From cugambetta at yahoo.com Tue Nov 6 02:03:02 2007 From: cugambetta at yahoo.com (Curt Gambetta) Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 12:33:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Urbanstudy] Crawford Market redevelopment Message-ID: <774091.9373.qm@web56809.mail.re3.yahoo.com> I have a request. A friend of mine in Bombay, a journalist and foodie, is concerned about what is slated to happen to Crawford Market. If unfamiliar with the issue, here are some recent articles: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/PoliticsNation/Save_Crawford_Market_move_gathers_pace/articleshow/2500928.cms http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1129549 He was inquiring as to what materials on rejuvenating public markets in India would be of use to someone who is concerned about the issue. Are there any interesting models--successes or failures--in South Asia we can think of that approached the future of a public market more democratically? I am most familiar with what I see as failures, for instance, the KR Market structure in Bangalore and the sustained effort to clean up and move out hawkers there. I know that a number of people at CASSUM in Bangalore have worked on this issue, but are there other recent examples that might educate us on the issue? Or examples outside of India or South Asia that might be interesting to critique? I think this is an important issue, because the landscape of food retail and distribution is changing, and what is happening to Crawford Market doesn't at all seem out of sync with larger efforts to streamline distribution, centralize the players and interiorize food retail space. Maybe the issue of interest here is not what you get out of the whole process but the process of getting there. Here we seem to have the heritage/ preservation process on the one hand and the BMC/developers on the other (please correct me if I am wrong). This is not of course to forget the civic activism that has been taking place around the issue (though I am curious what this activism is asking for, in relation to those who sell in the market?) I am interested in whether there have been compelling infrastructures of negotiation and collective politics in other cities that attempted to give those who sell, buy and manage the marketplace a substantive role in determining the future life of the market? When politicians talk of giving these interests a stake in the process, the issue is often already defined and refined in such a way that you either participate or you don't--if participation is even solicited (the objective of many of the good government/ civic activism initiatives enters into the problem at this stage, trying to increase vehicles of participation). So, you are asked to participate in an issue that has already been crafted for you, supposedly in your best interest (even though what is in your best interest may prove disastrous... look at the Bangalore Metro project!). The question that interests me is: who is defining the problem and how? This seems essential. Beyond this more general question... can anyone offer any insight as to what is happening around the Crawford Market issue? Is 'saving' Crawford market through the heritage process the only alternative on the table to the proposed redevelopment plan? Curt __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From yanivbin at gmail.com Fri Nov 9 15:34:05 2007 From: yanivbin at gmail.com (Vinay Baindur) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 15:34:05 +0530 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Paris to revert to public water provision In-Reply-To: <896016.59024.qm@web53612.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <896016.59024.qm@web53612.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <86b8a7050711090204q5caa143fnb05b0ad2f809bca0@mail.gmail.com> FYI [waterjustice] Paris mayor declares coming back to public service Dear Friends, We would like to share a very important victory against privatisation of water here in France: After months of a quite hard discussion and lobbying between the "left" parties, activist and the transnationals, the mayor of Paris, Bertrand Delanoë, announces the "retour" to a unique public service for water as one of the main goals of his new mandate; ( he will be very probably elected again in March 2008) This is a big victory for our friends of "Eau de Paris" ( greens ) and public operators from Val de Marne ( communists ) and all NGOs that struggle for public water; This is also a quite symbolic victory against Suez and Veolia in his own land. After being evasive concerning the renewal of the Suez and Veolia contracts, finally the socialist mayor decided to choose clearly a position against the renewal of the two contracts, signed in 1985 by Chirac when he was mayor; ******************************************************************* Le Monde , 7 november " The mayor wants to take this historical opportunity to take the entire control of the water management, that was partially led to private groups in 1985; (..) ' I would like to propose to Paris habitants a public operator which guarantees the quality of water at an affordable price' (…) ' A single public owned operator that manages all the cycle of production and distribution of water' "At the Paris council, the Green and the Communist party have been struggling for a long time to come back to public management. (…) Anne Le Strat, president of the Paris Water company, says she is satisfied with the mayor's decision; " ********************************** The entire press statement, in french, is in our website http://www.france-libertes.fr/ __,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071109/8cd94e23/attachment-0002.html From anilaemmanuel at gmail.com Sun Nov 11 11:50:25 2007 From: anilaemmanuel at gmail.com (anila emmanuel) Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 11:50:25 +0530 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Fwd: UN plans online resource on sustainable cities In-Reply-To: References: <59ead66c0711022212x68dca31bm22f09590f4ba2f35@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <59ead66c0711102220k644ef91flc6bbcb630a7fb2a9@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Augustine Veliath Date: Nov 8, 2007 11:02 AM Subject: UN plans online resource on sustainable cities To: anila emmanuel UN plans online resource on sustainable cities Prithwi November 7, 2007 | International, e-Gov and News. | Vancouver: The United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT) on Monday announced that it has partnered with the University ofBritish Columbia to create the UBC/UN-HABITAT archives which would be the world's most complete online repository of information on building sustainable cities. The online portal would give governments, urban planners, developers, academics and others access to sustainable solutions to all aspects of urban life, including housing, transportation, infrastructure, resources management, land tenure, governance and climate change. The virtual information centre would contain critical print and electronic material from Habitat's first conference held in1976 up to and including the 2006 World Urban Forum III, both of which took place in Vancouver. The UN-HABITAT's Executive Director Anna Tibaijuka said that the resulting web-based archive will provide an invaluable resource for learning, teaching and practice on our towns and cities locally, nationally and globally. Stressing on issues like rapid urbanization and its impact on communities, economies and the environment, the UBC President Stephen J Toope said that the university's leadership in urban planning will contribute to this important and timely endeavor. The ongoing project would feature several thousand items, including a unique collection of 2,000 videos accumulated since UN-HABITAT 1976. The UBC/UN-Habitat Archives is made possible with US $20,000 in seed-funding from the British Columbia Real Estate Foundation. A pilot version of the portal will have nearly 500 books, videos, magazines, pamphlets, websites and other materials. —iGovernment Bureau Augustine Veliath Communication Specialist UNICEF New Delhi India Tel: 9111246066165 Fax: 911124691410, 24627521 Email: aveliath at unicef.org Website: http://www.unicef.org/India For every child health, education, equality, protection ADVANCE HUMANITY Website: http://www.unicef.org/india -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071111/23a9b444/attachment-0002.html From ava at inthefield.info Mon Nov 19 01:11:38 2007 From: ava at inthefield.info (ava at inthefield.info) Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:41:38 -0600 Subject: [Urbanstudy] EDWARD W. SOJA PRIZE / CRITICAL PLANNING CALL FOR PAPERS DEADLINE EXTENDED Message-ID: Please forward widely: Announcing: The Edward W. Soja Prize for Critical Thinking in Urban and Regional Research Note: deadline for Critical Planning submissions extended to *Dec. 31st, 2007* Critical Planning, the UCLA Journal of Urban Planning, proudly announces the Edward W. Soja Prize for Critical Thinking in Urban and Regional Research. For the inaugural year, a cash prize of $1,000 will be given to the best article published in volume 15 of summer 2008. The prize is named after Edward W. Soja. It celebrates the lifetime achievements of this critical thinker whose work continues to open insightful new research directions for the theoretical and practical understanding of contemporary cities and regions. The awarded article will exemplify the seminal contribution that such visions make to scholarly research. For the prize we will consider all articles previously selected through the Critical Planning double-blind peer review — the journal's managing editor will chair a juried selection process. We welcome submissions related to urban and regional planning and all cognate disciplines from persons residing in any country. Preference will be given to authors speaking to critical issues outside the research agendas of traditional funding agencies and institutional donors. All other standards for publication in the Critical Planning journal apply. For additional details, please refer to the call for submissions to vol. 15 below. Please note: the deadline for submissions has been extended to December 31, 2007. CALL FOR PAPERS: Volume 15, Summer 2008 Critical Planning UCLA Journal of Urban Planning In honor of our 15th anniversary, this year's volume of Critical Planning is devoted to identifying and highlighting the most current critical approaches to urban theory, research and practice. We seek submissions that 1) address the challenges confronting the present and future of cities and regions in the U.S. and around the world and, 2) display an original and critical perspective on recent theoretical developments, policies and practices. We invite submissions from all disciplines as well as the use of various methodologies. We encourage cross-disciplinary, multi-scalar and mixed-method approaches. Critical Planning is a double-blind peer-reviewed publication. Feature articles are generally between 5,000 and 7,000 words, while shorter articles are between 1,000 and 3,000. All submissions should be written according to the standards of the Chicago Manual of Style, 15th Edition. Footnotes should be placed at the end of the document. Please double-space all parts of the manuscript and leave one-inch margins on all sides. Tables and images should be separated from the text. Images should be provided in .tif format, not exceeding a width of five inches and a resolution of 600 dpi (a width of 3000 pixels). Include a cover sheet with the article's title; the author's name, phone number, email address; and a two-sentence biographical statement. Please do not put identifying information (name or affiliation) anywhere but the cover sheet. Submissions will be accepted on a rolling basis. Feel free to contact us by email to discuss your ideas. Manuscripts should be submitted by 5pm on December 31, 2007 as .doc attachments via email to: critplan at ucla.edu and two hardcopies (postmarked by Dec. 31) should be mailed to: Critical Planning C/O Ava Bromberg, Managing Editor UCLA Department of Urban Planning School of Public Affairs 3250 Public Policy Building Los Angeles, CA 90095-1656 Email: critplan at ucla.edu Website: http://www.spa.ucla.edu/critplan/ For pdf version of call please see our website. From leofsaldanha at gmail.com Mon Nov 19 05:30:59 2007 From: leofsaldanha at gmail.com (leo saldanha) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 05:30:59 +0530 Subject: [Urbanstudy] The Philanthropic Enemy In-Reply-To: <47407AF1.4060009@cs.wisc.edu> References: <47407AF1.4060009@cs.wisc.edu> Message-ID: <9057132d0711181600q23465818h7decbe80cd20036a@mail.gmail.com> you might like reading the article below. -S. ------------------------------- Hi, Just to add that there is an equally enjoyable recent article of Slavoj Zizek at LRB entitled "Resistance is Surrender": http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n22/print/zize01_.html BTW let me say that Zizek was in Athens almost a month ago and he gave two lectures one on "ecology without nature" and another on the "liberal utopia" that I have shot them on video (for the purpose of using them in my courses) and then uploaded on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=5A4F3B61C3C08F8Fhttp://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=96990C7283819692 All the best, --Moses -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [WSF-Discuss] Fwd: The Philanthropic Enemy Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 11:27:55 +0530 From: Jai Sen To: Post WSFDiscuss References: Grist for the mill... with thanks to Brian Begin forwarded message: *From: *"Brian K. Murphy" *Date: * November 17 2007 10:09:49 AM GMT+05:30 *To: *Recipient List Suppressed:; *Subject: **The Philanthropic Enemy* http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n07/print/zize01_.html London Review of Books *The Philanthropic Enemy* *Nobody has to be vile ·* Slavoj ÎiÏek Since 2001, Davos and Porto Alegre have been the twin cities of globalisation: Davos, the exclusive Swiss resort where the global elite of managers, statesmen and media personalities meets for the World Economic Forum under heavy police protection, trying to convince us (and themselves) that globalisation is its own best remedy; Porto Alegre, the subtropical Brazilian city where the counter-elite of the anti-globalisation movement meets, trying to convince us (and themselves) that capitalist globalisation is not our inevitable fate - that, as the official slogan puts it, 'another world is possible.' It seems, however, that the Porto Alegre reunions have somehow lost their impetus - we have heard less and less about them over the past couple of years. Where did the bright stars of Porto Alegre go? Some of them, at least, moved to Davos. The tone of the Davos meetings is now predominantly set by the group of entrepreneurs who ironically refer to themselves as 'liberal communists' and who no longer accept the opposition between Davos and Porto Alegre: their claim is that we can have the global capitalist cake (thrive as entrepreneurs) and eat it (endorse the anti-capitalist causes of social responsibility, ecological concern etc). There is no need for Porto Alegre: instead, Davos can become Porto Davos. So who are these liberal communists? The usual suspects: Bill Gates and George Soros, the CEOs of Google, IBM, Intel, eBay, as well as court-philosophers like Thomas Friedman. The true conservatives today, they argue, are not only the old right, with its ridiculous belief in authority, order and parochial patriotism, but also the old left, with its war against capitalism: both fight their shadow-theatre battles in disregard of the new realities. The signifier of this new reality in the liberal communist Newspeak is 'smart'. Being smart means being dynamic and nomadic, and against centralised bureaucracy; believing in dialogue and co-operation as against central authority; in flexibility as against routine; culture and knowledge as against industrial production; in spontaneous interaction and autopoiesis as against fixed hierarchy. Bill Gates is the icon of what he has called 'frictionless capitalism', the post-industrial society and the 'end of labour'. Software is winning over hardware and the young nerd over the old manager in his black suit. In the new company headquarters, there is little external discipline; former hackers dominate the scene, working long hours, enjoying free drinks in green surroundings. The underlying notion here is that Gates is a subversive marginal hooligan, an ex-hacker, who has taken over and dressed himself up as a respectable chairman. Liberal communists are top executives reviving the spirit of contest or, to put it the other way round, countercultural geeks who have taken over big corporations. Their dogma is a new, postmodernised version of Adam Smith's invisible hand: the market and social responsibility are not opposites, but can be reunited for mutual benefit. As Friedman puts it, nobody has to be vile in order to do business these days; collaboration with employees, dialogue with customers, respect for the environment, transparency of deals - these are the keys to success. Olivier Malnuit recently drew up the liberal communist's ten commandments in the French magazine Technikart: 1. You shall give everything away free (free access, no copyright); just charge for the additional services, which will make you rich. 2. You shall change the world, not just sell things. 3. You shall be sharing, aware of social responsibility. 4. You shall be creative: focus on design, new technologies and science. 5. You shall tell all: have no secrets, endorse and practise the cult of transparency and the free flow of information; all humanity should collaborate and interact. 6. You shall not work: have no fixed 9 to 5 job, but engage in smart, dynamic, flexible communication. 7. You shall return to school: engage in permanent education. 8. You shall act as an enzyme: work not only for the market, but trigger new forms of social collaboration. 9. You shall die poor: return your wealth to those who need it, since you have more than you can ever spend. 