land acquisition

USA: Farmland seized for new corporate/private jet airport in Spalding County, Georgia

Rose Bridger land rights , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Farmland has been seized for a new airport in Spalding County, Georgia. Griffin-Spalding Regional Airport will serve corporate/private jets, has received federal, state and local government funding and is intended to spur real estate development in a large ‘Airport Impact Area’.

Griffin-Spalding Regional Airport site boundary
Boundary of the new Griffin-Spalding Regional Airport site, New Airport Location Map, Lamar County Commissioners, 13/01/2025, overlaid on aerial imagery dated 30/12/2025

Construction of a new airport for corporate/private jets, northeast of the City of Griffin in Spalding County, Georgia, USA has commenced. A Farm Journal article by Chris Bennett describes the seizure of a large area of Jeff Melin’s farm by eminent domain (government power to take land, with compensation, for public use such as infrastructure projects) for the new airport. The 225-acre middle section of his 450-acre farm, containing pasture, cattle, woodland, deer, dove field and a pecan tree grove, has been appropriated, which will leave his farmland on either side of the airport site landlocked. Trees, many more than a century old, at the edge of the pecan grove have already been felled to make way for airport construction and concrete poles for power lines are being erected. Melin first learned of the airport project in 2012, from a newspaper article showing his farm as one of four or five possible sites for a new airport with 124 hangars for corporate jets. He says authorities never communicated with him face to face and would not listen to him, just sending letters, making announcements and conducting ever more studies. Now Melin has been issued with an order to vacate within 90 days; he has to remove equipment and at least 65 cows and 30 calves. Melin say he is being forced to accept payment for the land which is far lower than what comparable property has been sold for. But he does not want to part with the land at any price. Melin said, “They force me to sell against my will and then pay a fraction of the value. And I’m not allowed to turn them down. My story will make you question what kind of country you’re living in” The farm has been in the family since they arrived in Griffin in 1951. Year after year Melin has worked to improve the farmland but none of this was factored into the evaluation.

Griffin-Spalding Regional Airport will be far larger than the existing Griffin-Spalding County Airport located south of the central business district of the City of Griffin, only 3 miles southwest of the new airport site, . The 5,500-6,000 foot runway will be nearly twice the length of the established airport’s 3,100-foot runway. The Griffin-Spalding Regional Airport site is significantly larger as well, encompassing 730 acres, over three and a half times the size of the existing airport’s 198-acre site. The airport site was among seven potential sites identified in the Griffin-Spalding County Airport; Airport Site Selection Study prepared for the City of Griffin and Spalding County by LPA Group Incorporated in 2008. The introduction to the study states that an ‘aeronautical industrial park adjacent to a new airport’ could help achieve industrial growth plans and that in ‘the process to find suitable land area for a new airport, this study considered an additional area for industrial development’. A map of Site 6, subsequently selected for the airport, shows a 320-acre Airport Area with a 5,500-foot runway. A second map of Site 6 shows a larger 392-acre Airport Area including a 500-foot runway extension plus an adjoining 351-acre Industrial Area, extending south of the runway with a smaller area on the other side. The combined area of the Airport Area and the Industrial Area is 743 acres.

In March 2013, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued a Finding of No Significant Impact, (FONSI) Record of Decision (ROD) determining that ‘the project as proposed would not significantly affect the quality of the human environment’ and deeming an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) unnecessary. The FONSI decision was based on information contained in a December 2011 Environmental Assessment (EA) for a replacement airport, prepared by LPA Group, and other applicable documents. Two potential alternative sites to replace the existing Griffin-Spalding County Airport, where expansion is constrained by a large amount of residential and commercial development surrounding it, were considered. A runway at least 5,500 feet in length and 100 feet wide with a parallel taxiway would enable the new airport to accommodate 75 per cent of large general aviation aircraft including Learjets, Cessna Citation 500s, Raytheon Hawkers, Dassault Falcons and the Bombardier Challenger 300.

