C H A P T E R 9
Erosion of Essential Resources in Neoliberal India
A BOTTOM-UP VIEW
Vamsi Vakulabharanam
The idea of essential resources (such as the means to produce a basic live-
lihood) as different from other goods (private, public, or common-pool
resources) does not arise so much from the unique internal nature of these
goods (e.g., their inherent attributes, such as excludability or subtractabil-
ity). Rather, the difference results from the fact that these resources are
indispensable to the basic survival of the people who use them. They need
to be governed differently than other goods, because we associate a value
of moral repugnance to the withdrawal of these goods from the poor.1
This chapter seeks to address whether it is possible to imagine a skeletal
governance structure or regime for essential goods that could span mul-
tiple spatial levels, including the local, provincial, national, and global.
In this paper, I work with the concrete experience of two South
Indian states—Andhra Pradesh (AP) and Telangana.2 Through the
case study of AP’s tribal economy and the peasant economy of Telan-
gana, I discuss how the erosion of access to essential goods has gath-
ered momentum in the past few decades. From this description, I
present broader reflections on the question of devising appropriate
governance structures for essential goods.
G R A N I T E Q U A R R Y I N G I N T H E P E A S A N T
E C O N O M Y O F K A R I M N A G A R
The Indian mining department makes a distinction between major and
minor minerals. In the case of minor minerals quarried in plots of less
than five hectares, exemption is given from environmental clearance
and a public hearing in the area where mining is anticipated. Granite