10. You shall be the state: companies should be in partnership with the state. Liberal communists are pragmatic; they hate a doctrinaire approach. There is no exploited working class today, only concrete problems to be solved: starvation in Africa, the plight of Muslim women, religious fundamentalist violence. When there is a humanitarian crisis in Africa (liberal communists love a humanitarian crisis; it brings out the best in them), instead of engaging in anti-imperialist rhetoric, we should get together and work out the best way of solving the problem, engage people, governments and business in a common enterprise, start moving things instead of relying on centralised state help, approach the crisis in a creative and unconventional way. Liberal communists like to point out that the decision of some large international corporations to ignore apartheid rules within their companies was as important as the direct political struggle against apartheid in South Africa. Abolishing segregation within the company, paying blacks and whites the same salary for the same job etc: this was a perfect instance of the overlap between the struggle for political freedom and business interests, since the same companies can now thrive in post-apartheid South Africa. Liberal communists love May 1968. What an explosion of youthful energy and creativity! How it shattered the bureaucratic order! What an impetus it gave to economic and social life after the political illusions dropped away! Those who were old enough were themselves protesting and fighting on the streets: now they have changed in order to change the world, to revolutionise our lives for real. Didn't Marx say that all political upheavals were unimportant compared to the invention of the steam engine? And would Marx not have said today: what are all the protests against global capitalism in comparison with the internet? Above all, liberal communists are true citizens of the world - good people who worry. They worry about populist fundamentalism and irresponsible greedy capitalist corporations. They see the 'deeper causes' of today's problems: mass poverty and hopelessness breed fundamentalist terror. Their goal is not to earn money, but to change the world (and, as a by-product, make even more money). Bill Gates is already the single greatest benefactor in the history of humanity, displaying his love for his neighbours by giving hundreds of millions of dollars for education, the fight against hunger and malaria etc. The catch is that before you can give all this away you have to take it (or, as the liberal communists would put it, create it). In order to help people, the justification goes, you must have the means to do so, and experience - that is, recognition of the dismal failure of all centralised statist and collectivist approaches - teaches us that private enterprise is by far the most effective way. By regulating their business, taxing them excessively, the state is undermining the official goal of its own activity (to make life better for the majority, to help those in need). Liberal communists do not want to be mere profit-machines: they want their lives to have deeper meaning. They are against old-fashioned religion and for spirituality, for non-confessional meditation (everybody knows that Buddhism foreshadows brain science, that the power of meditation can be measured scientifically). Their motto is social responsibility and gratitude: they are the first to admit that society has been incredibly good to them, allowing them to deploy their talents and amass wealth, so they feel that it is their duty to give something back to society and help people. This beneficence is what makes business success worthwhile. This isn't an entirely new phenomenon. Remember Andrew Carnegie, who employed a private army to suppress organised labour in his steelworks and then distributed large parts of his wealth for educational, cultural and humanitarian causes, proving that, although a man of steel, he had a heart of gold? In the same way, today's liberal communists give away with one hand what they grabbed with the other. There is a chocolate-flavoured laxative available on the shelves of US stores which is publicised with the paradoxical injunction: Do you have constipation? Eat more of this chocolate! - i.e. eat more of something that itself causes constipation. The structure of the chocolate laxative can be discerned throughout today's ideological landscape; it is what makes a figure like Soros so objectionable. He stands for ruthless financial exploitation combined with its counter-agent, humanitarian worry about the catastrophic social consequences of the unbridled market economy. Soros's daily routine is a lie embodied: half of his working time is devoted to financial speculation, the other half to 'humanitarian' activities (financing cultural and democratic activities in post-Communist countries, writing essays and books) which work against the effects of his own speculations. The two faces of Bill Gates are exactly like the two faces of Soros: on the one hand, a cruel businessman, destroying or buying out competitors, aiming at a virtual monopoly; on the other, the great philanthropist who makes a point of saying: 'What does it serve to have computers if people do not have enough to eat?' According to liberal communist ethics, the ruthless pursuit of profit is counteracted by charity: charity is part of the game, a humanitarian mask hiding the underlying economic exploitation. Developed countries are constantly 'helping' undeveloped ones (with aid, credits etc), and so avoiding the key issue: their complicity in and responsibility for the miserable situation of the Third World. As for the opposition between 'smart' and 'non-smart', outsourcing is the key notion. You export the (necessary) dark side of production - disciplined, hierarchical labour, ecological pollution - to 'non-smart' Third World locations (or invisible ones in the First World). The ultimate liberal communist dream is to export the entire working class to invisible Third World sweat shops. We should have no illusions: liberal communists are the enemy of every true progressive struggle today. All other enemies - religious fundamentalists, terrorists, corrupt and inefficient state bureaucracies - depend on contingent local circumstances. Precisely because they want to resolve all these secondary malfunctions of the global system, liberal communists are the direct embodiment of what is wrong with the system. It may be necessary to enter into tactical alliances with liberal communists in order to fight racism, sexism and religious obscurantism, but it's important to remember exactly what they are up to. Etienne Balibar, in La Crainte des masses (1997), distinguishes the two opposite but complementary modes of excessive violence in today's capitalism: the objective (structural) violence that is inherent in the social conditions of global capitalism (the automatic creation of excluded and dispensable individuals, from the homeless to the unemployed), and the subjective violence of newly emerging ethnic and/or religious (in short: racist) fundamentalisms. They may fight subjective violence, but liberal communists are the agents of the structural violence that creates the conditions for explosions of subjective violence. The same Soros who gives millions to fund education has ruined the lives of thousands thanks to his financial speculations and in doing so created the conditions for the rise of the intolerance he denounces. *Slavoj ÎiÏek is a dialectical-materialist philosopher and psychoanalyst. He also co-directs the International Centre for Humanities at Birkbeck College. The Parallax View appeared last year.* ISSN 0260-9592 Copyright (c) LRB Ltd., 1997-2007 < Home ^ Top terms & conditions privacy ______________________________ Jai Sen jai.sen at cacim.net CACIM, A-3 Defence Colony, New Delhi 110 024, India www.cacim.net Ph : +91-11-4155 1521, 2433 2451 *Check out* the OpenSpaceForum @ www.openspaceforum.net *Subscribe to WSFDiscuss*, an open and unmoderated forum on the World Social Forum and on related social and political movements and issues. Simply send an empty email to worldsocialforum-discuss-subscribe at openspaceforum.net *And, NEW ! :* Join CEOS at openspaceforum.net, the CEOS (Critical Engagement with Open Space) listserve for exchange and coordination on open space theory and practice and to facilitate a critical discussion of the idea of 'open space'. Just send an empty mail to CEOS-subscribe at openspaceforum.net -- Leo Saldanha Environment Support Group 105, East End B Main Road, Jayanagar 9th Block East, Bangalore 560069. INDIA Telefax: 91-80-26341977/26531339/26534364 Email: leo at esgindia.org or esg at esgindia.org Web: www.esgindia.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071119/111b3c3f/attachment-0002.html From sebydesiolim at hotmail.com Tue Nov 20 20:52:11 2007 From: sebydesiolim at hotmail.com (sebastian Rodrigues) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 20:52:11 +0530 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Police terror in Colamb, Sanguem Message-ID: According to just received today November 20 2007 reports from Colamb in Sanguem, that Goa Police attached to Quepem Police station have began terrorising the villagers. A group of 8Policemen came today in plain clothes at 6 pm and began threatening the villagers. they were searching Agnelo D'Souza, one of the villagers in forefront of protest against mining threatening to gobble up Colamb village. He had protested overvelmingly during Novemeber 18 2007 gram Sabha of the Rivona village panchayat and sought resulation seeking to ban further mining activity in Colamb. Villagers led by Milagrine Antao led the confrontation today against the police. Police are behaving in this manner to further the interest of the mining companies. -- www.mandgoa.blogspot.com MAND An adivasi-rights resource centre, An initiative of Gawda, Kunbi, Velip, and Dhangar Federation (GAKUVED) "Hari Smriti" 381, Dhulapi, Corlim, Ilhas, Goa. Pincode: 403 110 Visit my blog at http://www.openspaceforum.net/twiki/tiki-view_blog.php?blogId=17 _________________________________________________________________ Post ads for free - to sell, rent or even buy.www.yello.in http://ss1.richmedia.in/recurl.asp?pid=186 From leofsaldanha at gmail.com Wed Nov 21 11:37:28 2007 From: leofsaldanha at gmail.com (leo saldanha) Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 11:37:28 +0530 Subject: [Urbanstudy] NEAA Inspects project In-Reply-To: <4743CADB.70809@esgindia.org> References: <4743CADB.70809@esgindia.org> Message-ID: <9057132d0711202207j4315057bra6db81dc4cdfeab7@mail.gmail.com> *Date:21/11/2007* *URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2007/11/21/stories/2007112155050600.htm* ------------------------------ [image: ICICI Bank] Karnataka - Bangalore * NEAA inspects project * Alladi Jayasri BANGALORE: Allegations of gross violation of the Environment Impact Assessment Notification 2004 and the direction of the Karnataka High Court, by State Government officials in conducting a public hearing for an apartment project in Whitefield, brought members of the National Environment Appellate Authority (NEAA) to the city for spot inspection today. NEAA members K. Prasad, J.C. Kala and I.V. Manivannan inspected the site of the Athashri Housing project proposed by the Pune-based Paranjape Schemes. C.J. Singh, a resident of the area adjoining the project site, had appealed before the NEAA, which heard the case in September 2007. The project is the construction of 206 flats in Pattandur Agrahara, Whitefield, at an estimated cost of Rs. 13 crore. Mr. Singh has filed a public interest litigation in the High Court against the promoters for misrepresenting facts, and hiding other vital information. Main objection His main objection was that the promoters started construction without obtaining EIA clearance. The land use conversion orders were disputed by him. He maintained that the land, obtained from its previous owner Uma Devi, was meant for residential and semi-public purposes. Besides, the PIL contended that the apartment project, has no plans for waste disposal, water supply and other basic necessities. Further, the approach road to the project was owned by Mr. Singh and he had permitted fellow residents the use of the road, and it could not be claimed by the project promoters. The NGO, Environment Support Group, highlighted the "blatant violation of the law in holding the public hearing on August 23, 2006, despite being informed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Urban to refrain from doing so. * * (c) Copyright 2000 - 2007 The Hindu [image: Newindpress.com] *Print * *NEAA makes unprecedented visit to construction site* *ENS* The National Environment Appellate Authority (NEAA) on Tuesday inspected the ongoing construction at Whitefield taken up by Paranjpe Schemes Atashri Housing project to ascertain environmental compliance. The inspection was conducted following a complaint by neighbours. Athashri Paranjpe Schemes (Construction) Ltd. has been constructing a massive residential complex in Whitefield, without the mandatory clearance from Union Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF). A senior resident CJ Singh, has challenged the environmental clearances accorded to this large housing project on grounds of gross violations of civic planning, fire protection, land conversion and environmental laws. K Prasad, JC Kala and Dr V Manivannan, were the three members of NEAA, who visited the site for inspection. CJ Singh claimed that the project developers started construction without, in any manner, securing any clearance from either the Pollution Control Board or the Ministry of Environment and Forests. The Athashri Housing project has planned the development of 206 flats with one bedroom and two bed room units for Senior Citizens. However the decision on the Athashri Housing project by NEAA is yet to be ascertained. -- Leo Saldanha Environment Support Group 105, East End B Main Road, Jayanagar 9th Block East, Bangalore 560069. INDIA Telefax: 91-80-26341977/26531339/26534364 Email: leo at esgindia.org or esg at esgindia.org Web: www.esgindia.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071121/3e0ad4aa/attachment-0002.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 3057 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071121/3e0ad4aa/attachment-0006.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 1957 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071121/3e0ad4aa/attachment-0007.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 3799 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071121/3e0ad4aa/attachment-0008.gif From cugambetta at yahoo.com Sun Nov 25 01:57:50 2007 From: cugambetta at yahoo.com (Curt Gambetta) Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 12:27:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Urbanstudy] Fw: Screening of 'Liquid City' on December 6 Message-ID: <822431.85713.qm@web56814.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Check this out... if anyone is able to see it and would be willing to post some comments, I would love to read them. Curt ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: PUKAR To: cugambetta at yahoo.com Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2007 2:49:40 AM Subject: Screening of 'Liquid City' on December 6 If you are having trouble viewing this email please click here. PUKAR and India China Institute invite you for a screening of Liquid city (30 minutes; English, Hindi and Marathi with English subtitles) Followed by a discussion Directed and produced by Matthew Gandy Thursday, December 6, 2007 6:30 PM Venue: Max Muller Bhavan Auditorium, Kala Ghoda About the film: The tortuous flow of water through Mumbai presents one of the most striking indicators of persistent social inequalities within the globalizing metropolis. The documentary film Liquid City explores the complexity of water politics in Mumbai ranging from the engineering challenge of transferring nearly 3,000 million litres of water a day to the city from the jungles, lakes and mountains of the state of Maharashtra to debates over flooding, privatization and social conflict. The film is based on a unique collaboration between academics and film makers based in London and Mumbai and combines in-depth interviews with activists, engineers, local residents and other voices to paint a unique picture of this vibrant and fast changing city. Assistant director Savitri Medhatul Camera Krystallia Kamvasinou Editors Savitri Medhatul Krystallia Kamvasinou Sound designer Amala Popuri Research and production coordinator Andrew Harris The film was developed in collaboration with PUKAR and was funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. Matthew Gandy is Professor of Geography at University College London. His research focuses on urban landscape and infrastructure with recent work in India, Nigeria and the USA. His publications include Concrete and clay: reworking nature in New York City (MIT Press, 2002) and "Learning from Lagos" in New Left Review (2005). PUKAR (Partners for Urban Knowledge, Action and Research) Address:: 1-4, 2nd Floor, Kamanwala Chambers, Sir P. M. Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 Telephone:: +91 (22) 6574 8152 Fax:: +91 (22) 6664 0561 Email:: pukar at pukar.org.in Website:: www.pukar.org.in PUKAR is an innovative and experimental initiative that aims to contribute to a global debate about urbanization and globalization. Change email address / Leave mailing list ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071124/d6df62ef/attachment-0002.html From gandhisagars at yahoo.com Sun Nov 25 22:10:15 2007 From: gandhisagars at yahoo.com (Sagar Gandhi) Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2007 08:40:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Urbanstudy] Saudi Arbian firm's investment in India Message-ID: <647465.85040.qm@web38803.