强制但公平的土地征用:评估印度强制征用过程的程序公平性

IF 2.1 Q2 URBAN STUDIES Journal of Property Research Pub Date : 2021-03-01 DOI:10.1080/09599916.2021.1892802
J. Shukla
{"title":"强制但公平的土地征用:评估印度强制征用过程的程序公平性","authors":"J. Shukla","doi":"10.1080/09599916.2021.1892802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Coerciveness built in the process of compulsory acquisition (CA) induces a perception of unfairness among the affected landowners and may alleviate with fair compensation and due process. This research focuses on the latter and aims to identify issues of unfairness perceived by the affected landowners using six criteria of procedural fairness from the legal literature including ethicality, representativeness, bias-suppression, accuracy, correctability and consistency. While procedural unfairness is a concern in many geographies (see for Scotland), this research adopts a case-study approach given the geographical specificity of CA laws and examines Indian process for its relatively recent modification under the newly enacted CA act of 2013. The paper undertakes a qualitative content analysis of court case reports on the Bangalore–Mysore Infrastructure Corridor project and interview transcripts of forty-seven landowners whose land was acquired using Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act of 1966 (a precursor to the new act). This research argues that fixing following issues is crucial to improving the landowners’ perception of fairness: ethical behaviour by the acquirers; representativeness of the affected landowners; quality information throughout the process; accountability of acquirers; neutral review of objections; unbiased assessment of compensation; and inexpensive conflict resolutions.","PeriodicalId":45726,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Property Research","volume":"38 1","pages":"238 - 261"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09599916.2021.1892802","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Compulsory yet Fair Acquisition of Land: Assessing Procedural Fairness of Compulsory Acquisition Process in India\",\"authors\":\"J. Shukla\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09599916.2021.1892802\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Coerciveness built in the process of compulsory acquisition (CA) induces a perception of unfairness among the affected landowners and may alleviate with fair compensation and due process. This research focuses on the latter and aims to identify issues of unfairness perceived by the affected landowners using six criteria of procedural fairness from the legal literature including ethicality, representativeness, bias-suppression, accuracy, correctability and consistency. While procedural unfairness is a concern in many geographies (see for Scotland), this research adopts a case-study approach given the geographical specificity of CA laws and examines Indian process for its relatively recent modification under the newly enacted CA act of 2013. The paper undertakes a qualitative content analysis of court case reports on the Bangalore–Mysore Infrastructure Corridor project and interview transcripts of forty-seven landowners whose land was acquired using Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act of 1966 (a precursor to the new act). This research argues that fixing following issues is crucial to improving the landowners’ perception of fairness: ethical behaviour by the acquirers; representativeness of the affected landowners; quality information throughout the process; accountability of acquirers; neutral review of objections; unbiased assessment of compensation; and inexpensive conflict resolutions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45726,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Property Research\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"238 - 261\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09599916.2021.1892802\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Property Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09599916.2021.1892802\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"URBAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Property Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09599916.2021.1892802","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"URBAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要强制征用过程中产生的强制力会在受影响的土地所有者中引发不公平感,并可能通过公平补偿和正当程序来缓解。本研究侧重于后者,旨在利用法律文献中的六个程序公平标准,包括道德性、代表性、偏见抑制、准确性、可纠正性和一致性,确定受影响土地所有者感知到的不公平问题。虽然程序不公平在许多地区都是一个令人担忧的问题(参见苏格兰),但鉴于CA法律的地理特殊性,本研究采用了案例研究方法,并根据2013年新颁布的CA法案对印度的程序进行了相对较新的修改。本文对班加罗尔-迈索尔基础设施走廊项目的法庭案件报告和47名土地所有者的访谈记录进行了定性内容分析,这些土地所有者的土地是根据1966年《卡纳塔克邦工业区发展法》(新法案的前身)获得的。这项研究认为,解决以下问题对提高土地所有者的公平感至关重要:收购方的道德行为;受影响土地所有者的代表性;整个过程的质量信息;收购方的责任;对反对意见进行中立审查;对补偿的公正评估;以及廉价的冲突解决办法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Compulsory yet Fair Acquisition of Land: Assessing Procedural Fairness of Compulsory Acquisition Process in India
ABSTRACT Coerciveness built in the process of compulsory acquisition (CA) induces a perception of unfairness among the affected landowners and may alleviate with fair compensation and due process. This research focuses on the latter and aims to identify issues of unfairness perceived by the affected landowners using six criteria of procedural fairness from the legal literature including ethicality, representativeness, bias-suppression, accuracy, correctability and consistency. While procedural unfairness is a concern in many geographies (see for Scotland), this research adopts a case-study approach given the geographical specificity of CA laws and examines Indian process for its relatively recent modification under the newly enacted CA act of 2013. The paper undertakes a qualitative content analysis of court case reports on the Bangalore–Mysore Infrastructure Corridor project and interview transcripts of forty-seven landowners whose land was acquired using Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act of 1966 (a precursor to the new act). This research argues that fixing following issues is crucial to improving the landowners’ perception of fairness: ethical behaviour by the acquirers; representativeness of the affected landowners; quality information throughout the process; accountability of acquirers; neutral review of objections; unbiased assessment of compensation; and inexpensive conflict resolutions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: The Journal of Property Research is an international journal. The title reflects the expansion of research, particularly applied research, into property investment and development. The Journal of Property Research publishes papers in any area of real estate investment and development. These may be theoretical, empirical, case studies or critical literature surveys.
期刊最新文献
Digitalisation and valuations: an empirical analysis of valuers’ supplemental skills requirements From agriculture to new town: land conversion towards new-build gentrification in the southwest of Jakarta, Indonesia The impact of corporate governance and corporate social responsibility on SA REITs’ performance Do private rental tenants pay for energy efficiency?: The dynamics of green premiums and brown discounts Changes in risk appreciation, and short memory of house buyers when the market is hot, a case study of Christchurch, New Zealand
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1