Advertisement

Urbanization and Disaster: Loss of Women’s Property Ownership in Leh, Ladakh

  • Bhuvaneswari RamanEmail author
Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Environment, Security, Development and Peace book series (BRIEFSSECUR, volume 21)

Abstract

The Himalayan region along the northern border of India has been identified as a high-risk zone, vulnerable to earthquakes, landslides, flashfloods, and drought. Drawing on evidence from the mountain town of Leh in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, this chapter explores how State interventions to promote development affect women, particularly with respect to their property relations. This chapter elucidates that development efforts have aggravated the region’s vulnerability to natural disasters. A focus on tourism and associated urban development has affected women’s land ownership as well as adversely affected the environment, which in turn has increased women’s vulnerability to disasters in multiple ways. Women’s property claims are not supported by State law or community practices, compounding their difficulty in disaster response and recovery. We argue for a better alignment of strategies governing urbanization and disasters to mitigate risks and improve disaster responsiveness. We also suggest the need for a shift in strategies, for disaster-risk mitigation to move beyond relief operations. Further, recognition of a heterogeneity of tenure forms that allow women, migrants and relatively weaker groups to establish legal claims on property is required.

Keywords

Urbanization Disaster Gender Land rights Leh Tourism 

References

  1. Alexander, André; Catanese, Andreas, 2007: “Leh Old Town Conservation Project—Ladakh, Indian Himalayas”, in: E-Conservation, 1 (October).Google Scholar
  2. Bhasin, Veena, 1999a: “Leh—an endangered city?”, in: Anthropologist, 1,1: 1–17.Google Scholar
  3. Bhasin, Veena, 1999b: Tribals of Ladakh: Ecology, Human Settlements and Health (New Delhi: Kamla-Raj Enterprises).Google Scholar
  4. Bhasin, Veena, 2004: “Ecology and Status of Women among Tribals of India”, in: Journal of Human Ecology, 15,4: 237–249.Google Scholar
  5. Census, 2001: Census of India 2001 (New Delhi: Government of India) (5 June 2014).Google Scholar
  6. Census, 2011: Census of India 2011: Leh District (New Delhi: Government of India); at: http://www.census2011.co.in/census/district/621-leh.html (7 July 2014).
  7. Choudhury, Maitreyee, 2009: “Land and Forest in the Eastern Himalayas: A Critique on Agriculture and Agroforestry in Arunachal Pradesh”, in: Dialogue, 10,4 (April–June).Google Scholar
  8. Fernandes, Walter; Barbora, Sanjay, 2002: Modernisation and Women’s Status in North Eastern India: A Comparative Study of Six Tribes (Guwahati: North Eastern Social Research Centre).Google Scholar
  9. GoI, 2002: Tenth Five Year Plan 2002–07 of Planning Commission (New Delhi: Government of India).Google Scholar
  10. GoJK, 2011: Jammu and Kashmir State Disaster Management Policy (Draft) (Srinagar: Government of Jammu and Kashmir).Google Scholar
  11. Goodall, Sarah, 2004: “Rural-to-urban Migration and Urbanization in Leh, Ladakh. A Case Study of Three Nomadic Pastoral Communities”. in: Mountain Research and Development, 24,3 (August): 220–227.Google Scholar
  12. Goodall, Sarah, 2007: From Plateau Pastures to Urban Fringe: Sedentarisation of Nomadic Pastoralists in Ladakh (PhD dissertation, University of Adelaide: Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, Adelaide).Google Scholar
  13. Gupta, A.K.; Nair, S.S., 2011: “Urban floods in Bangalore and Chennai: Risk Management Challenges and Lessons for Sustainable Urban Ecology”, in: Current Science, 100,11: 10.Google Scholar
  14. Gupta, Preeti; Khanna, A.; Majumdar, S., 2012: “Disaster Management in Flash Floods in Leh (Ladakh): A Case Study”, in: Indian Journal of Community Medicine, 37,3 (July–September): 185–190.Google Scholar
  15. Hewitt, Kenneth; Mehta, Manjari, 2012: “Rethinking Risk and Disasters in Mountain Areas”, in: Journal of Alpine Research, 100,1: 2–10.Google Scholar
  16. LDC, 2011: Ladakh District Disaster Management Plan 2011 (Leh: District Administration).Google Scholar
  17. Mann, Michael (Ed.), 1987: Macmillan Student Encyclopaedia of Sociology. (London, Basingstoke: Macmillan).Google Scholar
  18. Marak, Kumie R., 1997: Tradition and Modernity in a Matrilineal Tribal Society (New Delhi: Inter- India Publications).Google Scholar
  19. Oza, Sanchit; Prajapathi, Kalpesh, 2012: Long Term Recovery Efforts in Cloudburst Affected Urban Area of Leh (Ahmedabad: All India Disaster Mitigation Institute).Google Scholar
  20. Pelliciardi, Vladimiro, 2010: “Tourism Traffic Volumes in Leh District: An Overview”, in: Ladakh Studies, 26: 14–23.Google Scholar
  21. Pirie, Fernanda, 2007: Peace and Conflict in Ladakh: The Construction of a Fragile Web of Order. Pirie Tibetan Buddhist Studies Series (Leiden: Koninklije Pirie).Google Scholar
  22. Planning Commission, 2003: Jammu & Kashmir State Development Report (New Delhi: Government of India).Google Scholar
  23. Rizvi, Janet, 1999: Ladakh: Crossroads of High Asia (New Delhi: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
  24. Sharma, Manish, 2008: “Rethinking of Urbanisation in Arunachal Pradesh”, in: Indian Journal of Regional Science, 40,2: 142–150.Google Scholar
  25. Singh, Harjit, 2011: “Leh Tragedy of August 2010—Some Lessons for Future Development and Probable Implications of Climate Change”. Paper presented at the 15th International Association of Ladakh Studies (IALS) Conference, on 19th August 2011 at Leh, Ladakh. Abstract at: http://ladakhstudies.org/resources/Conferences/Leh-2011/Leh-abstracts.pdf.
  26. WMF, 2008: Leh Old Town/Leh Palace: Field Project Survey 2008 Watch (New York: World Monument Fund); at: http://www.wmf.org/project/leh-old-town-leh-palace (20 June 2014).

Other Literature

  1. “District Profile Leh”, Official Website of District Administration, Leh; at: http://leh.nic.in/pages/leh.pdf (11 December 2013 and 12 June 2014).

Copyright information

©  Food and Agriculture Organization 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.SonepatIndia

Personalised recommendations