The issue of saving valuable arable land
Monday, 12 April 2010
Shamsul Huq Zahid
Bangladesh is a land where contradictions and dilemmas are aplenty. Very often, solutions to many problems at the local and national levels are kept in abeyance since the same would trigger some other problems. The scarcity of resources is found to be one of the major causes behind most of the dilemmas and contradictions at the policymakers' level.
However, poor planning, corruption and laissez faire attitude on the part of those involved in the process of policy planning down to implementation at the field level are no less responsible for deficiencies in development works in the country.
Inadequate availability of resources either in cash or in other forms, including the natural ones, are, at times, does appear as a major constraint on the policy planners. A case in point is natural gas. Even a decade back, most people, including donors and government leaders, had been under the impression that Bangladesh was floating on gas. There were strong debates whether the country would start exporting gas to neighbouring India. But the policymakers are now trying to import gas from Myanmar to meet its ever-expanding demand for the same.
It is feared that the country would run out of gas within four and five years unless new reserves are found either in offshore or onshore areas. In the meanwhile, the government is finding it difficult to meet the competing demands for gas from industries, including urea fertilizer plants, power generation entities, CNG filling stations and domestic consumers. It has recently shut five urea-producing units to divert gas to gas-based power plants.
Similarly, land, the most valuable resource in this highly over populated country, is in short supply. Consequently, conflicts over land are common both in urban and rural areas. It is more likely that violence over land would go on rising with that precious resource becoming scarcer in the coming days.
What is more worrying is that the size of the arable land that feeds a large population has been reducing constantly. According to an estimate of the Directorate of Agricultural Extension, on an average, nearly 200,000 acres of agricultural land are being lost to infrastructures and other uses. According to the Directorate of Land Records and Survey, the area under agriculture in 1971 was 21.7 million acres. It has now come down to 17.8 million acres.
It is feared that there would be no land left for agriculture within next three to four decades if the current rate of its non agricultural uses is allowed to continue.
The concern has, apparently, prompted the government to discourage development projects at the cost of agricultural land. The Planning Commission, reportedly, has sent a circular to all government agencies concerned to avoid construction of physical infrastructures, including roads and highways, educational institutions, residential and non-residential buildings and hospitals at the cost of farmland. The agency concerned would have to take permission from the Planning Commission if it becomes extremely essential for it to use agricultural land for the purpose of any development project. However, the government has not imposed any restriction on the use of arable land at the private level.
There is no denying that it is important to discourage the use of arable land for other purposes. But it remains in doubt whether any government restriction would ultimately work. The size of the government development plan has been going up every year and a large part of the development budget is spent on physical infrastructures, including roads, highways, hospitals, schools and colleges. How can the government implement all those projects without taking over agriculture land?
Then again there would be more residential houses to accommodate the ever-increasing population both in urban and rural areas. There would also be more markets, commercial establishments and industries. The process is unstoppable.
However, the encroachment on agricultural land would have been less had the administration been aware of the problem, which was rather obvious. For instance, industries and residential areas have come up in the peripheries of major cities, including Dhaka, over the years, of course, at a faster rate in recent years, in an unplanned manner. The government does neither have any appropriate land use nor land management plans. It has always preferred to be an onlooker as industries, residential houses and other establishments emerged on agricultural land. The glaring examples close to the Dhaka city are the areas along the Dhaka- Mymensingh, Dhaka-Aricha highways and Kerainiganj across the river Buriganga.
In the late seventies, an idea to develop cluster villages was floated to save the destruction of agricultural land for residential purposes was floated. But it had failed to gain ground because the rural people were not accustomed to this type of living.
But the government could, at least, save some arable land if it had restricted the establishment of industrial units to specific areas. The indifference on the part of the government has provided opportunities to so-called investors to establish industries, amusement parks, resorts and other facilities at any place of the country at the cost of agriculture land.
The government is not in a position to stop fully the loss of arable lands for all practical reasons. But it can, at least, help reduce the speed at which the farmlands are being lost. A circular issued by the Planning Commission or any other government agency is unlikely to make any difference in the prevailing situation. The relevant official agency must come up with an elaborate land use plan taking into consideration all the problems and potentials.
