“Resettlement is a complex social process; at its best, it should support and nourish the coping and adaptation processes that enable a population to regain the functionality and coherence of a viable community, resilient enough to deal with social and environmental stressors. Central to these tasks are the issues of rights, poverty, vulnerability, and other forms of social marginality that are intrinsically linked to displacement.” ~ Oliver-Smith and de Sherbinin, Forced Migration Review, 2014 (Oliver-Smith & de Sherbinin, 2014)

Resettlement and relocation (R&R) in the context of climatic and non-climatic disasters as well as that due to development projects has been followed the world over with varied experiences. Many international and regional frameworks exist, but despite that, there is very little understanding of how resettlement is enacted on the ground (drivers, context, implementation process, and short and long-term impacts). With climate change, the pressures for resettlement in urban areas are increasing thus requiring greater knowledge to improve outcomes including the option of non-movement and on-site upgrading of communities. The aim of this diagnostic report is to learn more about the existing work on resettlements and relocations in India, both in literature as well as practice, and find gaps that can help improve the outcomes of such projects for people and cities at large. The aim is also to understand the context at the country and city level in relation to the nature of climate-induced risks and how societal structures manifest themselves in location choices and affect exposure. The report also aims to learn how land use planning and resettlement policies, and legal and normative frameworks work at the regional, national, and local levels. This diagnostic work will lead to the selection of site-specific case studies. The methods include a review of country and city-specific literature on disaster risks and urban development, which will be complemented by consultations with local experts and key-informant interviews and workshops. The objectives for this work are as follows:
• Identify the factors that contribute to and define urban climate-related risk and systematize information on the legal and policy frameworks and guidelines governing ‘resettlement’ (and relocation) of affected communities.
• Define a typology of approaches to reducing climate risk for urban communities including relocation, and gauge their relative importance in achieving socially just outcomes for individuals and communities, as well as for society.

This work will further lead to enquiring about the following issues in the next phases:
• Define and characterize the underlying rationale and decision process associated with resettlement strategies enacted in different urban geographical contexts.
• Compare similar and different types of solutions enacted across continents, systematize costs and benefits and lessons learned; advantages and disadvantages with regard to reduction of future economic and social costs; and best policies for maximizing beneficial outcomes.

There is a paucity of literature that examines the urban context of R&R. While cities agglomerate risk, create risk, and often serve as respondents to risk experienced elsewhere, they also offer transformational opportunities to address these risks—building on the established institutional and financial capacities of the cities as well as their limited numbers as compared to rural locations. More risk can be mitigated by directing the research and other resources to the most vulnerable urban centers, particularly in small and medium sized towns, which are often the sites where the most vulnerable are forced to live. If planned ahead, it would not just safeguard cities’ future, but it could actually provide for more enhanced lives for its future citizens.

The review of the existing institutional and regulatory framework shows that while there are national and state policies for the ‘resettlement and rehabilitation’ of project-affected families in the context of land acquisition through Eminent Domain for ‘public purposes’, there seems to be no legal framework or safety net for those who are moved in case of disasters, and people are compensated by the State on a case to case basis.