We Need Roads

As a great advocate of road-building in India, I was naturally attracted to a report in Mint today on comments made by the highway minister on land acquisition for road-building. The report includes a 3-part video discussion that is worth watching.

Isn’t technology great? But remember, there is no technology without Capitalism. Under Socialism there can be only science – not technology. So now that we Indians have some access to high technology and are experiencing its wonders and benefits, let us also raise a toast to Capitalism, which converts science to technology.

But we were discussing land acquisition for road-building. I have three points to add to the discussion:

First, the terminology: I do not like the word “infrastructure” – which includes power, telecom, sewage and what not – when we have the more precise term “roads.” The minister’s title anyway is “roads and highways minister.” Power, telecom, railways, etc. are all specialized areas with their own solutions. Since our task should be to focus on solutions towards getting roads built, we must avoid the blanket term “infrastructure” and use the specific term “roads” instead.

As an aside, I may mention that the term “infrastructural bottlenecks” was in vogue even in 1977, when I was pursuing a BA in Economics in Delhi University. The paper on “Indian Economics” was full of this term. They were planning then; they are planning now. And the infrastructural bottlenecks continue. What a bunch of total duds!

Second: The power of The State to “acquire” land, also called “eminent domain,” is a very serious power, precisely because its use results in the loss of property for some citizens. Such powers should be very rarely used, and compensation should be huge – so there is no cause for complaint. If a person has lost his property to some public cause, the public should be more than happy to make up the unfortunate man’s loss – and more. This is also based on sound economics:

Suppose there is a row of houses, and one house has a “For Sale” sign on it. You can find out the “market value” of this house and acquire it at that price. But suppose eminent domain were to apply to the whole street. All the other houses are not up for sale. To make the owners sell would require a much higher price – and only that would be Justice.

Lastly, methinks they are making too much of a fuss over the hurdle of land acquisition for road projects. Vast swathes of the country is “unowned land.” A highway from Bombay to Cochin could easily be built along the unowned lands of the Western Ghats.

Further, where land is owned in big chunks, a landowner might even collaborate with the road builders by giving up a portion of his land because when the road is built, the value of his remaining land will shoot. Roads raise the value of land. Landowners have much to gain by collaborating with the road builders.

I also think the National Highway Authority of India (note the word “authority” – ugh!) should be corporatised and made to compete with private road builders. As was done with MNTL. Today, NHAI is just a roadblock, not a roadbuilder. It is a State monopolist. We don’t need these monopolies and authorities.

We need roads.