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hello All, Check this article. This might be of your interest. Regards, Sagar Saudi realty firm plans 3 bn investment in India - http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News_by_Industry/Saudi_realty_firm_plans_3_bn_investment_in_India/articleshow/2569401.cms MUMBAI: Saudi Arabia-based realty firm Tanmiyat group is planning an investment of around USD 3 billion in a township project in India, a top company official said. The group has zeroed in on Bangalore for the project, its first-ever in the Indian market. "We are in the final stages of fine-tuning our plans for this township project. We will be ready with the final blueprint within the next 2-3-months," Tanmiyat group's Managing Director Bharat Thakkar said. This would be a mixed-use project and would be completed in phases over a five-year time span, he said. The project would be distinctive and unique in many respects and "since this is our first venture in India, we will use the project to position ourselves rightly in the market to facilitate our growth thereafter," Thakkar said. The group was still fine-tuning various aspects of the project, including the investment structure for it, he added. "The equity component is still fluid and we have yet to decide whether we want to load a debt component onto the project," he said, adding that the average size of the group's projects has been in the range of USD 2.5-3 billion. Being a mixed-use project, apart from residential accommodation, the project would also have commercial infrastructure. "Bangalore is well-known for its IT, BPO and bio-tech establishments and these three would constitute focus areas for us," Thakkar said. -- Sagar S. Gandhi Graduate Student Construction Engineering & Management Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Stanford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071125/52dbcf93/attachment-0002.html From waquarahmed at hotmail.com Mon Nov 26 20:40:13 2007 From: waquarahmed at hotmail.com (waquar ahmed) Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:40:13 +0530 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Richard Peet in JNU In-Reply-To: <9057132d0711181600q23465818h7decbe80cd20036a@mail.gmail.com> References: <47407AF1.4060009@cs.wisc.edu> <9057132d0711181600q23465818h7decbe80cd20036a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Professor Richard Peet Will deliver a lecture on Global Finance Capital and Neoliberal Policy Regime in the School of Social Sciences I committee room, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi on November 30, 2007 at 2.30 pm - all are welcome. Just in case you are not familiar with Professor Peet's scholarship, then please check his profile at: http://www.clarku.edu/academiccatalog/facultybio.cfm?id=432 _________________________________________________________________ Post ads for free - to sell, rent or even buy.www.yello.in http://ss1.richmedia.in/recurl.asp?pid=186 From leofsaldanha at gmail.com Thu Nov 29 16:59:08 2007 From: leofsaldanha at gmail.com (leo saldanha) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 16:59:08 +0530 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Mangalore Petrochemical SEZ Environmental Public Hearing Ended Abruptly In-Reply-To: <474E993B.7030704@esgindia.org> References: <474E993B.7030704@esgindia.org> Message-ID: <9057132d0711290329v2ac5e46fmc3e310d8520b1e4d@mail.gmail.com> 29 Nov. 07 *Mangalore Petrochemical SEZ Environmental Public Hearing Ended Abruptly* In what is turning out to be another aggressive effort to push ahead with a Special Economic Zone, the Deputy Commissioner of Mangalore district in Karnataka, Mr. Mahabaleshwar Rao, IAS, decided to abruptly end proceedings of a statutory Environmental Public Hearing being held in Bajpe town on 28 November 2007. He refused to accept the demand of over 4000 local people who had gathered to participate in the proceedings that it made no sense to them to hold a Hearing, when the Environment Impact Assessment was furnished to them in English, and not in the local language of Kannada. The investment in question was the proposal of Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India to establish a massive Petrochemicals based Special Economic Zone over 4,000 acres of pristine agricultural, mountainous terrain replete with rivers and streams, in one of the most ecologically sensitive regions of India. The Karnataka State Pollution Control Board called for the Public Hearing with a 30 day notice, but without providing the EIA in a language that people could understand, as required by law. Undeterred by the fact that to hold the Hearing, despite this fundamental lacunae in dissemination of information, would make the entire process unconstitutional, the Deputy Commissioner held on to his questionable interpretation. Those gathered demanded almost total unanimity postponement of the Public Hearing, which infact is allowed by the EIA Notification. But this demand was callously brushed aside by the officer who left rather abruptly and without in any categorical manner explaining to the hundreds gathered what this action meant. Troubled by such abuse of power, a large section of the participants traveled to Mangalore city (20 kms. away) and held a demonstration in front of the DC's office till very late in the night. Their only demand was that the DC must order postponement of the Hearing in accordance with the EIA Notification, and announce the date for a fresh hearing when KSPCB and ONGC fully complied with the requirements of the law. Neither did the DC come to receive this representation, nor has he issued any official communication of how his action should be interpreted. The deeply flawed EIA Notification 2006 (check www.esgindia.org for details) clearly allows the Government to proceed with the process of clearing a project of such scale, even if the process of Public Hearing has not been properly conducted. Clearly an undemocratic and illegal provision, this flaw has been repeatedly abused by various authorities resulting in widespread violation of human rights and environmental norms. Enclosed is a detailed statement issued by *Krishi Bhoomi Samrakshana Samithi* (Farm Land Protection Committee) that represents all the affected villages the proposed site of the 4000 acres Mangalore Petrochemicals SEZ. Leo F. Saldanha Bhargavi S. Rao Arthur Pereira Environment Support Group (R) 105, East End B Main Road, Jayanagar 9th Block East, Bangalore 560069.INDIA Tel: 91-80-22441977/26531339 Voice/Fax: 91-80-26534364 Email: esg at esgindia.org or esgindia at gmail.com Web: www.esgindia.org *Press Coverage on the issue:* Public hearing on MSEZ ends abruptly, The Hindu* * http://www.hindu.com/2007/11/29/stories/2007112954890500.htm People wait for hours to submit memorandum to official, The Hindu,* * http://www.thehindu.com/2007/11/29/stories/2007112960240300.htm M'lore SEZ meet cut short amid protests, Deccan Herald, http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Nov292007/state2007112938399.asp * * MSEZ public hearing ends abruptly, Deccan Herald, http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Nov292007/district2007112838362.asp Public hearing meet ends abruptly, New Indian Express, http://newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IEK20071128202612&Page=K&Headline=Public+hearing+meet+ends+abruptly&Title=Southern+News+%2D+Karnataka&Topic=0 *Pictures enclosed (Zipped File):* 1) Women_hearing….jpg: Women participated in very large numbers in the Public Hearing 2) DC_KSPCB…jpg: The Deputy Commissioner Mr. Jayaprakash Rao flanked by KSPCB officials 3) DC_MSEZ…jpg: The Deputy Commissioner trying to justify why holding the Hearing was legal. 4) Protest_DEC..jpg: Affected communities protesting at the DC's office after the officer abruptly ended the Hearing. Enclosed: Representation and Demands Krishi Bhoomi Samrakshana Samithi (Permude, Thenka Ekkaru, Kutthethooru, Delantha Bettu villages) D'Cunha Complex, Katil Road, Permude, Mangalore Tel: 0824-2442789/9448216975 28 November 2007, Bajpe *DEMAND TO POSTPONE THE ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED MANGALORE SEZ IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT NOTIFICATION* An Environmental Public Hearing on the proposed Mangalore Special Economic Zone was called today at 11 am at St. Joseph's Church, Bajpe Church Hall, by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board under the Chairmanship of the Deputy Commissioner of Mangalore, Shri. Mahabaleshwar Rao, IAS. The claim made by the Board while issuing the 30 days notice of Public Hearing in various newspapers, was that the investor M/s Mangalore SEZ Ltd. complied fully with the provisions of the EIA Notification 2006, and thereby the issual of hearing notice was legal. Many written objections were raised by various local affected communities during the 30 days period on the ground that the Hearing had been called in abject violation of the spirit, objective and provisions of the said Notification, in particular the procedure as laid out for holding such Statutory Public Hearings in Annexure IV of the Notification. Of absolute importance here was the fact the the Draft Environment Impact Assessment of the proposed investment was available in the designated offices only in English, and thereby violated the provisions of Section 2 of the aforesaid Annexure. No clarification was issued to the general public by the Deputy Commissioner or by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board or even the Karnataka State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority as to how the holding of the Hearing fulfilled the aforementioned provisions. On the day of the Hearing over 5,000 people gathered at the venue from the very early hours of the morning. Significantly half of those gathered included women and children from the affected areas of the proposed investment. As was insisted, they followed every requirement of the Board in terms of registering their names and addresses and sat peacefully inside the premises of the Church Hall. The Hall was full half hour before the scheduled time of the Hearing, and about 500 people were seated outside after registration. Even at the time the Hearing commenced, at 11 a.m., there were at least another 1000 people still to be registered and seated. It is indeed a matter of great concern that the Deputy Commissioner opened the process of conducting the Hearing, even when the local affected persons in particular and many others who were concerned, in general, were not yet able to fully participate in the proceedings. Many fervent appeals were made to the Deputy Commissioner not to initiate the process till such time everyone was adequately seated and able to participate, but he overruled this request and continued with the process. After the introductory remarks by the Deputy Commissioner, Member Secretary of the Board, officials of the Government department dealing with SEZ and the project proponent, the floor was thrown open to those present to present their views. One important point raised at the outset was that the Deputy Commissioner was conducting the Hearing in gross violation of the provisions of the EIA Notification. In particular it was brought to the attention of the forum that the decision of the DC to hold the Hearing in this manner was in abject violation of the provision 2.2 wherein it is stated as follows: "The Applicant shall enclose with the letter of request, at least 10 hard copies and an equivalent number of soft (electronic) copies of the draft EIA Report with the generic structure given in Appendix III including the Summary Environment Impact Assessment report in English and in the local language, prepared strictly in accordance with the Terms of Reference communicated after Scoping (Stage-2)." It is clear from this provision that the Draft EIA and the Summary of the EIA must be provided in English and in the local language. Instead of fully complying with this provision, the Draft EIA, which constitutes the main document for consideration of impact was provided only in English and not in the local language, Kannada, as required per law. This despite many requests, including by way of mass representations, that this document must be provided in Kannada and to hold the Hearing only after this demand was complied. This act thereby constituted a major violation of the aforementioned provision and also prevented the affected communities in particular to be able to fully consider the details involved and provide their opinions fulfilling the principle of prior and informed consent. To hold the Hearing, thereby, despite this major illegality also attacked the very fundamental principles of Right to Life and Livelihood, to equal and genuine participation in a statutory process and also of expression. In such a situation the DC had powers to postpone the Hearing in accordance with Section 3.3 of Annexure IV if the aforesaid Notification, which is as follows: "3.3 No postponement of the date, time, venue of the public hearing shall be undertaken, unless some untoward emergency situation occurs and only on the recommendation of the concerned District Magistrate the postponement shall be notified to the public through the same National and Regional vernacular dailies and also prominently displayed at all the identified offices by the concerned SPCB or Union Territory Pollution Control Committee;" Clearly then, the only option available to the Deputy Commissioner was to comply fully with the aforesaid provisions and call for a Hearing after the project proponent had supplied the requisite documents in local language also as required per law. To continue to hold the Hearing despite this gross illegality and legal infirmity exposed the DC as engaging in fundamental violation of the basic tenets of the Constitution of India and the relevant law applicable to the conduct of Environmental Public Hearing process. Rather than accept this legal demand, the DC decided that it was up to him to decide that the Draft EIA need not be provided in the local language and thereby the Hearing would continue. He stated that there was precedence wherein documents had not been provided in the local language and the Hearing had been conducted by the Board, and that this was sufficient for him to consitute the process as legal. There was total opposition to this position from everyone gathered. It was pointed out to the DC that to cite a precedence of previous illegallity as a reason to continue holding the hearing exposed him to fundamentally violating the law, and he was urged to not continue with the illegal Hearing. Soon after the DC engaged in a political game by inviting some former local elected persons in an effort to convince the people that the continuance of the process was in accordance with law. But they were clearly shouted down by everyone present and the DC was urged to desist from abusing his power and engaging in such partisan behaviour. Protesting such partisan approach of the DC, he was told in clear terms that given that the Parliament of India was seized with the matter of SEZs in general, and that Karnataka was under President's Rule, it would be a major abrogation of the democratic traditions demanded for decision making to even consider moving ahead with the process of environmental decision making on the Mangalore SEZ when there were no elected bodies to represent the public. In addition, the Parliament had constituted various committees that had come out with important principles based on which decisions on SEZ's were to be taken, and none of which were being complied in the present instance. Once more repeated appeals were made to the DC to ensure full compliance with the EIA Notification and hold the Hearing only after the documents were available in Kannada as required per law. It was once more stressed that to invite opinions of the affected public without providing information in a language they could understand is no consultation at all. Thereby, it was only reasonable for the DC to postpone the Hearing in accordance with Section 3.3. of Annexure IV of the EIA Notification 2006. Even though these arguments were forcefully and repeatedly made for quite some time, the DC unreasonably and illegally decided to continue with the process of the Hearing. He even stated that he would not in any circumstance postpone the Hearing. This resulted in continuing forceful demands for postponement of the Hearing. At this instance the DC got up and declared the Hearing had ended and walked out. He did not in any manner explain the legal grounds for such a decision. * Demands:* In light of such turn of events and the eventual decision of the Deputy Commissioner to walk out of a Statutory Public Hearing in clear abrogation of his service rules and the applicable law, which constitutes a major attack on the fundamental right of the affected public to be heard based on the accepted principle of prior and informed consent, we demand that the DC must immediately announce by way of an executive order that the aforesaid Public Hearing has been postponed. In upholding the law, the undersigned demand that the process of decision making on this project is deferred till such time democracy is fully restored in Karnataka and the project proponent and the Board is able to fulfil the provisions of the EIA Notification and other applicable law. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: esglist-unsubscribe at esgindia.org For additional commands, e-mail: esglist-help at esgindia.org -- Leo Saldanha Environment Support Group 105, East End B Main Road, Jayanagar 9th Block East, Bangalore 560069. INDIA Telefax: 91-80-26341977/26531339/26534364 Email: leo at esgindia.org or esg at esgindia.org Web: www.esgindia.