Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Urban greening and displacement · India · 2009–2019

Sabarmati Riverfront Development (Ahmedabad)

Nature's voice · report
Along the city, my bed was filled with water brought from the Narmada canal.
Did nature suffer? Yes. Harm is on record. Disputed
Recorded
  • In my last 120 km to the sea I carry only industrial effluent and sewage. Down To Earth
  • 120 km of my rivers were polluted.
    Final stretch of the river to the sea reported to carry only industrial effluent and sewage.
People
  • About 8,500 people were displaced or listed for relocation.
    Survey of 1999–2002, as cited by Scroll (2014).
  • About 12,000 people were displaced or listed for relocation.
    Evicted over nine years, per Scroll (2014).
  • More than 10,000 people were displaced or listed for relocation.
    Project company figure.
  • About 5,000 people were displaced or listed for relocation.
    Down To Earth (2019).
What the record lacks: 2 none on record · 3 disputed See the gaps
Accounts of the harm differ
Did the project restore the river?
  • Government and regulators Ahmedabad municipality and SRFDCL: Presented the project as reclaiming the river for the city.
  • Press and investigations Down To Earth (2019): The stretch along the city was filled with Narmada canal water; the last 120 km of the river to the sea carried only industrial effluent and sewage. Down To Earth

Ahmedabad's Sabarmati riverfront project was presented as reclaiming the river for the city and won awards. Sources report thousands of families moved 7 to 15 km away and a river that downstream carries industrial effluent and sewage.

14%–21%Reclaimed land earmarked for commercial sale
Share of reclaimed riverfront land, as reported by Down To Earth.

Status As of the latest source reviewed (March 2019): resettlement figures remained disputed and the last 120 km of the river was reported to carry only industrial effluent and sewage.

What?
A riverfront development in Ahmedabad displaced thousands of families, was filled with Narmada canal water, and left the river downstream carrying industrial effluent and sewage. Down To Earth
Where?
Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India.
When?
2009 to 2019, with demolitions in May 2011.
Who?
Gained
  • Ahmedabad municipality and SRFDCL — Reclaimed land, part earmarked for commercial sale; awards and a loan. Down To Earth
Lost
  • Displaced families — Moved 7 to 15 km away; more than 1,000 left without shelter after May 2011. Scroll
Harmed
  • The river downstream — The last 120 km carries only industrial effluent and sewage. Down To Earth
Why?
The project was presented as reclaiming the river for the city.
How?
The stretch along the city was filled with water from the Narmada canal and part of the reclaimed land was earmarked for commercial sale. Down To Earth
6 of 6 questions answered from the record

What happened

The record, in order.

The Sabarmati Riverfront Development project in Ahmedabad, India, ran from 2009 to 2019 according to the sources reviewed. The Ahmedabad municipality and its project company, SRFDCL, presented it as reclaiming the river for the city.

Down To Earth reported that the project received a HUDCO loan, won a HUDCO award in 2012 and was placed on KPMG's 'most innovative' list, and that 14% to 21% of the reclaimed land was earmarked for commercial sale.

Reports of how many people were displaced differ. A 1999–2002 survey counted about 8,500 families (Scroll, 2014); Scroll also reported about 12,000 people evicted over nine years. The project company put the figure at more than 10,000 households; Down To Earth reported about 5,000 families. Land Conflict Watch reported that more than 1,000 families were left without shelter after the May 2011 demolitions. Scroll and Land Conflict Watch reported resettlement sites 7 to 15 km away, and an average of 7 km from the centre.

Down To Earth reported in March 2019 that the stretch along the city had been filled with water from the Narmada canal, which it described as a dirty stagnant pool, and that the last 120 km of the river to the sea carried only industrial effluent and sewage.

The sources reviewed record no penalty or prosecution. The project company stated that resettlement was supervised by the Gujarat High Court.

  1. 2002A 1999–2002 survey counts about 8,500 families on the riverbank
  2. 2009Project period begins (2009–2019)
  3. 2011May demolitions: more than 1,000 families left without shelter
  4. 2012HUDCO award; project later cited on KPMG's 'most innovative' list
  5. 2014Scroll reports about 12,000 people evicted in nine years
  6. 2019Down To Earth reports waste flowing downstream over the last 120 km of the river

What was said

Claims, in the words of those who made them.

Where accounts differ

Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.

How many people were displaced?
Press and investigations
Scroll (2014)

A 1999–2002 survey counted about 8,500 families; about 12,000 people were evicted in nine years.

Scroll
Government and regulators
SRFDCL (project company)

More than 10,000 households.

Press and investigations
Down To Earth (2019)

About 5,000 families relocated.

Down To Earth
Did the project restore the river?
Government and regulators
Ahmedabad municipality and SRFDCL

Presented the project as reclaiming the river for the city.

Press and investigations
Down To Earth (2019)

The stretch along the city was filled with Narmada canal water; the last 120 km of the river to the sea carried only industrial effluent and sewage.

Down To Earth

How it looked

What was shown, beside what was recorded.

Shown

  • The project was presented as reclaiming the river for the city.
    Ahmedabad municipality and SRFDCL
  • The project received the HUDCO award (2012) and a place on KPMG's 'most innovative' list.
    HUDCO; KPMG · Down To Earth

Recorded

  • Displacement figures: about 8,500 families (1999–2002 survey), about 12,000 people (nine years), more than 10,000 households (project company), about 5,000 families (Down To Earth).
  • More than 1,000 families were left without shelter after the May 2011 demolitions.
  • Resettlement sites were 7 to 15 km away.
  • The stretch along the city was filled with Narmada canal water; the last 120 km of the river to the sea carried only industrial effluent and sewage.
  • 14% to 21% of reclaimed land was earmarked for commercial sale.

Who gained

Money that reached nature, beside money that stayed elsewhere.

Reached nature or the ground

Not published
No figure published.

Gained elsewhere

Not totalled
Currency: · Window: . All figures cover the same period. * Estimate built from cited figures.

Responses on record

  • srfdcl: Stated that more than 10,000 households were affected and that resettlement was supervised by the Gujarat High Court.

In court and with insurers

Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

Lawsuits and rulings

No court case on record. No court has ruled on this case.

Insurers

No insurer decision on record.

What nature saw

Outcomes measured on the ground, and nature's note.

Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.

Urban riverfront stretch
Narmada canal water
Filled with canal water; described by Down To Earth as a dirty stagnant pool (2019)
Last 120 km to the sea
Industrial effluent and sewage only
Down To Earth, March 2019

What we don't know

Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.

Nature

  • Disputed Did the project restore the river?

Court

Accounts

  • Disputed How many people were displaced?

Record

  • Disputed Displacement figures differ across sources: about 5,000 families, about 8,500 families, more than 10,000 households and about 12,000 people.
  • None on record The sources reviewed record no penalty or prosecution connected with the project.

Did the harm stop?

The sources reviewed do not record any stop to the displacement or the downstream discharge.

Who paid?

Families moved 7 to 15 km from the riverbank, and the river downstream, which carries industrial effluent and sewage over its last 120 km.

Sources

Voices on record: — Company or project— Government and regulators— Courts✓ Press and investigations✓ Communities and civil society— Researchers

Communities and civil society

Connected cases

Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.