Amaravati Land Pooling Again: Chandrababu Has Learned Nothing From the Past

Despite the Andhra Pradesh government projecting renewed enthusiasm among a section of Amaravati farmers for the second phase of land pooling, deep concerns continue to overshadow the Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu’s capital dreams. What is being promoted as “cooperation” and “consensus” masks a larger debate: Is the state pushing its most fertile agricultural belt into irreversible ecological, social, and economic harm in the name of urban expansion?

A Capital Built on the Back of Farmlands

The villages surrounding Amaravati form one of the richest agricultural zones in South India — multi-crop, highly irrigated, and sustained by the Krishna river. For generations, these lands have ensured food security and livelihoods for thousands. But under the land pooling scheme, these same fields are being traded in for high-rise corridors, concrete blocks, and speculative real estate.

At a meeting held by Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu on Thursday, November 27, at the State Secretariat, some farmers who had previously surrendered land said they were willing to “cooperate” again. Yet this willingness must be viewed in context:

Years of stalled development have left farmers in limbo.

Many are trapped between uncertainty and hope, believing that giving up more land might finally trigger the promised returns.

Those resisting pooling face pressure — both administrative and social — to fall in line.

This is hardly an environment for free, informed consent.

CRDA’s Unfinished Responsibilities

Farmers at the meeting pointed out repeatedly that the CRDA has failed to provide full awareness on the implications of FSI (Floor Space Index) changes, long-term financial consequences, and risks inherent to pooled development. Without transparent disclosures, farmers are being nudged to make decisions that may permanently disadvantage them.

When a government agency does not clearly explain:

how land use will change,

what ecological damage is anticipated,

how compensation will evolve over decades,

and what safeguards exist if the project stalls again — then land pooling becomes less of a partnership and more of a gamble with farmers’ futures.

The Ecological Cost No One Discusses

Amaravati’s fertile lands are not just agricultural assets—they are ecological buffers. Turning thousands of acres of green farmland into concrete has consequences:

Severe groundwater depletion due to loss of recharge zones

Urban heat island effects as green cover disappears

Flood vulnerability, especially in low-lying river-adjacent zones

Biodiversity loss as croplands, ponds, and wetlands vanish

Climate impact from large-scale construction across seismic and riverbank zones

These long-term effects will outlast any political term, yet they rarely feature in official conversations.

Promises on Paper, Uncertainty on Ground

Chandrababu Naidu repeated that the state has requested the Centre to formally notify Amaravati as the capital of Andhra Pradesh. He also spoke of extending the capital gains exemption period for farmers.

But these assurances highlight the central flaw of the project:

Even after a decade, Amaravati still depends on ongoing political negotiations with the Centre rather than guaranteed policy continuity.

When a capital city itself lacks certainty, how can farmers trust that surrendering more land will secure their future?

The Social Cost of Displacement

Land pooling is often marketed as a “non-coercive” alternative to land acquisition. However, when large tracts of land from entire villages are absorbed into a capital project, the outcome is the same:

communities fragment,

traditional livelihoods vanish,

tenant farmers lose income,

and agricultural workers are rendered jobless.

The cultivated soil that once fed the state will be replaced with commercial zones that may or may not benefit the very people who sacrificed for it.

Development Must Not Come at the Expense of Farmers

Amaravati’s vision cannot succeed by forcing farmers to choose between uncertainty and sacrifice.

Real development is inclusive, environmentally responsible, and transparent. A decade of stalled promises, half-finished structures, and shifting political realities should have been a lesson.

Yet Andhra Pradesh appears set to repeat the same mistakes — expanding a capital city by shrinking the agricultural heart of the state.

If land pooling continues without accountability, environmental safeguards, and genuine consent, Amaravati may one day be remembered not as a world-class capital, but as a cautionary tale of how fertile, life-sustaining lands were lost to concrete dreams.

Finally

With this, it is clear that YS Jagan was right — and continues to be right. Jagan's vision for inclusive development — the three-capital model, with Visakhapatnam as the executive capital and Amaravati and Kurnool as the legislative and judicial capitals — remains a far better plan. It seems Chandrababu has not learned anything from his past mistakes.