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071129/17fd3d11/attachment-0002.html -------------- next part -------------- ***** NOTE: An attachment named MloreSEZ_Hearing_281107.zip was deleted from this message because it contained a windows executableor other potentially dangerous file type. Contact the system administrator for more information. From harishpoovaiah at gmail.com Thu Nov 29 17:43:42 2007 From: harishpoovaiah at gmail.com (harish poovaiah) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:43:42 +0530 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Mangalore Petrochemical SEZ Environmental Public Hearing Ended Abruptly In-Reply-To: <9057132d0711290329v2ac5e46fmc3e310d8520b1e4d@mail.gmail.com> References: <474E993B.7030704@esgindia.org> <9057132d0711290329v2ac5e46fmc3e310d8520b1e4d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi Leo 1. There are two names quoted as DC: Mr. Jayaprakash Rao and Mr. Mahabaleshwar Rao. 2. Under the demand - if in light of such turn of events and the eventual decision of the Deputy Commissioner to walk out of a Statutory Public Hearing in clear abrogation of his service rules and the applicable law - why not action be demanded on him to set an example. Harish On Nov 29, 2007 4:59 PM, leo saldanha wrote: > > > 29 Nov. 07 > > *Mangalore Petrochemical SEZ Environmental Public Hearing Ended Abruptly* > > > > In what is turning out to be another aggressive effort to push ahead with > a Special Economic Zone, the Deputy Commissioner of Mangalore district in > Karnataka, Mr. Mahabaleshwar Rao, IAS, decided to abruptly end proceedings > of a statutory Environmental Public Hearing being held in Bajpe town on 28 > November 2007. He refused to accept the demand of over 4000 local people > who had gathered to participate in the proceedings that it made no sense to > them to hold a Hearing, when the Environment Impact Assessment was furnished > to them in English, and not in the local language of Kannada. > > > > The investment in question was the proposal of Oil and Natural Gas > Commission of India to establish a massive Petrochemicals based Special > Economic Zone over 4,000 acres of pristine agricultural, mountainous terrain > replete with rivers and streams, in one of the most ecologically sensitive > regions of India. The Karnataka State Pollution Control Board called for > the Public Hearing with a 30 day notice, but without providing the EIA in a > language that people could understand, as required by law. > > > > Undeterred by the fact that to hold the Hearing, despite this fundamental > lacunae in dissemination of information, would make the entire process > unconstitutional, the Deputy Commissioner held on to his questionable > interpretation. Those gathered demanded almost total unanimity postponement > of the Public Hearing, which infact is allowed by the EIA Notification. But > this demand was callously brushed aside by the officer who left rather > abruptly and without in any categorical manner explaining to the hundreds > gathered what this action meant. > > > > Troubled by such abuse of power, a large section of the participants > traveled to Mangalore city (20 kms. away) and held a demonstration in front > of the DC's office till very late in the night. Their only demand was that > the DC must order postponement of the Hearing in accordance with the EIA > Notification, and announce the date for a fresh hearing when KSPCB and ONGC > fully complied with the requirements of the law. Neither did the DC come to > receive this representation, nor has he issued any official communication of > how his action should be interpreted. > > > > The deeply flawed EIA Notification 2006 (check www.esgindia.org for > details) clearly allows the Government to proceed with the process of > clearing a project of such scale, even if the process of Public Hearing has > not been properly conducted. Clearly an undemocratic and illegal provision, > this flaw has been repeatedly abused by various authorities resulting in > widespread violation of human rights and environmental norms. > > > > Enclosed is a detailed statement issued by *Krishi Bhoomi Samrakshana > Samithi* (Farm Land Protection Committee) that represents all the affected > villages the proposed site of the 4000 acres Mangalore Petrochemicals SEZ. > > > > > > Leo F. Saldanha Bhargavi S. > Rao Arthur Pereira > > Environment Support Group (R) > > 105, East End B Main Road, Jayanagar 9th Block East, Bangalore > 560069.INDIA > > Tel: 91-80-22441977/26531339 Voice/Fax: 91-80-26534364 > > Email: esg at esgindia.org or esgindia at gmail.com Web: > www.esgindia.org > > > > > > *Press Coverage on the issue:* > > > > Public hearing on MSEZ ends abruptly, The Hindu* *http://www.hindu.com/2007/11/29/stories/2007112954890500.htm > > > > > People wait for hours to submit memorandum to official, The Hindu,* *http://www.thehindu.com/2007/11/29/stories/2007112960240300.htm > > > > > M'lore SEZ meet cut short amid protests, Deccan Herald, http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Nov292007/state2007112938399.asp > > > * * > > MSEZ public hearing ends abruptly, Deccan Herald, > > http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Nov292007/district2007112838362.asp > > > > Public hearing meet ends abruptly, New Indian Express, > > > http://newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IEK20071128202612&Page=K&Headline=Public+hearing+meet+ends+abruptly&Title=Southern+News+%2D+Karnataka&Topic=0 > > > > > > *Pictures enclosed (Zipped File):* > > > > 1) Women_hearing….jpg: Women participated in very large numbers in > the Public Hearing > > 2) DC_KSPCB…jpg: The Deputy Commissioner Mr. Jayaprakash Rao flanked > by KSPCB officials > > 3) DC_MSEZ…jpg: The Deputy Commissioner trying to justify why > holding the Hearing was legal. > > 4) Protest_DEC..jpg: Affected communities protesting at the DC's > office after the officer abruptly ended the Hearing. > Enclosed: Representation and Demands > > Krishi Bhoomi Samrakshana Samithi > > (Permude, Thenka Ekkaru, Kutthethooru, Delantha Bettu villages) > > D'Cunha Complex, Katil Road, Permude, Mangalore > > Tel: 0824-2442789/9448216975 > > > > 28 November 2007, Bajpe > > > > *DEMAND TO POSTPONE THE ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED > MANGALORE SEZ IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT > NOTIFICATION* > > > > > > An Environmental Public Hearing on the proposed Mangalore Special Economic > Zone was called today at 11 am at St. Joseph's Church, Bajpe Church Hall, by > the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board under the Chairmanship of the > Deputy Commissioner of Mangalore, Shri. Mahabaleshwar Rao, IAS. > > > > The claim made by the Board while issuing the 30 days notice of Public > Hearing in various newspapers, was that the investor M/s Mangalore SEZ Ltd. > complied fully with the provisions of the EIA Notification 2006, and thereby > the issual of hearing notice was legal. > > > > Many written objections were raised by various local affected communities > during the 30 days period on the ground that the Hearing had been called in > abject violation of the spirit, objective and provisions of the said > Notification, in particular the procedure as laid out for holding such > Statutory Public Hearings in Annexure IV of the Notification. Of absolute > importance here was the fact the the Draft Environment Impact Assessment of > the proposed investment was available in the designated offices only in > English, and thereby violated the provisions of Section 2 of the aforesaid > Annexure. > > > > No clarification was issued to the general public by the Deputy > Commissioner or by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board or even the > Karnataka State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority as to how the > holding of the Hearing fulfilled the aforementioned provisions. > > > > On the day of the Hearing over 5,000 people gathered at the venue from the > very early hours of the morning. Significantly half of those gathered > included women and children from the affected areas of the proposed > investment. As was insisted, they followed every requirement of the Board > in terms of registering their names and addresses and sat peacefully inside > the premises of the Church Hall. > > > > The Hall was full half hour before the scheduled time of the Hearing, and > about 500 people were seated outside after registration. Even at the time > the Hearing commenced, at 11 a.m., there were at least another 1000 people > still to be registered and seated. It is indeed a matter of great concern > that the Deputy Commissioner opened the process of conducting the Hearing, > even when the local affected persons in particular and many others who were > concerned, in general, were not yet able to fully participate in the > proceedings. > > > > Many fervent appeals were made to the Deputy Commissioner not to initiate > the process till such time everyone was adequately seated and able to > participate, but he overruled this request and continued with the process. > > > > After the introductory remarks by the Deputy Commissioner, Member > Secretary of the Board, officials of the Government department dealing with > SEZ and the project proponent, the floor was thrown open to those present to > present their views. > > > > One important point raised at the outset was that the Deputy Commissioner > was conducting the Hearing in gross violation of the provisions of the EIA > Notification. In particular it was brought to the attention of the forum > that the decision of the DC to hold the Hearing in this manner was in abject > violation of the provision 2.2 wherein it is stated as follows: > > > > "The Applicant shall enclose with the letter of request, at least 10 hard > copies and an equivalent number of soft (electronic) copies of the draft EIA > Report with the generic structure given in Appendix III including the > Summary Environment Impact Assessment report in English and in the local > language, prepared strictly in accordance with the Terms of Reference > communicated after Scoping (Stage-2)." > > > > It is clear from this provision that the Draft EIA and the Summary of the > EIA must be provided in English and in the local language. Instead of > fully complying with this provision, the Draft EIA, which constitutes the > main document for consideration of impact was provided only in English and > not in the local language, Kannada, as required per law. This despite many > requests, including by way of mass representations, that this document must > be provided in Kannada and to hold the Hearing only after this demand was > complied. > > > > This act thereby constituted a major violation of the aforementioned > provision and also prevented the affected communities in particular to be > able to fully consider the details involved and provide their opinions > fulfilling the principle of prior and informed consent. To hold the > Hearing, thereby, despite this major illegality also attacked the very > fundamental principles of Right to Life and Livelihood, to equal and genuine > participation in a statutory process and also of expression. > > > > In such a situation the DC had powers to postpone the Hearing in > accordance with Section 3.3 of Annexure IV if the aforesaid Notification, > which is as follows: > > > > "3.3 No postponement of the date, time, venue of the public hearing > shall be undertaken, unless some untoward emergency situation occurs and > only on the recommendation of the concerned District Magistrate the > postponement shall be notified to the public through the same National and > Regional vernacular dailies and also prominently displayed at all the > identified offices by the concerned SPCB or Union Territory Pollution > Control Committee;" > > > > Clearly then, the only option available to the Deputy Commissioner was to > comply fully with the aforesaid provisions and call for a Hearing after the > project proponent had supplied the requisite documents in local language > also as required per law. To continue to hold the Hearing despite this > gross illegality and legal infirmity exposed the DC as engaging in > fundamental violation of the basic tenets of the Constitution of India and > the relevant law applicable to the conduct of Environmental Public Hearing > process. > > > > Rather than accept this legal demand, the DC decided that it was up to him > to decide that the Draft EIA need not be provided in the local language and > thereby the Hearing would continue. He stated that there was precedence > wherein documents had not been provided in the local language and the > Hearing had been conducted by the Board, and that this was sufficient for > him to consitute the process as legal. > > > > There was total opposition to this position from everyone gathered. It > was pointed out to the DC that to cite a precedence of previous illegallity > as a reason to continue holding the hearing exposed him to fundamentally > violating the law, and he was urged to not continue with the illegal > Hearing. > > > > Soon after the DC engaged in a political game by inviting some former > local elected persons in an effort to convince the people that the > continuance of the process was in accordance with law. But they were > clearly shouted down by everyone present and the DC was urged to desist from > abusing his power and engaging in such partisan behaviour. > > > > Protesting such partisan approach of the DC, he was told in clear terms > that given that the Parliament of India was seized with the matter of SEZs > in general, and that Karnataka was under President's Rule, it would be a > major abrogation of the democratic traditions demanded for decision making > to even consider moving ahead with the process of environmental decision > making on the Mangalore SEZ when there were no elected bodies to represent > the public. In addition, the Parliament had constituted various committees > that had come out with important principles based on which decisions on > SEZ's were to be taken, and none of which were being complied in the present > instance. > > > > Once more repeated appeals were made to the DC to ensure full compliance > with the EIA Notification and hold the Hearing only after the documents were > available in Kannada as required per law. It was once more stressed that to > invite opinions of the affected public without providing information in a > language they could understand is no consultation at all. Thereby, it was > only reasonable for the DC to postpone the Hearing in accordance with > Section 3.3. of Annexure IV of the EIA Notification 2006. > > > > Even though these arguments were forcefully and repeatedly made for quite > some time, the DC unreasonably and illegally decided to continue with the > process of the Hearing. He even stated that he would not in any circumstance > postpone the Hearing. This resulted in continuing forceful demands for > postponement of the Hearing. > > > > At this instance the DC got up and declared the Hearing had ended and > walked out. He did not in any manner explain the legal grounds for such a > decision. > > * > Demands:* > > In light of such turn of events and the eventual decision of the Deputy > Commissioner to walk out of a Statutory Public Hearing in clear abrogation > of his service rules and the applicable law, which constitutes a major > attack on the fundamental right of the affected public to be heard based on > the accepted principle of prior and informed consent, we demand that the DC > must immediately announce by way of an executive order that the aforesaid > Public Hearing has been postponed. In upholding the law, the undersigned > demand that the process of decision making on this project is deferred till > such time democracy is fully restored in Karnataka and the project proponent > and the Board is able to fulfil the provisions of the EIA Notification and > other applicable law. > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: esglist-unsubscribe at esgindia.org > For additional commands, e-mail: esglist-help at esgindia.org > > > > -- > Leo Saldanha > Environment Support Group > 105, East End B Main Road, > Jayanagar 9th Block East, > Bangalore 560069. INDIA > Telefax: 91-80-26341977/26531339/26534364 > Email: leo at esgindia.org or esg at esgindia.org > Web: www.esgindia.org > > ***** > NOTE: An attachment named MloreSEZ_Hearing_281107.zip was deleted from > this message because it contained a windows executableor other potentially > dangerous file type. > Contact the system administrator for more information. > _______________________________________________ > Urbanstudygroup mailing list > Urban Study Group: Reading the South Asian City > > To subscribe or browse the Urban Study Group archives, please visit > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/urbanstudygroup > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071129/825ef245/attachment-0002.html From mail at chitrakarkhana.net Fri Nov 30 13:59:22 2007 From: mail at chitrakarkhana.net (shaina anand) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:59:22 +0530 Subject: [Urbanstudy] CAMP First Weekend Project In-Reply-To: <33eee40c0711292231m24fedbcak944cc10ac59a6ca@mail.gmail.com> References: <33eee40c0711292231m24fedbcak944cc10ac59a6ca@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <33eee40c0711300029u1343f8b8rc5b47dcf57723542@mail.gmail.com> Kiosk of Someone Else's Dreams. A computer kiosk at Celebrate Bandra. 2007 November 30, to Dec 2, 2007, 6 p.m to 10 p.m. daily. At the Otter's Club end of Carter Road, Bandra. Look out for a strange security booth. A touchscreen kiosk manages various connections within a neighbourhood, using technologies varying from wifi to electricity, and including people and ideologies from various "points of view"; sea-facing apartments, street vendors, passers-by on the promenade. A viewer/ user can browse through archives of recorded material here, as well as open live connections to the sources of this material, or perform physical world transformations. The kiosk thus executes, at a small scale, some recurring fantasies of both state-supported "e-communities" and community-run mesh networks, and the like. But is this the kind of "mapping" or "connectivity" we want? What are the limits of exchange, and what do people have to say? Such questions arise, and it is unknown what effects our temporary excess of connections will have. Technically, the project involves the integration of web technologies with unusual databases, other networks such as radio and electricity, and things in the physical environment. *Venue * Carter Road Promenade At the Security Booth Otters Club End (Joggers Park End) Bandra, Mumbai. >From Khar, all the way down carter road towards end of the promenade >From Bandra, Turner Road, turn right at otters club, at the start of the promenade *When* Friday Nov 30, Saturday Dec 1 and Sunday, Dec 2. 6:00pm-10:00pm Best time to visit: Saturday/Sunday between 8:pm -10:9m A project by CAMP http://camputer.org -- chitrakarkhana.net camputer.org -- chitrakarkhana.net camputer.