The EA identified the site where the airport is now being constructed as the Preferred Build Alternative, requiring acquisition of 320 acres of land comprising 51 land parcels, many of which were uninhabited so relocation of residents would not be necessary. The EA notes that land acquisition would result in conversion of the land from agricultural and residential use to aviation use and clearance of approximately 260 acres of forest. Forest types identified within the site boundary and runway protection zones included bluff, slope and ravine forest along with pine and oak-hickory successional forests. The site includes approximately 37.1 acres of prime farmland and 55.6 acres of farmland categorised as of ‘statewide importance’. About 33.5 acres of floodplain and 7,368 feet of streams would be lost to airport construction. Maps of existing land use and future land use in and around the airport site show large areas of Agriculture/Forest converted to Medium and Low-Density Residential with narrow corridors of ‘Open Space Network’. A large commercial area is shown south of the airport site, with smaller industrial areas and a large industrial area to the south of AKB Parkway. An expanded ‘ultimate build-out of the Airport’ with a 6,500-foot runway is ‘reasonably foreseeable’. This would require conversion of 239 acres of federally protected farmland and relocation of 49 acres of residences.

Griffin-Spalding Regional Airport, Airport Impact Area
Griffin-Spalding Regional Airport site and Airport Impact Area, as shown in Griffin-Spalding Regional Airport Strategic Development Plan, KB Advisory Group, page 5, overlaid on aerial imagery dated 30/12/2025

Georgia based Croy Engineering was selected as the prime consultant for development of the new airport in 2018, assisting with development of a financial plan and procurement of a USD8.5 million grant for the final design. The Griffin-Spalding Regional Airport Strategic Development Plan, prepared for Spalding County and the City of Griffin by KB Advisory Group based on data up to 2025, summarises the purpose of the project, ‘The new airport can serve as the driver for increased personal & business/corporate aviation traffic, expedite the corridor as a manufacturing and distribution hub, support technical training and research for the aerospace industry, and become a local destination for the community.’ Commercial and industrial corridor development is envisaged along the AKB Parkway which runs south of the airport site. The plan identifies an ‘Airport Impact Area‘ representing ‘potential real estate development capture’, forecasting future real estate demand for four key land use types: 29 million square feet of new industrial/flex (versatile property that can be utilised for a combination of warehouse, distribution, office and retail) space, 79,800-97,000 square feet of new retail space and 1,796 housing units by 2045, plus 180 additional hotel rooms by 2035. The Airport Impact Area, including the airport site, encompasses more than 18,500 acres of land. The report recommends infrastructure development to signal site readiness and reduce risks to developers, initially prioritising shovel ready sites to market the corridor. The Immediate Priority: Target Area 1 extends along both sides of the AKB. The Medium-Term: Impact Area is the entire Airport Impact Area.

The groundbreaking ceremony for Griffin-Spalding Regional Airport took place on 7th May 2026 with over 50 people in attendance, including Department of Transportation (DOT) Under Secretary Ryan McCormack who echoed President Donald Trump’s lauding of the One BIg Beautiful Bill Act with his description of the airport as “big and beautiful“, Congressman Brian Jack, Lieutenant Governor Burt Jones, GDOT Commissioner Russell McMurry and local leaders. Construction of the airport is scheduled to be completed by 2030. Griffin-Spalding Regional Airport, the first new airport to be constructed in Georgia since 2008, is supported by federal, state and local funding. Congressman Brian Jack stated that to date the project has secured a total of USD83.4 million including USD8.5 million from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport Improvement Program, USD8.8 million from a Congressional Community Project Funding appropriation, USD47.2 million from the Georgia General Assembly, USD11.9 million from the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) Airport Aid Development program and USD7 million from a local bond.

Uganda: Industry scepticism over planned mega airport in Nyakisharara, Mbarara District

Rose Bridger Uganda , , , , ,

Announcement of a mega airport in Nyakisharara in the Mbarara District, with two 5.5-kilometre runways and a VIP runway, met with scepticism from aviation industry specialists. Land acquisition would displace residents and there are doubts over the scale, site and financing of the project.

