--- prasad shetty <[email protected]> wrote:

In case of Mumbai, TDRs were used initially to
compensate plot owners whose development right was
ristricted due to some public programmes like
widening of roads etc. Later this was used for
compensating owners of Heritage buildings who could
not develop their lands. More recenntly they have
been used in case of Slum Redevlopments...


should have guessed heritage piety featured en-route
TDR piety for slums! poverty-n-participatory piety and
heritage-n-environment-n-worldclassiness piety
harmoniously trade-off equity in space for equity in
time, solutions of today for promises of tomorrow.  it
is little wonder that piety instruments are universal.
generically, instruments for exploiting issues by
subverting techno-legal safeguards. I missed their
celebration at ActionAid people asia summit against
poverty (reminiscent of the wsf housing rights event
of jan 2004 or asf voices-of-people before that), with
poverty-concert by ARRehman and Junoon/SalmanAhmed in
old delhi on 2 & 3 sep:
(if anyone has a copy of their people report on
millennium development goals or details of their
look-taking at WTO ministerial in HongKong in Dec,
please check and tell if there is any reference to
GATS revised offer re professions; like happened to
the bijli thekedars of Delhi in course of
privatisation of power, we chaps seem to have slipped
into blackhole in course of
people-representation-claim regime change from
political parties to organised civil-society)  

I also missed the television promo of Delhi metroPD on
2-3 sep. but I had ring-side view of latest
identically untenable (in landuse planning/zoning
terms) contrivance in, respectively, rishikesh and
jaipur. eco-tourism zone.