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071130/e4306d34/attachment-0002.html From cugambetta at yahoo.com Tue Nov 6 02:03:08 2007 From: cugambetta at yahoo.com (Curt Gambetta) Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 20:33:08 -0000 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Crawford Market redevelopment Message-ID: <774091.9373.qm@web56809.mail.re3.yahoo.com> I have a request. A friend of mine in Bombay, a journalist and foodie, is concerned about what is slated to happen to Crawford Market. If unfamiliar with the issue, here are some recent articles: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/PoliticsNation/Save_Crawford_Market_move_gathers_pace/articleshow/2500928.cms http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1129549 He was inquiring as to what materials on rejuvenating public markets in India would be of use to someone who is concerned about the issue. Are there any interesting models--successes or failures--in South Asia we can think of that approached the future of a public market more democratically? I am most familiar with what I see as failures, for instance, the KR Market structure in Bangalore and the sustained effort to clean up and move out hawkers there. I know that a number of people at CASSUM in Bangalore have worked on this issue, but are there other recent examples that might educate us on the issue? Or examples outside of India or South Asia that might be interesting to critique? I think this is an important issue, because the landscape of food retail and distribution is changing, and what is happening to Crawford Market doesn't at all seem out of sync with larger efforts to streamline distribution, centralize the players and interiorize food retail space. Maybe the issue of interest here is not what you get out of the whole process but the process of getting there. Here we seem to have the heritage/ preservation process on the one hand and the BMC/developers on the other (please correct me if I am wrong). This is not of course to forget the civic activism that has been taking place around the issue (though I am curious what this activism is asking for, in relation to those who sell in the market?) I am interested in whether there have been compelling infrastructures of negotiation and collective politics in other cities that attempted to give those who sell, buy and manage the marketplace a substantive role in determining the future life of the market? When politicians talk of giving these interests a stake in the process, the issue is often already defined and refined in such a way that you either participate or you don't--if participation is even solicited (the objective of many of the good government/ civic activism initiatives enters into the problem at this stage, trying to increase vehicles of participation). So, you are asked to participate in an issue that has already been crafted for you, supposedly in your best interest (even though what is in your best interest may prove disastrous... look at the Bangalore Metro project!). The question that interests me is: who is defining the problem and how? This seems essential. Beyond this more general question... can anyone offer any insight as to what is happening around the Crawford Market issue? Is 'saving' Crawford market through the heritage process the only alternative on the table to the proposed redevelopment plan? Curt __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From yanivbin at gmail.com Fri Nov 9 15:34:13 2007 From: yanivbin at gmail.com (Vinay Baindur) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 10:04:13 -0000 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Paris to revert to public water provision In-Reply-To: <896016.59024.qm@web53612.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <896016.59024.qm@web53612.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <86b8a7050711090204q5caa143fnb05b0ad2f809bca0@mail.gmail.com> FYI [waterjustice] Paris mayor declares coming back to public service Dear Friends, We would like to share a very important victory against privatisation of water here in France: After months of a quite hard discussion and lobbying between the "left" parties, activist and the transnationals, the mayor of Paris, Bertrand Delanoë, announces the "retour" to a unique public service for water as one of the main goals of his new mandate; ( he will be very probably elected again in March 2008) This is a big victory for our friends of "Eau de Paris" ( greens ) and public operators from Val de Marne ( communists ) and all NGOs that struggle for public water; This is also a quite symbolic victory against Suez and Veolia in his own land. After being evasive concerning the renewal of the Suez and Veolia contracts, finally the socialist mayor decided to choose clearly a position against the renewal of the two contracts, signed in 1985 by Chirac when he was mayor; ******************************************************************* Le Monde , 7 november " The mayor wants to take this historical opportunity to take the entire control of the water management, that was partially led to private groups in 1985; (..) ' I would like to propose to Paris habitants a public operator which guarantees the quality of water at an affordable price' (…) ' A single public owned operator that manages all the cycle of production and distribution of water' "At the Paris council, the Green and the Communist party have been struggling for a long time to come back to public management. (…) Anne Le Strat, president of the Paris Water company, says she is satisfied with the mayor's decision; " ********************************** The entire press statement, in french, is in our website http://www.france-libertes.fr/ __,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071109/8cd94e23/attachment-0003.html From anilaemmanuel at gmail.com Sun Nov 11 11:50:30 2007 From: anilaemmanuel at gmail.com (anila emmanuel) Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 06:20:30 -0000 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Fwd: UN plans online resource on sustainable cities In-Reply-To: References: <59ead66c0711022212x68dca31bm22f09590f4ba2f35@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <59ead66c0711102220k644ef91flc6bbcb630a7fb2a9@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Augustine Veliath Date: Nov 8, 2007 11:02 AM Subject: UN plans online resource on sustainable cities To: anila emmanuel UN plans online resource on sustainable cities Prithwi November 7, 2007 | International, e-Gov and News. | Vancouver: The United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT) on Monday announced that it has partnered with the University ofBritish Columbia to create the UBC/UN-HABITAT archives which would be the world's most complete online repository of information on building sustainable cities. The online portal would give governments, urban planners, developers, academics and others access to sustainable solutions to all aspects of urban life, including housing, transportation, infrastructure, resources management, land tenure, governance and climate change. The virtual information centre would contain critical print and electronic material from Habitat's first conference held in1976 up to and including the 2006 World Urban Forum III, both of which took place in Vancouver. The UN-HABITAT's Executive Director Anna Tibaijuka said that the resulting web-based archive will provide an invaluable resource for learning, teaching and practice on our towns and cities locally, nationally and globally. Stressing on issues like rapid urbanization and its impact on communities, economies and the environment, the UBC President Stephen J Toope said that the university's leadership in urban planning will contribute to this important and timely endeavor. The ongoing project would feature several thousand items, including a unique collection of 2,000 videos accumulated since UN-HABITAT 1976. The UBC/UN-Habitat Archives is made possible with US $20,000 in seed-funding from the British Columbia Real Estate Foundation. A pilot version of the portal will have nearly 500 books, videos, magazines, pamphlets, websites and other materials. —iGovernment Bureau Augustine Veliath Communication Specialist UNICEF New Delhi India Tel: 9111246066165 Fax: 911124691410, 24627521 Email: aveliath at unicef.org Website: http://www.unicef.org/India For every child health, education, equality, protection ADVANCE HUMANITY Website: http://www.unicef.org/india -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071111/23a9b444/attachment-0003.html From ava at inthefield.info Mon Nov 19 01:11:44 2007 From: ava at inthefield.info (ava at inthefield.info) Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 19:41:44 -0000 Subject: [Urbanstudy] EDWARD W. SOJA PRIZE / CRITICAL PLANNING CALL FOR PAPERS DEADLINE EXTENDED Message-ID: Please forward widely: Announcing: The Edward W. Soja Prize for Critical Thinking in Urban and Regional Research Note: deadline for Critical Planning submissions extended to *Dec. 31st, 2007* Critical Planning, the UCLA Journal of Urban Planning, proudly announces the Edward W. Soja Prize for Critical Thinking in Urban and Regional Research. For the inaugural year, a cash prize of $1,000 will be given to the best article published in volume 15 of summer 2008. The prize is named after Edward W. Soja. It celebrates the lifetime achievements of this critical thinker whose work continues to open insightful new research directions for the theoretical and practical understanding of contemporary cities and regions. The awarded article will exemplify the seminal contribution that such visions make to scholarly research. For the prize we will consider all articles previously selected through the Critical Planning double-blind peer review — the journal's managing editor will chair a juried selection process. We welcome submissions related to urban and regional planning and all cognate disciplines from persons residing in any country. Preference will be given to authors speaking to critical issues outside the research agendas of traditional funding agencies and institutional donors. All other standards for publication in the Critical Planning journal apply. For additional details, please refer to the call for submissions to vol. 15 below. Please note: the deadline for submissions has been extended to December 31, 2007. CALL FOR PAPERS: Volume 15, Summer 2008 Critical Planning UCLA Journal of Urban Planning In honor of our 15th anniversary, this year's volume of Critical Planning is devoted to identifying and highlighting the most current critical approaches to urban theory, research and practice. We seek submissions that 1) address the challenges confronting the present and future of cities and regions in the U.S. and around the world and, 2) display an original and critical perspective on recent theoretical developments, policies and practices. We invite submissions from all disciplines as well as the use of various methodologies. We encourage cross-disciplinary, multi-scalar and mixed-method approaches. Critical Planning is a double-blind peer-reviewed publication. Feature articles are generally between 5,000 and 7,000 words, while shorter articles are between 1,000 and 3,000. All submissions should be written according to the standards of the Chicago Manual of Style, 15th Edition. Footnotes should be placed at the end of the document. Please double-space all parts of the manuscript and leave one-inch margins on all sides. Tables and images should be separated from the text. Images should be provided in .tif format, not exceeding a width of five inches and a resolution of 600 dpi (a width of 3000 pixels). Include a cover sheet with the article's title; the author's name, phone number, email address; and a two-sentence biographical statement. Please do not put identifying information (name or affiliation) anywhere but the cover sheet. Submissions will be accepted on a rolling basis. Feel free to contact us by email to discuss your ideas. Manuscripts should be submitted by 5pm on December 31, 2007 as .doc attachments via email to: critplan at ucla.edu and two hardcopies (postmarked by Dec. 31) should be mailed to: Critical Planning C/O Ava Bromberg, Managing Editor UCLA Department of Urban Planning School of Public Affairs 3250 Public Policy Building Los Angeles, CA 90095-1656 Email: critplan at ucla.edu Website: http://www.spa.ucla.edu/critplan/ For pdf version of call please see our website. From leofsaldanha at gmail.com Mon Nov 19 05:31:06 2007 From: leofsaldanha at gmail.com (leo saldanha) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 00:01:06 -0000 Subject: [Urbanstudy] The Philanthropic Enemy In-Reply-To: <47407AF1.4060009@cs.wisc.edu> References: <47407AF1.4060009@cs.wisc.edu> Message-ID: <9057132d0711181600q23465818h7decbe80cd20036a@mail.gmail.com> you might like reading the article below. -S. ------------------------------- Hi, Just to add that there is an equally enjoyable recent article of Slavoj Zizek at LRB entitled "Resistance is Surrender": http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n22/print/zize01_.html BTW let me say that Zizek was in Athens almost a month ago and he gave two lectures one on "ecology without nature" and another on the "liberal utopia" that I have shot them on video (for the purpose of using them in my courses) and then uploaded on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=5A4F3B61C3C08F8Fhttp://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=96990C7283819692 All the best, --Moses -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [WSF-Discuss] Fwd: The Philanthropic Enemy Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 11:27:55 +0530 From: Jai Sen To: Post WSFDiscuss References: Grist for the mill... with thanks to Brian Begin forwarded message: *From: *"Brian K. Murphy" *Date: * November 17 2007 10:09:49 AM GMT+05:30 *To: *Recipient List Suppressed:; *Subject: **The Philanthropic Enemy* http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n07/print/zize01_.html London Review of Books *The Philanthropic Enemy* *Nobody has to be vile ·* Slavoj ÎiÏek Since 2001, Davos and Porto Alegre have been the twin cities of globalisation: Davos, the exclusive Swiss resort where the global elite of managers, statesmen and media personalities meets for the World Economic Forum under heavy police protection, trying to convince us (and themselves) that globalisation is its own best remedy; Porto Alegre, the subtropical Brazilian city where the counter-elite of the anti-globalisation movement meets, trying to convince us (and themselves) that capitalist globalisation is not our inevitable fate - that, as the official slogan puts it, 'another world is possible.' It seems, however, that the Porto Alegre reunions have somehow lost their impetus - we have heard less and less about them over the past couple of years. Where did the bright stars of Porto Alegre go? Some of them, at least, moved to Davos. The tone of the Davos meetings is now predominantly set by the group of entrepreneurs who ironically refer to themselves as 'liberal communists' and who no longer accept the opposition between Davos and Porto Alegre: their claim is that we can have the global capitalist cake (thrive as entrepreneurs) and eat it (endorse the anti-capitalist causes of social responsibility, ecological concern etc). There is no need for Porto Alegre: instead, Davos can become Porto Davos. So who are these liberal communists? The usual suspects: Bill Gates and George Soros, the CEOs of Google, IBM, Intel, eBay, as well as court-philosophers like Thomas Friedman. The true conservatives today, they argue, are not only the old right, with its ridiculous belief in authority, order and parochial patriotism, but also the old left, with its war against capitalism: both fight their shadow-theatre battles in disregard of the new realities. The signifier of this new reality in the liberal communist Newspeak is 'smart'. Being smart means being dynamic and nomadic, and against centralised bureaucracy; believing in dialogue and co-operation as against central authority; in flexibility as against routine; culture and knowledge as against industrial production; in spontaneous interaction and autopoiesis as against fixed hierarchy. Bill Gates is the icon of what he has called 'frictionless capitalism', the post-industrial society and the 'end of labour'. Software is winning over hardware and the young nerd over the old manager in his black suit. In the new company headquarters, there is little external discipline; former hackers dominate the scene, working long hours, enjoying free drinks in green surroundings. The underlying notion here is that Gates is a subversive marginal hooligan, an ex-hacker, who has taken over and dressed himself up as a respectable chairman. Liberal communists are top executives reviving the spirit of contest or, to put it the other way round, countercultural geeks who have taken over big corporations. Their dogma is a new, postmodernised version of Adam Smith's invisible hand: the market and social responsibility are not opposites, but can be reunited for mutual benefit. As Friedman puts it, nobody has to be vile in order to do business these days; collaboration with employees, dialogue with customers, respect for the environment, transparency of deals - these are the keys to success. Olivier Malnuit recently drew up the liberal communist's ten commandments in the French magazine Technikart: 1. You shall give everything away free (free access, no copyright); just charge for the additional services, which will make you rich. 2. You shall change the world, not just sell things. 3. You shall be sharing, aware of social responsibility. 4. You shall be creative: focus on design, new technologies and science. 5. You shall tell all: have no secrets, endorse and practise the cult of transparency and the free flow of information; all humanity should collaborate and interact. 6. You shall not work: have no fixed 9 to 5 job, but engage in smart, dynamic, flexible communication. 7. You shall return to school: engage in permanent education. 8. You shall act as an enzyme: work not only for the market, but trigger new forms of social collaboration. 9. You shall die poor: return your wealth to those who need it, since you have more than you can ever spend. 