The proposed Mbarara Airport site is centred on the existing Nyakisharara Airstrip
The proposed Mbarara Airport site encompasses approximately 21 square kilometres of predominantly agricultural land and is centred on the existing Nyakisharara Airstrip. Aerial image: 27/07/2025

On 11th February 2026 Ugandan President Yoweri K. Museveni’s announced a mega airport project in Nyakisharara, northwest of the city of Mbarara in the Western Region. A 21 square kilometre site has been allocated for an airport with two 5.5-kilometre runways and a 3.7-kilometre runway for VIP flights. Hotels are also planned and the project will require relocation of the Mbarara-Ibanda road. Land acquisition, for what would be one of the largest infrastructure developments in the region, will cause displacement of people living in the Nyakisharara area. President Museveni instructed Prime Minister Robinah Nabbanja to oversee the relocation and compensation of impacted residents. A higher number of people might be displaced if a NewSwift article, reporting a larger project site of almost 30 square kilometres for the ‘master plan’, is correct. Many aviation professionals and experts have expressed doubts over the plan. Airport projects in other African countries show that the most serious pre-construction hurdles arise from disputes over land acquisition. Compensation and relocation of communities, if conducted without a clear process and transparency, can be protracted, delaying the project and increasing costs. The requisite Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is particularly important because the area earmarked for the project includes settlements, agriculture and sensitive ecosystems. The project is focussed on transforming an established airstrip into a ‘global hub’ linking Latin America with China and reducing travel time between these regions. But location alone does not induce airlines to use a particular airport. Analysts warned that commercial decision-making is multifactorial, considering passenger demand, profitability forecasts, operating costs, cargo, logistics and transfer networks linking airports with destinations. With regard to tourism, an airport alone rarely creates an inflow of passengers. Tourism operators and planners from several countries explained that to attract visitors an airport needs to be built where facilities such as accommodation, connectivity via road and/or rail and a reliable flight schedule are already in place.

No cost estimate and risky BOT contract

As of March 2026 the government had yet to announce an official cost estimate for the megaproject. Yet six months previously, on 4th September 2025, at a meeting in which China-based consortium presented its proposal to build the Mbarara International Airport project, ‘specifically in Nyakisharara’ to President Museveni, Bethuel Macharia of Blackrock Uwekeza, a private limited company registered in the UK, ‘expressed enthusiasm for financing the entire project’. Bethuel Macharia confirmed Blackrock Uwekeza’s full financial backing for the airport in February 2026, saying, “The project is expected to take shape in December, we already have backing from the president, as we await the feasibility study as well as the conceptual and preliminary designs. Next year construction is expected to start.” Government statements about the airport emphasised the private financing committed to the project, under the Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) model whereby an investor operates the airport, recouping costs and generating profits, for an agreed period before transferring ownership to the government. Caution is advised as BOT contracts are risky for the public purse. If the projected revenue from passenger numbers and cargo volumes fail to materialise, the state may be obliged to provide revenue guarantees and other subsidies. Viable examples of the BOT model usually include non-aeronautical revenue from an ‘airport zone’ containing facilities such as retail, hospitality, logistics centres and real estate in addition to aeronautical revenue from landing and passenger handling fees and cargo operations. The airport might only be viable with commercial development on a large land area surrounding it. Another issue casting doubts on the feasibility of the Mbarara mega airport is major investment in other major airport projects in Uganda. The US$125 million second phase of expansion of the country’s main airport, Entebbe Airport, is underway. in the Hoima District construction of Kabalega Airport, to serve the oil sector and possibly provide access to tourist attractions, is reported to be in its final stages.

Artistic impression of Mbarara Airport
Artistic impression of Mbarara Airport terminal with dozens of parked aircraft. Graphic: NTVUganda

Doubts over scale, site and VIP runway

Another critic of the ‘Gargantuan New Airport‘ questions the logic of building a transfer hub for flights between China and Latin America; refuelling stops with passengers staying on the plane would not make a significant contribution to Uganda’s economy. The scale of the project in a remote area, its renderings showing ‘dozens and dozens’ of planes parked at terminal gates, seem immensely unrealistic and the claim that the airport will have a VIP runway is particularly fanciful. Regional competition could also undermine the viability of the Mbarara Airport project. Most notably, Ethiopia is expanding its already more established aviation sector and has begun construction of a mega airport in Abusera, near the town of Bishoftu. Another sceptical article, questioning whether the mega airport is a ‘real deal‘, highlights the length of the two main runways; at 5.5 kilometres these would be the longest in the world. Aircraft would require long runways to reach take-off speed due to the low air density and high temperatures at the high-altitude site. Selection of the high elevation site, centred on the existing Nyakisharara Airstrip at an altitude of 1,517metres, for the mega airport would lead to inefficient air operations and increase airport construction and operating costs. The economic performance of the heavily subsidised Uganda Airlines does not inspire confidence in the country’s governance of its aviation sector. Since a massive injection of government funds in August 2019, for procurement of four Bombardier CRJ900 regional jets each costing US$27.3 million (and providing flights for a minute number of people as these jets can only accommodate up to 90 passengers), Uganda Airlines has reported heavy losses every year. In the 2023/24 financial year alone Ugandan Airlines made a loss of over US$63 million. Yet a further allocation of public funds to the airline, US$113 million from a supplementary budget for purchase of ten aircraft, is planned.