Bangladesh is a land where contradictions and dilemmas are aplenty. Very often, solutions to many problems at the local and national levels are kept in abeyance since the same would trigger some other problems. The scarcity of resources is found to be one of the major causes behind most of the dilemmas and contradictions at the policymakers' level.
However, poor planning, corruption and laissez faire attitude on the part of those involved in the process of policy planning down to implementation at the field level are no less responsible for deficiencies in development works in the country.
Inadequate availability of resources either in cash or in other forms, including the natural ones, are, at times, does appear as a major constraint on the policy planners. A case in point is natural gas. Even a decade back, most people, including donors and government leaders, had been under the impression that Bangladesh was floating on gas. There were strong debates whether the country would start exporting gas to neighbouring India. But the policymakers are now trying to import gas from Myanmar to meet its ever-expanding demand for the same.
It is feared that the country would run out of gas within four and five years unless new reserves are found either in offshore or onshore areas. In the meanwhile, the government is finding it difficult to meet the competing demands for gas from industries, including urea fertilizer plants, power generation entities, CNG filling stations and domestic consumers. It has recently shut five urea-producing units to divert gas to gas-based power plants.
Similarly, land, the most valuable resource in this highly over populated country, is in short supply. Consequently, conflicts over land are common both in urban and rural areas. It is more likely that violence over land would go on rising with that precious resource becoming scarcer in the coming days.
What is more worrying is that the size of the arable land that feeds a large population has been reducing constantly. According to an estimate of the Directorate of Agricultural Extension, on an average, nearly 200,000 acres of agricultural land are being lost to infrastructures and other uses. According to the Directorate of Land Records and Survey, the area under agriculture in 1971 was 21.7 million acres. It has now come down to 17.8 million acres.
It is feared that there would be no land left for agriculture within next three to four decades if the current rate of its non agricultural uses is allowed to continue.
The concern has, apparently, prompted the government to discourage development projects at the cost of agricultural land. The Planning Commission, reportedly, has sent a circular to all government agencies concerned to avoid construction of physical infrastructures, including roads and highways, educational institutions, residential and non-residential buildings and hospitals at the cost of farmland. The agency concerned would have to take permission from the Planning Commission if it becomes extremely essential for it to use agricultural land for the purpose of any development project. However, the government has not imposed any restriction on the use of arable land at the private level.
There is no denying that it is important to discourage the use of arable land for other purposes. But it remains in doubt whether any government restriction would ultimately work. The size of the government development plan has been going up every year and a large part of the development budget is spent on physical infrastructures, including roads, highways, hospitals, schools and colleges. How can the government implement all those projects without taking over agriculture land?
Then again there would be more residential houses to accommodate the ever-increasing population both in urban and rural areas. There would also be more markets, commercial establishments and industries. The process is unstoppable.
However, the encroachment on agricultural land would have been less had the administration been aware of the problem, which was rather obvious. For instance, industries and residential areas have come up in the peripheries of major cities, including Dhaka, over the years, of course, at a faster rate in recent years, in an unplanned manner. The government does neither have any appropriate land use nor land management plans. It has always preferred to be an onlooker as industries, residential houses and other establishments emerged on agricultural land. The glaring examples close to the Dhaka city are the areas along the Dhaka- Mymensingh, Dhaka-Aricha highways and Kerainiganj across the river Buriganga.
In the late seventies, an idea to develop cluster villages was floated to save the destruction of agricultural land for residential purposes was floated. But it had failed to gain ground because the rural people were not accustomed to this type of living.
But the government could, at least, save some arable land if it had restricted the establishment of industrial units to specific areas. The indifference on the part of the government has provided opportunities to so-called investors to establish industries, amusement parks, resorts and other facilities at any place of the country at the cost of agriculture land.
The government is not in a position to stop fully the loss of arable lands for all practical reasons. But it can, at least, help reduce the speed at which the farmlands are being lost. A circular issued by the Planning Commission or any other government agency is unlikely to make any difference in the prevailing situation. The relevant official agency must come up with an elaborate land use plan taking into consideration all the problems and potentials.