10. You shall be the state: companies should be in partnership with the state. Liberal communists are pragmatic; they hate a doctrinaire approach. There is no exploited working class today, only concrete problems to be solved: starvation in Africa, the plight of Muslim women, religious fundamentalist violence. When there is a humanitarian crisis in Africa (liberal communists love a humanitarian crisis; it brings out the best in them), instead of engaging in anti-imperialist rhetoric, we should get together and work out the best way of solving the problem, engage people, governments and business in a common enterprise, start moving things instead of relying on centralised state help, approach the crisis in a creative and unconventional way. Liberal communists like to point out that the decision of some large international corporations to ignore apartheid rules within their companies was as important as the direct political struggle against apartheid in South Africa. Abolishing segregation within the company, paying blacks and whites the same salary for the same job etc: this was a perfect instance of the overlap between the struggle for political freedom and business interests, since the same companies can now thrive in post-apartheid South Africa. Liberal communists love May 1968. What an explosion of youthful energy and creativity! How it shattered the bureaucratic order! What an impetus it gave to economic and social life after the political illusions dropped away! Those who were old enough were themselves protesting and fighting on the streets: now they have changed in order to change the world, to revolutionise our lives for real. Didn't Marx say that all political upheavals were unimportant compared to the invention of the steam engine? And would Marx not have said today: what are all the protests against global capitalism in comparison with the internet? Above all, liberal communists are true citizens of the world - good people who worry. They worry about populist fundamentalism and irresponsible greedy capitalist corporations. They see the 'deeper causes' of today's problems: mass poverty and hopelessness breed fundamentalist terror. Their goal is not to earn money, but to change the world (and, as a by-product, make even more money). Bill Gates is already the single greatest benefactor in the history of humanity, displaying his love for his neighbours by giving hundreds of millions of dollars for education, the fight against hunger and malaria etc. The catch is that before you can give all this away you have to take it (or, as the liberal communists would put it, create it). In order to help people, the justification goes, you must have the means to do so, and experience - that is, recognition of the dismal failure of all centralised statist and collectivist approaches - teaches us that private enterprise is by far the most effective way. By regulating their business, taxing them excessively, the state is undermining the official goal of its own activity (to make life better for the majority, to help those in need). Liberal communists do not want to be mere profit-machines: they want their lives to have deeper meaning. They are against old-fashioned religion and for spirituality, for non-confessional meditation (everybody knows that Buddhism foreshadows brain science, that the power of meditation can be measured scientifically). Their motto is social responsibility and gratitude: they are the first to admit that society has been incredibly good to them, allowing them to deploy their talents and amass wealth, so they feel that it is their duty to give something back to society and help people. This beneficence is what makes business success worthwhile. This isn't an entirely new phenomenon. Remember Andrew Carnegie, who employed a private army to suppress organised labour in his steelworks and then distributed large parts of his wealth for educational, cultural and humanitarian causes, proving that, although a man of steel, he had a heart of gold? In the same way, today's liberal communists give away with one hand what they grabbed with the other. There is a chocolate-flavoured laxative available on the shelves of US stores which is publicised with the paradoxical injunction: Do you have constipation? Eat more of this chocolate! - i.e. eat more of something that itself causes constipation. The structure of the chocolate laxative can be discerned throughout today's ideological landscape; it is what makes a figure like Soros so objectionable. He stands for ruthless financial exploitation combined with its counter-agent, humanitarian worry about the catastrophic social consequences of the unbridled market economy. Soros's daily routine is a lie embodied: half of his working time is devoted to financial speculation, the other half to 'humanitarian' activities (financing cultural and democratic activities in post-Communist countries, writing essays and books) which work against the effects of his own speculations. The two faces of Bill Gates are exactly like the two faces of Soros: on the one hand, a cruel businessman, destroying or buying out competitors, aiming at a virtual monopoly; on the other, the great philanthropist who makes a point of saying: 'What does it serve to have computers if people do not have enough to eat?' According to liberal communist ethics, the ruthless pursuit of profit is counteracted by charity: charity is part of the game, a humanitarian mask hiding the underlying economic exploitation. Developed countries are constantly 'helping' undeveloped ones (with aid, credits etc), and so avoiding the key issue: their complicity in and responsibility for the miserable situation of the Third World. As for the opposition between 'smart' and 'non-smart', outsourcing is the key notion. You export the (necessary) dark side of production - disciplined, hierarchical labour, ecological pollution - to 'non-smart' Third World locations (or invisible ones in the First World). The ultimate liberal communist dream is to export the entire working class to invisible Third World sweat shops. We should have no illusions: liberal communists are the enemy of every true progressive struggle today. All other enemies - religious fundamentalists, terrorists, corrupt and inefficient state bureaucracies - depend on contingent local circumstances. Precisely because they want to resolve all these secondary malfunctions of the global system, liberal communists are the direct embodiment of what is wrong with the system. It may be necessary to enter into tactical alliances with liberal communists in order to fight racism, sexism and religious obscurantism, but it's important to remember exactly what they are up to. Etienne Balibar, in La Crainte des masses (1997), distinguishes the two opposite but complementary modes of excessive violence in today's capitalism: the objective (structural) violence that is inherent in the social conditions of global capitalism (the automatic creation of excluded and dispensable individuals, from the homeless to the unemployed), and the subjective violence of newly emerging ethnic and/or religious (in short: racist) fundamentalisms. They may fight subjective violence, but liberal communists are the agents of the structural violence that creates the conditions for explosions of subjective violence. The same Soros who gives millions to fund education has ruined the lives of thousands thanks to his financial speculations and in doing so created the conditions for the rise of the intolerance he denounces. *Slavoj ÎiÏek is a dialectical-materialist philosopher and psychoanalyst. He also co-directs the International Centre for Humanities at Birkbeck College. The Parallax View appeared last year.* ISSN 0260-9592 Copyright (c) LRB Ltd., 1997-2007 < Home ^ Top terms & conditions privacy ______________________________ Jai Sen jai.sen at cacim.net CACIM, A-3 Defence Colony, New Delhi 110 024, India www.cacim.net Ph : +91-11-4155 1521, 2433 2451 *Check out* the OpenSpaceForum @ www.openspaceforum.net *Subscribe to WSFDiscuss*, an open and unmoderated forum on the World Social Forum and on related social and political movements and issues. Simply send an empty email to worldsocialforum-discuss-subscribe at openspaceforum.net *And, NEW ! :* Join CEOS at openspaceforum.net, the CEOS (Critical Engagement with Open Space) listserve for exchange and coordination on open space theory and practice and to facilitate a critical discussion of the idea of 'open space'. Just send an empty mail to CEOS-subscribe at openspaceforum.net -- Leo Saldanha Environment Support Group 105, East End B Main Road, Jayanagar 9th Block East, Bangalore 560069. INDIA Telefax: 91-80-26341977/26531339/26534364 Email: leo at esgindia.org or esg at esgindia.org Web: www.esgindia.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071119/111b3c3f/attachment-0003.html From sebydesiolim at hotmail.com Tue Nov 20 20:52:33 2007 From: sebydesiolim at hotmail.com (sebastian Rodrigues) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:22:33 -0000 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Police terror in Colamb, Sanguem Message-ID: According to just received today November 20 2007 reports from Colamb in Sanguem, that Goa Police attached to Quepem Police station have began terrorising the villagers. A group of 8Policemen came today in plain clothes at 6 pm and began threatening the villagers. they were searching Agnelo D'Souza, one of the villagers in forefront of protest against mining threatening to gobble up Colamb village. He had protested overvelmingly during Novemeber 18 2007 gram Sabha of the Rivona village panchayat and sought resulation seeking to ban further mining activity in Colamb. Villagers led by Milagrine Antao led the confrontation today against the police. Police are behaving in this manner to further the interest of the mining companies. -- www.mandgoa.blogspot.com MAND An adivasi-rights resource centre, An initiative of Gawda, Kunbi, Velip, and Dhangar Federation (GAKUVED) "Hari Smriti" 381, Dhulapi, Corlim, Ilhas, Goa. Pincode: 403 110 Visit my blog at http://www.openspaceforum.net/twiki/tiki-view_blog.php?blogId=17 _________________________________________________________________ Post ads for free - to sell, rent or even buy.www.yello.in http://ss1.richmedia.in/recurl.asp?pid=186 From leofsaldanha at gmail.com Wed Nov 21 11:37:32 2007 From: leofsaldanha at gmail.com (leo saldanha) Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 06:07:32 -0000 Subject: [Urbanstudy] NEAA Inspects project In-Reply-To: <4743CADB.70809@esgindia.org> References: <4743CADB.70809@esgindia.org> Message-ID: <9057132d0711202207j4315057bra6db81dc4cdfeab7@mail.gmail.com> *Date:21/11/2007* *URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2007/11/21/stories/2007112155050600.htm* ------------------------------ [image: ICICI Bank] Karnataka - Bangalore * NEAA inspects project * Alladi Jayasri BANGALORE: Allegations of gross violation of the Environment Impact Assessment Notification 2004 and the direction of the Karnataka High Court, by State Government officials in conducting a public hearing for an apartment project in Whitefield, brought members of the National Environment Appellate Authority (NEAA) to the city for spot inspection today. NEAA members K. Prasad, J.C. Kala and I.V. Manivannan inspected the site of the Athashri Housing project proposed by the Pune-based Paranjape Schemes. C.J. Singh, a resident of the area adjoining the project site, had appealed before the NEAA, which heard the case in September 2007. The project is the construction of 206 flats in Pattandur Agrahara, Whitefield, at an estimated cost of Rs. 13 crore. Mr. Singh has filed a public interest litigation in the High Court against the promoters for misrepresenting facts, and hiding other vital information. Main objection His main objection was that the promoters started construction without obtaining EIA clearance. The land use conversion orders were disputed by him. He maintained that the land, obtained from its previous owner Uma Devi, was meant for residential and semi-public purposes. Besides, the PIL contended that the apartment project, has no plans for waste disposal, water supply and other basic necessities. Further, the approach road to the project was owned by Mr. Singh and he had permitted fellow residents the use of the road, and it could not be claimed by the project promoters. The NGO, Environment Support Group, highlighted the "blatant violation of the law in holding the public hearing on August 23, 2006, despite being informed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Urban to refrain from doing so. * * (c) Copyright 2000 - 2007 The Hindu [image: Newindpress.com] *Print * *NEAA makes unprecedented visit to construction site* *ENS* The National Environment Appellate Authority (NEAA) on Tuesday inspected the ongoing construction at Whitefield taken up by Paranjpe Schemes Atashri Housing project to ascertain environmental compliance. The inspection was conducted following a complaint by neighbours. Athashri Paranjpe Schemes (Construction) Ltd. has been constructing a massive residential complex in Whitefield, without the mandatory clearance from Union Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF). A senior resident CJ Singh, has challenged the environmental clearances accorded to this large housing project on grounds of gross violations of civic planning, fire protection, land conversion and environmental laws. K Prasad, JC Kala and Dr V Manivannan, were the three members of NEAA, who visited the site for inspection. CJ Singh claimed that the project developers started construction without, in any manner, securing any clearance from either the Pollution Control Board or the Ministry of Environment and Forests. The Athashri Housing project has planned the development of 206 flats with one bedroom and two bed room units for Senior Citizens. However the decision on the Athashri Housing project by NEAA is yet to be ascertained. -- Leo Saldanha Environment Support Group 105, East End B Main Road, Jayanagar 9th Block East, Bangalore 560069. INDIA Telefax: 91-80-26341977/26531339/26534364 Email: leo at esgindia.org or esg at esgindia.org Web: www.esgindia.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071121/3e0ad4aa/attachment-0003.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 3057 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071121/3e0ad4aa/attachment-0009.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 1957 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071121/3e0ad4aa/attachment-0010.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 3799 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071121/3e0ad4aa/attachment-0011.gif From cugambetta at yahoo.com Sun Nov 25 01:57:58 2007 From: cugambetta at yahoo.com (Curt Gambetta) Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 20:27:58 -0000 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Fw: Screening of 'Liquid City' on December 6 Message-ID: <822431.85713.qm@web56814.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Check this out... if anyone is able to see it and would be willing to post some comments, I would love to read them. Curt ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: PUKAR To: cugambetta at yahoo.com Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2007 2:49:40 AM Subject: Screening of 'Liquid City' on December 6 If you are having trouble viewing this email please click here. PUKAR and India China Institute invite you for a screening of Liquid city (30 minutes; English, Hindi and Marathi with English subtitles) Followed by a discussion Directed and produced by Matthew Gandy Thursday, December 6, 2007 6:30 PM Venue: Max Muller Bhavan Auditorium, Kala Ghoda About the film: The tortuous flow of water through Mumbai presents one of the most striking indicators of persistent social inequalities within the globalizing metropolis. The documentary film Liquid City explores the complexity of water politics in Mumbai ranging from the engineering challenge of transferring nearly 3,000 million litres of water a day to the city from the jungles, lakes and mountains of the state of Maharashtra to debates over flooding, privatization and social conflict. The film is based on a unique collaboration between academics and film makers based in London and Mumbai and combines in-depth interviews with activists, engineers, local residents and other voices to paint a unique picture of this vibrant and fast changing city. Assistant director Savitri Medhatul Camera Krystallia Kamvasinou Editors Savitri Medhatul Krystallia Kamvasinou Sound designer Amala Popuri Research and production coordinator Andrew Harris The film was developed in collaboration with PUKAR and was funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. Matthew Gandy is Professor of Geography at University College London. His research focuses on urban landscape and infrastructure with recent work in India, Nigeria and the USA. His publications include Concrete and clay: reworking nature in New York City (MIT Press, 2002) and "Learning from Lagos" in New Left Review (2005). PUKAR (Partners for Urban Knowledge, Action and Research) Address:: 1-4, 2nd Floor, Kamanwala Chambers, Sir P. M. Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 Telephone:: +91 (22) 6574 8152 Fax:: +91 (22) 6664 0561 Email:: pukar at pukar.org.in Website:: www.pukar.org.in PUKAR is an innovative and experimental initiative that aims to contribute to a global debate about urbanization and globalization. Change email address / Leave mailing list ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071124/d6df62ef/attachment-0003.html From gandhisagars at yahoo.com Sun Nov 25 22:10:23 2007 From: gandhisagars at yahoo.com (Sagar Gandhi) Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2007 16:40:23 -0000 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Saudi Arbian firm's investment in India Message-ID: <647465.85040.qm@web38803.