Development at what cost?

FE Team | Published: November 27, 2025 21:44:18

Bangladesh's impressive infrastructural expansion - expressways, economic zones, bridges and mega-projects - has reshaped the national landscape. Yet behind these achievements lies a pressing question: development for whom and at what human cost? Land acquisition remains one of the most sensitive aspects of state-led development, repeatedly generating debates over compensation, fairness and the long-term well-being of affected communities.
Under the Acquisition and Requisition of Immovable Property Act, 2017, thousands of acres have been taken for public projects. Although the Act was designed to modernise acquisition procedures with higher compensation, clearer justification and structured rehabilitation, its implementation often tells a different story. In many projects, affected families have reported delays in receiving compensation, which is frequently calculated using outdated circle rates rather than actual market value. Instances of disputed land classification and the non-recognition of non-titled users, including sharecroppers and informal settlers, further compound their hardships.
Beyond compensation, gaps in promised rehabilitation and resettlement continue to undermine public trust. Displacement caused by expressways, bridge approaches and industrial zones has exposed inconsistencies between policy and practice. Unprepared relocation sites, weak livelihood restoration efforts and limited community consultation have left many families more vulnerable than before.
Equally troubling are issues of transparency. Investigative reports and findings by the Anti-Corruption Commission have revealed cases in which land or flats designated for displaced people were misallocated to influential individuals. Such incidents highlight the urgent need for stronger oversight and accountability mechanisms.
Admittedly, some positive changes are under way. Digital land management systems, automated mutation processes and geospatial mapping are reducing disputes. Development partners like the World Bank and JICA have encouraged Bangladesh to adopt global safeguards, including mandatory social impact assessments and grievance redress mechanisms.
Still, deeper reforms are needed before land acquisition can be truly humane and just. Valuation must reflect full replacement cost, including livelihood loss; compensation must recognise the rights of informal land users; and independent monitoring bodies should oversee all acquisition and resettlement activities. Public hearings, accessible grievance channels and meaningful community participation must become standard practice.
Sanjana Hossain
Department of Law
Bangladesh University of Professionals