Residents of three villages oppose land acquisition for Guwahati Aerotropolis

Rose Bridger India , , , , , , , , , ,
Guwahati Airport and the villages of Azara, Garal and Mirzapur
Guwahati Airport and the villages of Azara, Garal and Mirzapur. Satellite imagery: 03/04/2024

A land acquisition notice for a proposed Aerotropolis near Guwahati Airport – the primary airport of northeast India located in the west of Assams’ largest city and also known as Lokpriya Gopinath Bordoloi International Airport (LGBI) – met with anxiety, anger and opposition from many affected residents. Issued on 25th July 2025 by the Kamrup Metropolitan District Administration the notice encompassed 400 bighas (101 hectares) of inhabited and uninhabited land in the villages of Azara, Garal and Mirzapur and impact upon more than a thousand families. Many villagers had given land for construction of Guwahati Airport decades ago and feared loss of their homes and livelihoods. An Azara resident said, “We have already given away vast stretches of land. Now this fresh move will leave many of us homeless.” In Garal village, where the district administration moved to acquire 70 bighas (17.7 hectares) of land for the Aerotropolis project, over 100 pattadars (landholders) were named in the land acquisition notice. Critics of the project claimed the land acquisition process lacked transparency, consultation or a clear plan to rehabilitate affected people and that the main beneficiary would be a private company. Guwahati Airport is owned by Adani, one of India’s largest multinational conglomerates. A local committee member said, “Guwahati Airport is now under Adani’s ownership. So the land being acquired in the name of an airport township will ultimately go to Adani.”

Affected families began to protest the land acquisition process, demanding transparency, a thorough impact assessment and guarantees that they would be rehabilitated. “We are not against development”, said an affected farmer, “But we deserve clarity, transparency and fair compensation. Right now everything feels juggled up and a lot is hidden from the public.” Protests took place in many affected areas. Leader of the Opposition Debabrata Saikia described the move to acquire land for the ‘Aerocity‘ as anti-indigenous and serving corporate interests. He said more than 1,116 families were affected, some of which had held land titles for nearly 200 years. He also warned that, in addition to the families facing displacement, local entrepreneurs in the area running guesthouses and restaurants would be adversely impacted. The location of the project site, near the Deepor Beel freshwater lake, a Ramsar site (designated as of international importance under the Ramsar Convention) raised environmental concerns.

Land acquisition for the aerotropolis had been requested by the managing director of the Assam Industrial Development Corporation (AIDC). Akan Chandra Das, president of Mirzapur Anchalik Bhumi Suraksha Samiti, the committee representing affected residents of Mirzapur, Azara and Garal villages, said, “Already nine to ten times, our families gave land to the government post-independence, for development of the airport, adjacent roads, and defence establishments near the Guwahati airport. If the remaining land is also taken for development projects, where will we go? How will our children survive if they don’t get jobs in other sectors?” Basudev Mali, a retired teacher and owner of 10 bighas (2.53 hectares) of land near the airport, in Mirzapur, said, “If the government continues to take over our lands for airport expansion or for aerotropolis development now, who will ensure the survival of our children? The remaining farmlands were our only hope, but the government wants to take that also.”

A residents’ delegation met with Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Samra, but his attempts to reassure them that only vacant land would be used, for public projects were unsuccessful. Locals remained reluctant to give up their land for either government or private projects. Villagers attending a public meeting in Mirzapur unanimously resolved not to give their land to the government under any circumstances, declaring, “Our land is our identity and livelihood. We will not give it away at any cost.” At the beginning of September 2025 the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority (GMDA) suspended building permits and land sales in the proposed aerotropolis area around Guwahati Airport. Additional restrictions were also imposed. The suspension affected Azara, Garal and Mirzapur villages where hundreds of indigenous families were unwilling to vacate their land for the aerotropolis project. They also opposed the notice issued by GMDA as it restricted their rights as landowners.