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hello All, Check this article. This might be of your interest. Regards, Sagar Saudi realty firm plans 3 bn investment in India - http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News_by_Industry/Saudi_realty_firm_plans_3_bn_investment_in_India/articleshow/2569401.cms MUMBAI: Saudi Arabia-based realty firm Tanmiyat group is planning an investment of around USD 3 billion in a township project in India, a top company official said. The group has zeroed in on Bangalore for the project, its first-ever in the Indian market. "We are in the final stages of fine-tuning our plans for this township project. We will be ready with the final blueprint within the next 2-3-months," Tanmiyat group's Managing Director Bharat Thakkar said. This would be a mixed-use project and would be completed in phases over a five-year time span, he said. The project would be distinctive and unique in many respects and "since this is our first venture in India, we will use the project to position ourselves rightly in the market to facilitate our growth thereafter," Thakkar said. The group was still fine-tuning various aspects of the project, including the investment structure for it, he added. "The equity component is still fluid and we have yet to decide whether we want to load a debt component onto the project," he said, adding that the average size of the group's projects has been in the range of USD 2.5-3 billion. Being a mixed-use project, apart from residential accommodation, the project would also have commercial infrastructure. "Bangalore is well-known for its IT, BPO and bio-tech establishments and these three would constitute focus areas for us," Thakkar said. -- Sagar S. Gandhi Graduate Student Construction Engineering & Management Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Stanford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071125/52dbcf93/attachment-0003.html From waquarahmed at hotmail.com Mon Nov 26 20:40:25 2007 From: waquarahmed at hotmail.com (waquar ahmed) Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:10:25 -0000 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Richard Peet in JNU In-Reply-To: <9057132d0711181600q23465818h7decbe80cd20036a@mail.gmail.com> References: <47407AF1.4060009@cs.wisc.edu> <9057132d0711181600q23465818h7decbe80cd20036a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Professor Richard Peet Will deliver a lecture on Global Finance Capital and Neoliberal Policy Regime in the School of Social Sciences I committee room, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi on November 30, 2007 at 2.30 pm - all are welcome. Just in case you are not familiar with Professor Peet's scholarship, then please check his profile at: http://www.clarku.edu/academiccatalog/facultybio.cfm?id=432 _________________________________________________________________ Post ads for free - to sell, rent or even buy.www.yello.in http://ss1.richmedia.in/recurl.asp?pid=186 From leofsaldanha at gmail.com Thu Nov 29 16:59:18 2007 From: leofsaldanha at gmail.com (leo saldanha) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 11:29:18 -0000 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Mangalore Petrochemical SEZ Environmental Public Hearing Ended Abruptly In-Reply-To: <474E993B.7030704@esgindia.org> References: <474E993B.7030704@esgindia.org> Message-ID: <9057132d0711290329v2ac5e46fmc3e310d8520b1e4d@mail.gmail.com> 29 Nov. 07 *Mangalore Petrochemical SEZ Environmental Public Hearing Ended Abruptly* In what is turning out to be another aggressive effort to push ahead with a Special Economic Zone, the Deputy Commissioner of Mangalore district in Karnataka, Mr. Mahabaleshwar Rao, IAS, decided to abruptly end proceedings of a statutory Environmental Public Hearing being held in Bajpe town on 28 November 2007. He refused to accept the demand of over 4000 local people who had gathered to participate in the proceedings that it made no sense to them to hold a Hearing, when the Environment Impact Assessment was furnished to them in English, and not in the local language of Kannada. The investment in question was the proposal of Oil and Natural Gas Commission of India to establish a massive Petrochemicals based Special Economic Zone over 4,000 acres of pristine agricultural, mountainous terrain replete with rivers and streams, in one of the most ecologically sensitive regions of India. The Karnataka State Pollution Control Board called for the Public Hearing with a 30 day notice, but without providing the EIA in a language that people could understand, as required by law. Undeterred by the fact that to hold the Hearing, despite this fundamental lacunae in dissemination of information, would make the entire process unconstitutional, the Deputy Commissioner held on to his questionable interpretation. Those gathered demanded almost total unanimity postponement of the Public Hearing, which infact is allowed by the EIA Notification. But this demand was callously brushed aside by the officer who left rather abruptly and without in any categorical manner explaining to the hundreds gathered what this action meant. Troubled by such abuse of power, a large section of the participants traveled to Mangalore city (20 kms. away) and held a demonstration in front of the DC's office till very late in the night. Their only demand was that the DC must order postponement of the Hearing in accordance with the EIA Notification, and announce the date for a fresh hearing when KSPCB and ONGC fully complied with the requirements of the law. Neither did the DC come to receive this representation, nor has he issued any official communication of how his action should be interpreted. The deeply flawed EIA Notification 2006 (check www.esgindia.org for details) clearly allows the Government to proceed with the process of clearing a project of such scale, even if the process of Public Hearing has not been properly conducted. Clearly an undemocratic and illegal provision, this flaw has been repeatedly abused by various authorities resulting in widespread violation of human rights and environmental norms. Enclosed is a detailed statement issued by *Krishi Bhoomi Samrakshana Samithi* (Farm Land Protection Committee) that represents all the affected villages the proposed site of the 4000 acres Mangalore Petrochemicals SEZ. Leo F. Saldanha Bhargavi S. Rao Arthur Pereira Environment Support Group (R) 105, East End B Main Road, Jayanagar 9th Block East, Bangalore 560069.INDIA Tel: 91-80-22441977/26531339 Voice/Fax: 91-80-26534364 Email: esg at esgindia.org or esgindia at gmail.com Web: www.esgindia.org *Press Coverage on the issue:* Public hearing on MSEZ ends abruptly, The Hindu* * http://www.hindu.com/2007/11/29/stories/2007112954890500.htm People wait for hours to submit memorandum to official, The Hindu,* * http://www.thehindu.com/2007/11/29/stories/2007112960240300.htm M'lore SEZ meet cut short amid protests, Deccan Herald, http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Nov292007/state2007112938399.asp * * MSEZ public hearing ends abruptly, Deccan Herald, http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Nov292007/district2007112838362.asp Public hearing meet ends abruptly, New Indian Express, http://newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IEK20071128202612&Page=K&Headline=Public+hearing+meet+ends+abruptly&Title=Southern+News+%2D+Karnataka&Topic=0 *Pictures enclosed (Zipped File):* 1) Women_hearing….jpg: Women participated in very large numbers in the Public Hearing 2) DC_KSPCB…jpg: The Deputy Commissioner Mr. Jayaprakash Rao flanked by KSPCB officials 3) DC_MSEZ…jpg: The Deputy Commissioner trying to justify why holding the Hearing was legal. 4) Protest_DEC..jpg: Affected communities protesting at the DC's office after the officer abruptly ended the Hearing. Enclosed: Representation and Demands Krishi Bhoomi Samrakshana Samithi (Permude, Thenka Ekkaru, Kutthethooru, Delantha Bettu villages) D'Cunha Complex, Katil Road, Permude, Mangalore Tel: 0824-2442789/9448216975 28 November 2007, Bajpe *DEMAND TO POSTPONE THE ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED MANGALORE SEZ IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT NOTIFICATION* An Environmental Public Hearing on the proposed Mangalore Special Economic Zone was called today at 11 am at St. Joseph's Church, Bajpe Church Hall, by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board under the Chairmanship of the Deputy Commissioner of Mangalore, Shri. Mahabaleshwar Rao, IAS. The claim made by the Board while issuing the 30 days notice of Public Hearing in various newspapers, was that the investor M/s Mangalore SEZ Ltd. complied fully with the provisions of the EIA Notification 2006, and thereby the issual of hearing notice was legal. Many written objections were raised by various local affected communities during the 30 days period on the ground that the Hearing had been called in abject violation of the spirit, objective and provisions of the said Notification, in particular the procedure as laid out for holding such Statutory Public Hearings in Annexure IV of the Notification. Of absolute importance here was the fact the the Draft Environment Impact Assessment of the proposed investment was available in the designated offices only in English, and thereby violated the provisions of Section 2 of the aforesaid Annexure. No clarification was issued to the general public by the Deputy Commissioner or by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board or even the Karnataka State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority as to how the holding of the Hearing fulfilled the aforementioned provisions. On the day of the Hearing over 5,000 people gathered at the venue from the very early hours of the morning. Significantly half of those gathered included women and children from the affected areas of the proposed investment. As was insisted, they followed every requirement of the Board in terms of registering their names and addresses and sat peacefully inside the premises of the Church Hall. The Hall was full half hour before the scheduled time of the Hearing, and about 500 people were seated outside after registration. Even at the time the Hearing commenced, at 11 a.m., there were at least another 1000 people still to be registered and seated. It is indeed a matter of great concern that the Deputy Commissioner opened the process of conducting the Hearing, even when the local affected persons in particular and many others who were concerned, in general, were not yet able to fully participate in the proceedings. Many fervent appeals were made to the Deputy Commissioner not to initiate the process till such time everyone was adequately seated and able to participate, but he overruled this request and continued with the process. After the introductory remarks by the Deputy Commissioner, Member Secretary of the Board, officials of the Government department dealing with SEZ and the project proponent, the floor was thrown open to those present to present their views. One important point raised at the outset was that the Deputy Commissioner was conducting the Hearing in gross violation of the provisions of the EIA Notification. In particular it was brought to the attention of the forum that the decision of the DC to hold the Hearing in this manner was in abject violation of the provision 2.2 wherein it is stated as follows: "The Applicant shall enclose with the letter of request, at least 10 hard copies and an equivalent number of soft (electronic) copies of the draft EIA Report with the generic structure given in Appendix III including the Summary Environment Impact Assessment report in English and in the local language, prepared strictly in accordance with the Terms of Reference communicated after Scoping (Stage-2)." It is clear from this provision that the Draft EIA and the Summary of the EIA must be provided in English and in the local language. Instead of fully complying with this provision, the Draft EIA, which constitutes the main document for consideration of impact was provided only in English and not in the local language, Kannada, as required per law. This despite many requests, including by way of mass representations, that this document must be provided in Kannada and to hold the Hearing only after this demand was complied. This act thereby constituted a major violation of the aforementioned provision and also prevented the affected communities in particular to be able to fully consider the details involved and provide their opinions fulfilling the principle of prior and informed consent. To hold the Hearing, thereby, despite this major illegality also attacked the very fundamental principles of Right to Life and Livelihood, to equal and genuine participation in a statutory process and also of expression. In such a situation the DC had powers to postpone the Hearing in accordance with Section 3.3 of Annexure IV if the aforesaid Notification, which is as follows: "3.3 No postponement of the date, time, venue of the public hearing shall be undertaken, unless some untoward emergency situation occurs and only on the recommendation of the concerned District Magistrate the postponement shall be notified to the public through the same National and Regional vernacular dailies and also prominently displayed at all the identified offices by the concerned SPCB or Union Territory Pollution Control Committee;" Clearly then, the only option available to the Deputy Commissioner was to comply fully with the aforesaid provisions and call for a Hearing after the project proponent had supplied the requisite documents in local language also as required per law. To continue to hold the Hearing despite this gross illegality and legal infirmity exposed the DC as engaging in fundamental violation of the basic tenets of the Constitution of India and the relevant law applicable to the conduct of Environmental Public Hearing process. Rather than accept this legal demand, the DC decided that it was up to him to decide that the Draft EIA need not be provided in the local language and thereby the Hearing would continue. He stated that there was precedence wherein documents had not been provided in the local language and the Hearing had been conducted by the Board, and that this was sufficient for him to consitute the process as legal. There was total opposition to this position from everyone gathered. It was pointed out to the DC that to cite a precedence of previous illegallity as a reason to continue holding the hearing exposed him to fundamentally violating the law, and he was urged to not continue with the illegal Hearing. Soon after the DC engaged in a political game by inviting some former local elected persons in an effort to convince the people that the continuance of the process was in accordance with law. But they were clearly shouted down by everyone present and the DC was urged to desist from abusing his power and engaging in such partisan behaviour. Protesting such partisan approach of the DC, he was told in clear terms that given that the Parliament of India was seized with the matter of SEZs in general, and that Karnataka was under President's Rule, it would be a major abrogation of the democratic traditions demanded for decision making to even consider moving ahead with the process of environmental decision making on the Mangalore SEZ when there were no elected bodies to represent the public. In addition, the Parliament had constituted various committees that had come out with important principles based on which decisions on SEZ's were to be taken, and none of which were being complied in the present instance. Once more repeated appeals were made to the DC to ensure full compliance with the EIA Notification and hold the Hearing only after the documents were available in Kannada as required per law. It was once more stressed that to invite opinions of the affected public without providing information in a language they could understand is no consultation at all. Thereby, it was only reasonable for the DC to postpone the Hearing in accordance with Section 3.3. of Annexure IV of the EIA Notification 2006. Even though these arguments were forcefully and repeatedly made for quite some time, the DC unreasonably and illegally decided to continue with the process of the Hearing. He even stated that he would not in any circumstance postpone the Hearing. This resulted in continuing forceful demands for postponement of the Hearing. At this instance the DC got up and declared the Hearing had ended and walked out. He did not in any manner explain the legal grounds for such a decision. * Demands:* In light of such turn of events and the eventual decision of the Deputy Commissioner to walk out of a Statutory Public Hearing in clear abrogation of his service rules and the applicable law, which constitutes a major attack on the fundamental right of the affected public to be heard based on the accepted principle of prior and informed consent, we demand that the DC must immediately announce by way of an executive order that the aforesaid Public Hearing has been postponed. In upholding the law, the undersigned demand that the process of decision making on this project is deferred till such time democracy is fully restored in Karnataka and the project proponent and the Board is able to fulfil the provisions of the EIA Notification and other applicable law. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: esglist-unsubscribe at esgindia.org For additional commands, e-mail: esglist-help at esgindia.org -- Leo Saldanha Environment Support Group 105, East End B Main Road, Jayanagar 9th Block East, Bangalore 560069. INDIA Telefax: 91-80-26341977/26531339/26534364 Email: leo at esgindia.org or esg at esgindia.org Web: www.esgindia.