on 3 sep I was at one of those National-Conferences
where investor chaps and govt chaps take, as obscenely
minimal garb for decency, decisions already taken.
FICCI, 2-3 sep, Jaipur, focus on
investments-eco-rural-health-tourism. I was at the 9am
session on ecoT. a lady-expert made power-point
presentation on behalf of investor firm that claims to
have cooked up the ecoT-Zone contrivance whereby large
tract acquisitions of prime eco sites are becoming
possible.  she was very cute. she told
golden-egg-goose story in full and said
all-must-save-env-because-trees-give-oxygen and so the
firm that employs her started making 4 yrs ago large
tract acquisitions to develop ecoT zones where it has
just begun to offer premium packages to promote love
of nature. the kindergarten style seemed to inspire
state forest secretary, who later spoke passionately
of tree plantation by school children (still in ecoT
session in national conference). an unscheduled
speaker also spoke of similar large tract acquisitions
started 2 yrs ago by his firm, explaining dire need
for ecoT Zones in business-school style in terms of
things like lack of certification in ecoT industry.
(his power-point and speech were as un-coordinated as
his problem-assessment and solution-prescription and
certain rude remarks made amidst
pre-presentation-polite-conversation might have
rattled him since he made repeated references to a
particular situation to which they pertained). the
chap from Karnataka and the chap from uttaranchal
(whom I had accompanied, being advisor to the firm he
heads) made sensible presentations of their
non-acquisitive ecoT partnership models working
successfully for 15+ yrs (latter without power-point,
my holistic-approach type of advising includes,
besides interfering in all aspects of business, advise
like not using trappings like power-point or neckties
in ecoT discussions. btw, I am also very cut-up about
I-day address by President on power-point). state
principal secy, chairwoman for ecoT session in
national conference, however, found the 2-4 yr old
excesses exciting successes for state of rajasthan to
emulate. that made me feel also gender-insulted! (the
unscheduled chap brought no cheer, since there was
also unscheduled lady who spoke very professionally
but about hi-tech hi-capacity urban lodging business,
wholly unrelated to ecoT).
2 sep non-conference tourism and ecoT-Zone fret might
need explanation, since I am mistaken for Delhi Master
Plan fixated planner chap here. I am adviser to some
enterprise chaps who pioneered what we thought was
what they call ecoT and I have been adviser to some
village chaps inclined to buy out said enterprise
chaps. this is *not* any crooked-planner stuff:
village chaps get equity control, enterprise chaps
remain equity partners as support-enterprise and get
to grow instead of growing roots and becoming
vegetables for acquisitive ones to cook when ripe. and
it is *not* just plannerly bullying, but respectable
conceptually and theoretically robust, model-like,
outcome of PhD work of mid-90s (on tourism and
regional development; detailed case study kumaun;
general focus on peripheral destinations and
non-conventional attractions; overall hypothesis of
local control imperative where tourism is significant
in regional economic base and impacts on conservation
and development goals). model was discussed with all
public private community partnership stakeholders
(that jargon was already noise-making then, 97) most
respectably at u.p.academy of admin (where they
refresher-train officials and I had otherwise
respectably been visiting-trainer) and everyone
disrespectfully said it was idealistic because
communities could not be more than
ayah-butler-cook-driver. so I decided to test my
assumption of x-y-z instead of a-b-c-d role for
communities in stakeholders equation before submitting
PhD. it was tested and proven.
I did not submit my PhD for reasons to do with
identity crisis of the planning profession including
terribly cold feet about getting mistaken for
gynaecologist if they put Dr before my name. the rest
is subaltern history and, especially for the last 2-3
years, chaps who played it out are constantly invited
to show-n-tell at meetings between govt and investor
chaps about PPP (public private partnership), CBT
(community based tourism), PPCP (inclusive PPP, with C
for Community squeezed in), etc. I dont go for these
unless business commitments are expected to be
required to be made because I am not polite and chaps
keep accepting chit-chat invitations out of courtesy
and because our requests for serious meetings in govt
offices keep going unanswered. on 3 sep, however, I
accompanied MD Wildrift Adventures (support-enterprise
in Kumaun, with three camps taken over by village
communities and expanding range of synergy
partnerships in business portfolio) because on 2 sep
we were in Forest Conservator office in Rishikesh
discussing offer to do for free a pilot-project (their
jargon) for transition from existing to PPP / PPCP
regime in the river-rafting cluster (Garhwal) this
this was because we were in receipt of fax-letter of
31 aug (in reply to WA queries re dmrc recreation
facility on yamuna riverbed) from MoEF about PPP
guidelines for protected areas being under formulation
and had attended on Jul 14 the
uttranchal-ecoT-investment-opportunities meet where I
had raised several questions about techno-legal basis
of state ideas for PPP / PPCP shown to us on
power-point and suggested clarifications be
demonstrated, for investor confidence, in the case of
the river-rafting cluster (those enterprises had
raised at the meeting serious issues about problems
being faced by them about permit renewals since last
year). All investors had agreed and subsequently
several villages also sought details of PPCP.
On 3 Aug river-rafting enterprises were invited to a
separate meeting and told their permits would be
renewed for season starting 1 sep as before since PPP
/ PPCP details were still to be worked out. chaps had
accepted bookings accordingly but were told last week
that the minister had desired permits to be under PPP.
the 40-odd firms affected were going to ask for
provisional permits meanwhile. the pilot-project idea,
predicated on season running under existing regime, is
consistent with that demand and after checking with
them, we met the Conservator just before. he seemed
interested in our offer and also sympathetic about the
permits problem that, however, was not resolved on 2
with PPP becoming reason for delay, and possibly even
refusal, of permits to old including pioneer
enterprises I felt-need for first-hand at-source feel
of distortion and piled in to car headed that-a-way
next day, with resolve to keep big-mouth shut in
course of presentations (so I made rude remarks wrt
river-rafting cluster before and had field day
afterwards with investor chaps rattled by punch line
in WA presentation, to the effect that ecoT and PPCP
pioneer enterprises find emergent connotations of ecoT
and PPP etc unrecognisable and are considering
quitting and other options).

I am personally aggrieved (badly, enough to have
risked long settled work-n-leisure-relationships by
waking up at 4am and not bad-mouthing about
car-to-where-u-can-take-train) on grounds (in addition
to ones in my case against the metroPD that, btw, is
identical in plannerly terms to ecoT-zones etc) of
jeopardy to pilot-project I was mulling, for first
time in my adventurous professional experience,
en-route to graceful peace-made peace-n-quiet
retirement in wide public interest. all because FICCI
likes lady-experts who hawk stuff-n-nonsense like
trees-give-oxygen (investor chap who approached
afterwards said that is the sort of thing govt chaps
understand)! augh.

btw, mumbai-model for slums in delhi is on-course;
there was a teeny weeny public notice in HT of 31/08.
will be posting more about that anon.