Assessing Compensation Values from Resettlement Projects
The Need to Incorporate Elements of Freedom and Justice
Keywords:
compensation, welfare, freedom, liberty, capabilities approach, legal entitlement, social exclusionAbstract
The compensation for communities who are relocated to make way for development projects is often underestimated. As a consequence, the displaced communities often find their welfare to be worse off after resettlement and hence, the compensations do not provide justice to them. This paper reviews the issue of compensation and the approach for making compensation. In particular, it reviews the classical compensation theory by Kaldor-Hicks and also the modern theories of compensation. This paper argues that the Kaldor-Hicks compensation criteria are limited to explain the changes in the welfare of the displaced communities after resettlement. Thus, there is a need to consider the elements in Amartya Sen’s conception of freedom, capability and liberty as well as Rawlsian theory of justice in modern compensation theories in order to capture the real changes in the welfare. A broader conceptual framework for the economics of compensation employing the role of freedom is constructed to provide a comprehensive understanding on the role of freedom and rights in compensation valuation for future development projects.
Downloads
References
Agba, A.M.O., Akpanudoedehe, J.J. & Ushie, E.M. (2010). Socio-economic and cultural impacts of resettlement on Bakassi People of Cross River State, Nigeria. Studies in Sociology of Science, 1(2), 50-62.
Elster, J. & Roemer, J.E. (1991). Introduction. In Jon Elster and John E. Roemer, editors, Interpersonal Comparison of Wellbeing, pages 1-16. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Goodin, R.E. (1989). Theories of compensation. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 1, 56-75. Hicks, J.R. (1939). The foundations of welfare economics. Economic Journal, 49, 696-712. Hwang, S-S., Cao, Y. & Xi, J. (2011). The short-term impact of involuntary migration in China’s Three Gorges: A prospective study. Social Indicator Research, 101(1), 73-92. Judge, P.S. (1997). Response to dams and displacement in two Indian States. Asian Survey, 37(9), 840-851.
Just, R.E., Hueth, D.L. & Schmitz, A. (1982). Applied welfare economics and public policy. Prentice Hall. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
Kaldor, N. (1939). Welfare propositions in economics and interpersonal comparisons of utility. Economic Journal, 49, 549-552.
Nussbaum, M. (2003). Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: sen and social justice. Feminist Economics, 9(2-3), 33-59.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Sen, A. (1970). Collective choice and social welfare. San Francisco: Holden-Day.
Cernea, M. (1997). The risks and reconstruction model for resettling displaced populations. World Development, 25(10), 1569-1587.
Sen, A. (1988). Freedom of choice. European Economic Review, 32, 269-294.
Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Anchor Books, A Division of Random House, New York.
Sen, A. (2000). The discipline of cost-benefit analysis. Journal of Legal Studies, 29(S2), 931-952.
Sen, A. (2000). Social exclusion: Concept, application and scrutiny. Social Development Papers No. 1, Office of Environmental and Social Development, Asian Development Bank, June 2000, Manila, Phillipines.
Sen, A. (2001). Economic theory, freedom and human rights: The work of Amartya Sen. Overseas Development Institute Briefing Paper, London.
Sen, A. (2003). Development as capability expansion. In Sakiko Fukuda-Parr and A.K.Shiva Kumar, editors, Readings in Human Development, Concepts, Measures and Policies for a Development Paradigm, pages 3-16. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Swainson, L. & McGregor, A. (2008). Compensating for development: Orang Asli experiences of Malaysia’s Sungai Selangor Dam. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 49(2), 155-167.
WCD (1999). “The resettlement of indigenous people affected by the Bakun Hydro-Electric Project, Sarawak, Malaysia”, working paper, World Commission on Dams, Cape Town, South Africa, December.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Disclaimer
Global Business Management Review (GBMR) has taken all reasonable measures to ensure that material contained in this website is the original work of the author(s). However, the Journal gives no warranty and accepts no responsibility for the accuracy or the completeness of the material; no reliance should be made by any user on the material. The user should check with the authors for confirmation.
Articles published in the Global Business Management Review (GBMR) do not represent the views held by the editors and members of the editorial board. Authors are responsible for all aspects of their articles except the editorial screen design.
Submission of an article is done with the understanding that the article has not been published before (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, or thesis) that it is not under consideration for publication somewhere else; that if and when the article is accepted for publication, the author's consent to automatic transfer of the copyright to the publisher.