Livelihood Substitution DFID Karachi Research: Lyari Expressway

The policy also lays down the basis of resettlement compensation very much on the lines of the LAA 1894. However, unlike the LAA, it also outlines a process of rehabilitation of affectees which includes income restoration; project sponsored programmes like regular employment and training for improvement of incomes; establishing linkages to the national socio-economic uplift and employment generation programmes in the project area; and initiatives by NGOs and DFIs for the affected. It also states that relocation sites for affected persons should be within the same region.

The policy document has also development an institutional framework for the implementation of the policy guidelines. In addition to the traditional involvement of the revenue officer of the project area, the institutional arrangement also sees the involvement of the Provincial Environmental Protection Agency (PEPA) and of NGOs and CBOs in the resettlement, monitoring and grievance resolution process.

It is not clear as to when the policy and the ordinance will finally become law.

5.3 Involuntary Resettlement Policy of the Asian Development Bank

Involuntary Resettlement Policy of the Asian Development Bank (Appendix – 5) is summarised in the introduction to the document. The summary is reproduced below.

ADB’s Policy on Involuntary Resettlement was adopted in 1995 and became operational in January 1996. The Policy requires that involuntary resettlement be an integral part of project design, dealt with from the earliest stages of the project cycle.

The Policy aims to

• Avoid involuntary resettlement wherever feasible
• Minimise resettlement where population displacement is unavoidable by exploring all viable project options.

If, nonetheless, individuals or communities must lose their land, means of livelihood, social support systems, or way of life they should be

• Compensated for lost assets and loss of income and livelihood
• Assisted for relocation
• Assisted so that their economic and social future will generally be at least as favourable with the project as without it
• Provided with appropriate land, housing, infrastructure, and other compensation, comparable to the without-project situation
• Fully informed and closely consulted on resettlement and compensation options

The Policy also specifies that lack of formal legal title to land is not a bar to compensation and other assistance. This may apply to a range of people affected, e.g. informal dwellers, land users with traditional or customary rights, squatters or those with adverse possession rights but no formal legal title to land and assets. Appropriate assistance provided to address the needs of the poorest affected persons such as female-headed households, and other vulnerable groups such as indigenous peoples, helps them improve their status.

The Policy further requires that ADB assist the government and other project sponsors to

• Adopt and implement the objectives and principles of the Policy within their own policy, legal, administrative and institutional frameworks
• Build and strengthen developing member countries’ (DMC) capacities and national frameworks for resettlement.

Moreover, the Policy requires the government of the borrowing country, or private project sponsor to submit a satisfactory Resettlement Plan with time-bound actions and budgets before loan appraisal. This applies to every project that involves any form of involuntary resettlement, either through

• Physical displacement of people from homes, lands, other assets, resources or services.
• Loss of income and livelihood.

The policy document also contains a review of involuntary resettlement experiences of Developing Member Countries (DMCs) of the ADB. Important experiences mentioned are of China, India (where the Maharashtra Project Effected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1986 has been enacted) and Bangladesh. Experience of resettlement components in ADB financed projects have also been given along with experience of the World Bank in involuntary resettlement operations.

The policy document also lays down some implementation procedures which include social assessment of the affectees and beneficiaries; the guidelines for preparing a resettlement plan and the identification of the responsibility for resettlement. The policy document also identifies the role of the Bank in resettlement matters through supporting the efforts of the government and other project sponsors through: i) assistance in formulating and implementing resettlement policies, strategies, laws, regulations, and specific plans; ii) providing technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of agencies responsible for resettlement; and iii) financing eligible costs of resettlement, if requested.

6. Livelihood Impact Of Lyari Project

6.1 Present Situation

There has been no livelihoods impact assessment for the affectees of the Lyari Expressway Project. A satellite survey of the Lyari Corridor was carried out and digitised. The alignment of the Expressway was marked on the map and the number of properties affected by it were identified and calculated. Based on this map, a demarcation of the land required for the Expressway was done on-site. A pamphlet and a survey report was produced, which is the only document that has been made public and that too after a lot of pressure from the Lyari affectees and NGOs. The document is attached and marked as Appendix – 6. Residents who came within the alignment of the Expressway were informed and on a three day notice bulldozing was undertaken. The affectees were given compensation of Rs 50,000 (US$ 860) and a plot of 80 square yards in a plot scheme on the fringes of the city. The plot scheme has no electricity, sewage, water (available only through tankers) and social facilities such as school and health clinics. Also, the compensation has nothing to do with the nature of the property or of tenure-ship of the affected persons. Commercial properties have been denied any form of compensation.

As a result of pressure from affected communities and NGOs, compensation and a plot of land is being provided before demolition takes place and time is being provided for people to move to their new location before their properties can be demolished. So far, about 4,000 families have received compensation and about 600 have moved to the plot township. Leased properties have been granted a stay by the law courts.

6.2 Possible Methodology for Livelihoods Impact of Lyari Project

What was required for the Lyari Project affectees resettlement/rehabilitation plan and for the Lyari Project as a whole was as under:

1. Lyari Project concept should have been presented for public hearings in which the private sector, city planners, academic institutions, professional institutions and NGOs should have been invited. If the Project was considered necessary as a result of such hearings then a concept plan should have been prepared.
2. Identification of CBOs in the Lyari Corridor should have taken place and the plan presented to them for discussion purposes.
3. A Steering Committee consisting of the representatives of government agencies involved with the plan, representatives of relevant professional and academic institutions, NGOs and representatives of local CBOs should have been put in place. The Steering Committee should have then seen how the Project could be designed so as to minimise displacement and establish a criteria for the preparation of a resettlement plan.
4. Lyari Corridor should then have been divided into zones along its length. Each zone should not have consisted of more than 15,000 population. A survey committee should have been formed in each zone with the involvement of CBOs and concerned Karachi NGOs.
5. The survey committee should have surveyed its area population with regard to family size and income; tenure status; assets; location of work place; residents-work place link; school going children and school location; working women and their location of work; expenditure on transport, health and education; household linkages with each other; and preferences of residents regarding their future resettlement locations and the relationship of incomes to them.
6. The formation of a rehabilitation committee comprising of selected members of the Steering Committee, local organisations and rehabilitation planners.
7. The rehabilitation plan should have attempted to relocate businesses wherever possible next to locations where labour (preferably ones being displaced) and markets would be available; relocate people as communities rather than individual households; provided funds for the relocation of the bulldozed schools and health facilities within the same communities as before the resettlement; identified with the help of the CBOs and NGOs micro credit and training programmes for income generation that were of relevance to the new location to which the communities were being shifted; and provided a subsidy for the marginalised groups for a period of time (time period should have been worked out) to help them re-establish themselves in income generation and social life.
8. To carry out the above programme, a loan from a government source should have been provided to the city government and recovered as a toll tax from the Expressway in a period of five years.
9. One officer should have been made in-charge of and responsible for all aspects of the project from its inception to its completion. Quarterly accounts of the Project should have been made public by the Steering Committee so as to ensure transparency and accountability.
10. Management of the resettlement funds and process should have left to the area survey committees (who should have been given an appropriate honorarium) with support from a mid-level government official.