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071129/17fd3d11/attachment-0003.html -------------- next part -------------- ***** NOTE: An attachment named MloreSEZ_Hearing_281107.zip was deleted from this message because it contained a windows executableor other potentially dangerous file type. Contact the system administrator for more information. From harishpoovaiah at gmail.com Thu Nov 29 17:43:53 2007 From: harishpoovaiah at gmail.com (harish poovaiah) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:13:53 -0000 Subject: [Urbanstudy] Mangalore Petrochemical SEZ Environmental Public Hearing Ended Abruptly In-Reply-To: <9057132d0711290329v2ac5e46fmc3e310d8520b1e4d@mail.gmail.com> References: <474E993B.7030704@esgindia.org> <9057132d0711290329v2ac5e46fmc3e310d8520b1e4d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi Leo 1. There are two names quoted as DC: Mr. Jayaprakash Rao and Mr. Mahabaleshwar Rao. 2. Under the demand - if in light of such turn of events and the eventual decision of the Deputy Commissioner to walk out of a Statutory Public Hearing in clear abrogation of his service rules and the applicable law - why not action be demanded on him to set an example. Harish On Nov 29, 2007 4:59 PM, leo saldanha wrote: > > > 29 Nov. 07 > > *Mangalore Petrochemical SEZ Environmental Public Hearing Ended Abruptly* > > > > In what is turning out to be another aggressive effort to push ahead with > a Special Economic Zone, the Deputy Commissioner of Mangalore district in > Karnataka, Mr. Mahabaleshwar Rao, IAS, decided to abruptly end proceedings > of a statutory Environmental Public Hearing being held in Bajpe town on 28 > November 2007. He refused to accept the demand of over 4000 local people > who had gathered to participate in the proceedings that it made no sense to > them to hold a Hearing, when the Environment Impact Assessment was furnished > to them in English, and not in the local language of Kannada. > > > > The investment in question was the proposal of Oil and Natural Gas > Commission of India to establish a massive Petrochemicals based Special > Economic Zone over 4,000 acres of pristine agricultural, mountainous terrain > replete with rivers and streams, in one of the most ecologically sensitive > regions of India. The Karnataka State Pollution Control Board called for > the Public Hearing with a 30 day notice, but without providing the EIA in a > language that people could understand, as required by law. > > > > Undeterred by the fact that to hold the Hearing, despite this fundamental > lacunae in dissemination of information, would make the entire process > unconstitutional, the Deputy Commissioner held on to his questionable > interpretation. Those gathered demanded almost total unanimity postponement > of the Public Hearing, which infact is allowed by the EIA Notification. But > this demand was callously brushed aside by the officer who left rather > abruptly and without in any categorical manner explaining to the hundreds > gathered what this action meant. > > > > Troubled by such abuse of power, a large section of the participants > traveled to Mangalore city (20 kms. away) and held a demonstration in front > of the DC's office till very late in the night. Their only demand was that > the DC must order postponement of the Hearing in accordance with the EIA > Notification, and announce the date for a fresh hearing when KSPCB and ONGC > fully complied with the requirements of the law. Neither did the DC come to > receive this representation, nor has he issued any official communication of > how his action should be interpreted. > > > > The deeply flawed EIA Notification 2006 (check www.esgindia.org for > details) clearly allows the Government to proceed with the process of > clearing a project of such scale, even if the process of Public Hearing has > not been properly conducted. Clearly an undemocratic and illegal provision, > this flaw has been repeatedly abused by various authorities resulting in > widespread violation of human rights and environmental norms. > > > > Enclosed is a detailed statement issued by *Krishi Bhoomi Samrakshana > Samithi* (Farm Land Protection Committee) that represents all the affected > villages the proposed site of the 4000 acres Mangalore Petrochemicals SEZ. > > > > > > Leo F. Saldanha Bhargavi S. > Rao Arthur Pereira > > Environment Support Group (R) > > 105, East End B Main Road, Jayanagar 9th Block East, Bangalore > 560069.INDIA > > Tel: 91-80-22441977/26531339 Voice/Fax: 91-80-26534364 > > Email: esg at esgindia.org or esgindia at gmail.com Web: > www.esgindia.org > > > > > > *Press Coverage on the issue:* > > > > Public hearing on MSEZ ends abruptly, The Hindu* *http://www.hindu.com/2007/11/29/stories/2007112954890500.htm > > > > > People wait for hours to submit memorandum to official, The Hindu,* *http://www.thehindu.com/2007/11/29/stories/2007112960240300.htm > > > > > M'lore SEZ meet cut short amid protests, Deccan Herald, http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Nov292007/state2007112938399.asp > > > * * > > MSEZ public hearing ends abruptly, Deccan Herald, > > http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Nov292007/district2007112838362.asp > > > > Public hearing meet ends abruptly, New Indian Express, > > > http://newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IEK20071128202612&Page=K&Headline=Public+hearing+meet+ends+abruptly&Title=Southern+News+%2D+Karnataka&Topic=0 > > > > > > *Pictures enclosed (Zipped File):* > > > > 1) Women_hearing….jpg: Women participated in very large numbers in > the Public Hearing > > 2) DC_KSPCB…jpg: The Deputy Commissioner Mr. Jayaprakash Rao flanked > by KSPCB officials > > 3) DC_MSEZ…jpg: The Deputy Commissioner trying to justify why > holding the Hearing was legal. > > 4) Protest_DEC..jpg: Affected communities protesting at the DC's > office after the officer abruptly ended the Hearing. > Enclosed: Representation and Demands > > Krishi Bhoomi Samrakshana Samithi > > (Permude, Thenka Ekkaru, Kutthethooru, Delantha Bettu villages) > > D'Cunha Complex, Katil Road, Permude, Mangalore > > Tel: 0824-2442789/9448216975 > > > > 28 November 2007, Bajpe > > > > *DEMAND TO POSTPONE THE ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED > MANGALORE SEZ IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT > NOTIFICATION* > > > > > > An Environmental Public Hearing on the proposed Mangalore Special Economic > Zone was called today at 11 am at St. Joseph's Church, Bajpe Church Hall, by > the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board under the Chairmanship of the > Deputy Commissioner of Mangalore, Shri. Mahabaleshwar Rao, IAS. > > > > The claim made by the Board while issuing the 30 days notice of Public > Hearing in various newspapers, was that the investor M/s Mangalore SEZ Ltd. > complied fully with the provisions of the EIA Notification 2006, and thereby > the issual of hearing notice was legal. > > > > Many written objections were raised by various local affected communities > during the 30 days period on the ground that the Hearing had been called in > abject violation of the spirit, objective and provisions of the said > Notification, in particular the procedure as laid out for holding such > Statutory Public Hearings in Annexure IV of the Notification. Of absolute > importance here was the fact the the Draft Environment Impact Assessment of > the proposed investment was available in the designated offices only in > English, and thereby violated the provisions of Section 2 of the aforesaid > Annexure. > > > > No clarification was issued to the general public by the Deputy > Commissioner or by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board or even the > Karnataka State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority as to how the > holding of the Hearing fulfilled the aforementioned provisions. > > > > On the day of the Hearing over 5,000 people gathered at the venue from the > very early hours of the morning. Significantly half of those gathered > included women and children from the affected areas of the proposed > investment. As was insisted, they followed every requirement of the Board > in terms of registering their names and addresses and sat peacefully inside > the premises of the Church Hall. > > > > The Hall was full half hour before the scheduled time of the Hearing, and > about 500 people were seated outside after registration. Even at the time > the Hearing commenced, at 11 a.m., there were at least another 1000 people > still to be registered and seated. It is indeed a matter of great concern > that the Deputy Commissioner opened the process of conducting the Hearing, > even when the local affected persons in particular and many others who were > concerned, in general, were not yet able to fully participate in the > proceedings. > > > > Many fervent appeals were made to the Deputy Commissioner not to initiate > the process till such time everyone was adequately seated and able to > participate, but he overruled this request and continued with the process. > > > > After the introductory remarks by the Deputy Commissioner, Member > Secretary of the Board, officials of the Government department dealing with > SEZ and the project proponent, the floor was thrown open to those present to > present their views. > > > > One important point raised at the outset was that the Deputy Commissioner > was conducting the Hearing in gross violation of the provisions of the EIA > Notification. In particular it was brought to the attention of the forum > that the decision of the DC to hold the Hearing in this manner was in abject > violation of the provision 2.2 wherein it is stated as follows: > > > > "The Applicant shall enclose with the letter of request, at least 10 hard > copies and an equivalent number of soft (electronic) copies of the draft EIA > Report with the generic structure given in Appendix III including the > Summary Environment Impact Assessment report in English and in the local > language, prepared strictly in accordance with the Terms of Reference > communicated after Scoping (Stage-2)." > > > > It is clear from this provision that the Draft EIA and the Summary of the > EIA must be provided in English and in the local language. Instead of > fully complying with this provision, the Draft EIA, which constitutes the > main document for consideration of impact was provided only in English and > not in the local language, Kannada, as required per law. This despite many > requests, including by way of mass representations, that this document must > be provided in Kannada and to hold the Hearing only after this demand was > complied. > > > > This act thereby constituted a major violation of the aforementioned > provision and also prevented the affected communities in particular to be > able to fully consider the details involved and provide their opinions > fulfilling the principle of prior and informed consent. To hold the > Hearing, thereby, despite this major illegality also attacked the very > fundamental principles of Right to Life and Livelihood, to equal and genuine > participation in a statutory process and also of expression. > > > > In such a situation the DC had powers to postpone the Hearing in > accordance with Section 3.3 of Annexure IV if the aforesaid Notification, > which is as follows: > > > > "3.3 No postponement of the date, time, venue of the public hearing > shall be undertaken, unless some untoward emergency situation occurs and > only on the recommendation of the concerned District Magistrate the > postponement shall be notified to the public through the same National and > Regional vernacular dailies and also prominently displayed at all the > identified offices by the concerned SPCB or Union Territory Pollution > Control Committee;" > > > > Clearly then, the only option available to the Deputy Commissioner was to > comply fully with the aforesaid provisions and call for a Hearing after the > project proponent had supplied the requisite documents in local language > also as required per law. To continue to hold the Hearing despite this > gross illegality and legal infirmity exposed the DC as engaging in > fundamental violation of the basic tenets of the Constitution of India and > the relevant law applicable to the conduct of Environmental Public Hearing > process. > > > > Rather than accept this legal demand, the DC decided that it was up to him > to decide that the Draft EIA need not be provided in the local language and > thereby the Hearing would continue. He stated that there was precedence > wherein documents had not been provided in the local language and the > Hearing had been conducted by the Board, and that this was sufficient for > him to consitute the process as legal. > > > > There was total opposition to this position from everyone gathered. It > was pointed out to the DC that to cite a precedence of previous illegallity > as a reason to continue holding the hearing exposed him to fundamentally > violating the law, and he was urged to not continue with the illegal > Hearing. > > > > Soon after the DC engaged in a political game by inviting some former > local elected persons in an effort to convince the people that the > continuance of the process was in accordance with law. But they were > clearly shouted down by everyone present and the DC was urged to desist from > abusing his power and engaging in such partisan behaviour. > > > > Protesting such partisan approach of the DC, he was told in clear terms > that given that the Parliament of India was seized with the matter of SEZs > in general, and that Karnataka was under President's Rule, it would be a > major abrogation of the democratic traditions demanded for decision making > to even consider moving ahead with the process of environmental decision > making on the Mangalore SEZ when there were no elected bodies to represent > the public. In addition, the Parliament had constituted various committees > that had come out with important principles based on which decisions on > SEZ's were to be taken, and none of which were being complied in the present > instance. > > > > Once more repeated appeals were made to the DC to ensure full compliance > with the EIA Notification and hold the Hearing only after the documents were > available in Kannada as required per law. It was once more stressed that to > invite opinions of the affected public without providing information in a > language they could understand is no consultation at all. Thereby, it was > only reasonable for the DC to postpone the Hearing in accordance with > Section 3.3. of Annexure IV of the EIA Notification 2006. > > > > Even though these arguments were forcefully and repeatedly made for quite > some time, the DC unreasonably and illegally decided to continue with the > process of the Hearing. He even stated that he would not in any circumstance > postpone the Hearing. This resulted in continuing forceful demands for > postponement of the Hearing. > > > > At this instance the DC got up and declared the Hearing had ended and > walked out. He did not in any manner explain the legal grounds for such a > decision. > > * > Demands:* > > In light of such turn of events and the eventual decision of the Deputy > Commissioner to walk out of a Statutory Public Hearing in clear abrogation > of his service rules and the applicable law, which constitutes a major > attack on the fundamental right of the affected public to be heard based on > the accepted principle of prior and informed consent, we demand that the DC > must immediately announce by way of an executive order that the aforesaid > Public Hearing has been postponed. In upholding the law, the undersigned > demand that the process of decision making on this project is deferred till > such time democracy is fully restored in Karnataka and the project proponent > and the Board is able to fulfil the provisions of the EIA Notification and > other applicable law. > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: esglist-unsubscribe at esgindia.org > For additional commands, e-mail: esglist-help at esgindia.org > > > > -- > Leo Saldanha > Environment Support Group > 105, East End B Main Road, > Jayanagar 9th Block East, > Bangalore 560069. INDIA > Telefax: 91-80-26341977/26531339/26534364 > Email: leo at esgindia.org or esg at esgindia.org > Web: www.esgindia.org > > ***** > NOTE: An attachment named MloreSEZ_Hearing_281107.zip was deleted from > this message because it contained a windows executableor other potentially > dangerous file type. > Contact the system administrator for more information. > _______________________________________________ > Urbanstudygroup mailing list > Urban Study Group: Reading the South Asian City > > To subscribe or browse the Urban Study Group archives, please visit > https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/urbanstudygroup > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071129/825ef245/attachment-0003.html From mail at chitrakarkhana.net Fri Nov 30 13:59:29 2007 From: mail at chitrakarkhana.net (shaina anand) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 08:29:29 -0000 Subject: [Urbanstudy] CAMP First Weekend Project In-Reply-To: <33eee40c0711292231m24fedbcak944cc10ac59a6ca@mail.gmail.com> References: <33eee40c0711292231m24fedbcak944cc10ac59a6ca@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <33eee40c0711300029u1343f8b8rc5b47dcf57723542@mail.gmail.com> Kiosk of Someone Else's Dreams. A computer kiosk at Celebrate Bandra. 2007 November 30, to Dec 2, 2007, 6 p.m to 10 p.m. daily. At the Otter's Club end of Carter Road, Bandra. Look out for a strange security booth. A touchscreen kiosk manages various connections within a neighbourhood, using technologies varying from wifi to electricity, and including people and ideologies from various "points of view"; sea-facing apartments, street vendors, passers-by on the promenade. A viewer/ user can browse through archives of recorded material here, as well as open live connections to the sources of this material, or perform physical world transformations. The kiosk thus executes, at a small scale, some recurring fantasies of both state-supported "e-communities" and community-run mesh networks, and the like. But is this the kind of "mapping" or "connectivity" we want? What are the limits of exchange, and what do people have to say? Such questions arise, and it is unknown what effects our temporary excess of connections will have. Technically, the project involves the integration of web technologies with unusual databases, other networks such as radio and electricity, and things in the physical environment. *Venue * Carter Road Promenade At the Security Booth Otters Club End (Joggers Park End) Bandra, Mumbai. >From Khar, all the way down carter road towards end of the promenade >From Bandra, Turner Road, turn right at otters club, at the start of the promenade *When* Friday Nov 30, Saturday Dec 1 and Sunday, Dec 2. 6:00pm-10:00pm Best time to visit: Saturday/Sunday between 8:pm -10:9m A project by CAMP http://camputer.org -- chitrakarkhana.net camputer.org -- chitrakarkhana.net camputer.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/urbanstudygroup/attachments/20071130/e4306d34/attachment-0003.html