health impacts from mining pollution and fears of losing their Indigenous identity due to land dispossession.

The second case study was based in Surguja district in Chhattisgarh, home to Indigenous communities such as the Pando, Munda, Kanwar and Korwa, who faced challenges from Bharat Aluminium Company's (BALCO) bauxite mining beginning in the 1990s. The paper notes that the operations resulted in deforestation, displacement, and health issues  for residents of the area who also say that the process began without adequate consent and compensation. Community protests began in 2016 over BALCO's flawed afforestation practices and discrimination against local youths. The community united to demand adherence to FPIC principles, leading to civil society support and a halt to mining by 2017.

The final and third case study explores Chhatra district which is set to become Asia's largest coal mining area. The study area included 170 Indigenous households, primarily Oraon and Munda who rely on forest resources like mahua for their livelihood. Central Coalfields Limited (CCL), a coal-mining company, has caused severe environmental damage in the area resulting in water pollution and degraded farmland. Since 2014, Oraon women have protested, demanding a wastewater treatment plant, but received no drinking water supply or compensation for losses caused by mining activities. However, people in the area, frustrated by a lack of knowledge regarding compensation and divisive tactics from mining companies, continue to assert their cultural identity and resist encroachments.

The study summarizes that the FPIC process, intended to ensure collective consent from Indigenous communities, often becomes a bureaucratic trap. Authorities manipulate this process to control negotiations, frequently consulting only those who support the projects. State and mining companies utilise development narratives to counter Indigenous social movements, portraying mining as essential for national development while framing resistors as anti-development or insurgent sympathisers. Additionally, they promote misleading narratives about compensation and reforestation efforts, undermining the negative impacts of mining on local ecosystems and livelihoods.

The paper underscores the necessity for equitable forest and land-use policies that prioritize Indigenous rights and sustainable development. Recommendations include effective implementation of national policies and international guidelines like FPIC in Indigenous territories, addressing mining sector corruption, and supporting non-violent social movements. Incorporating Indigenous knowledge systems in resource management and collaborating with people to reform policies is also essential for sustainable development.

Focus and Factoids by Saismit Naik.