Mega Airport City in Bishoftu, Ethiopia

Rose Bridger land rights , , , , , , , ,

Construction of Africa’s biggest airport, a Mega Airport City, in Bishoftu, Ethiopia, is set to take up a vast 35 square kilometre site and a budget of USD6 billion just for the first phase and has met with resistance from farmers impacted by the resettlement process.

Mega Airport City, Bishoftu, Ethiopia
Artist rendering of planned Mega Airport City in Bishoftu, Ethiopia. Photo: Ethiopian Airlines, September 2024

Ethiopian Airlines announced plans for an airport city in Abusera (in Bishoftu, part of central Ethiopia’s Oromia region, about 40 kilometres southeast of Addis Ababa) in September 2018. CEO Tewolde Gebremariam said the location was selected because of its elevation; at about 1,900 metres above sea level it is considerably lower than Addis Ababa at 2,400 metres. This would bring the advantage of improved fuel efficiency for flights in comparison with Ethiopia’s existing main airport, Addis Ababa Bole International Airport. French engineering firm ADP Ingénierie (ADPI) conducted a site selection study and in February 2019 the Council of Ministers was set to endorse the proposed site in Abusera. Gebremariam said the mega-hub would not just be an airport, costing USD4 billion with four runways and capacity to handle 80 million passengers per year; it would include other infrastructures making it an airport city with a large duty-free shopping area, entertainment centres, hotels, business centre, logistics centres and real estate development. By January 2020 the airport city plans had become even more ambitious; passenger capacity had increased to 100 million per year. The anticipated cost had also risen significantly. Gebremariam said “We have identified 35sqkm land to be developed as an airport and it is about a $5bn project – larger than the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). It is going to accommodate 100m passengers; larger than Dubai and more or less equal to the new Istanbul airport.”

In February 2024 Ethiopian Airlines announced that the designated land for the airport city had been secured and that the project would encompass an area of 38 to 40 square kilometres. A spokesperson said the Oromia Regional Government, in collaboration with the Federal Government, was evacuating residents from the site to make way for construction to begin. The estimated cost of the megaproject had escalated again. In August 2024 Ethiopian Airlines was searching for USD6 billion in financing just for the first phase of what was now called a ‘Mega Airport City’. Projected passenger capacity increased again, to 110 million per annum, and the Dar Al-Handasah consultancy was awarded the contract for design and supervision of the Mega Airport City. At the signing ceremony Ethiopian Airlines stated, ‘The architectural team will incorporate elements of Ethiopian heritage to establish a people-centric, intuitive airport characterised by sustainability, resilience, and future-readiness.’

The claim to be ‘intuitive airport’, ascribing sentience to infrastructure, is just meaningless corporate guff. And the claims to be ‘people-centric’ boasting the qualities of ‘sustainability’, ‘resilience’ and ‘future-readiness’ disregard the airport city’s impacts on the people most directly affected, those who are being displaced to make way for it. Simultaneous with the search for USD6 billion to finance the airport city it was announced that construction could only go ahead if up to 2,500 farmers currently residing on and surrounding the site were resettled. Mesfin Tassev, CEO of Dar Al-Handasah, said a 740-hectare plot had been allocated by the Oromia Regional Government for this purpose, along with 17 billion Birr (USD172.5 million) for resettlement and development works. Design work was anticipated to be complete by December 2025 followed by construction of housing and other basic facilities along with development of employment opportunities for relocated residents by the end of 2026. Mesfin told The Reporter, “The construction of the airport city depends on the resettlement of the farmers. It will commence as soon as they move.”

The resettlement process is not proceeding smoothly. By January 2025 it was reported that Africa’s biggest airport was under construction but ‘faced significant challenges’ regarding coordination of finances, geopolitical dynamics, environmental concerns and the complex task of relocating affected communities. The airport city has triggered local resistance. Affected farmers, many of whom depend upon their land for subsistence and farming livelihoods, are concerned about compensation and resettlement. Many of them feel inadequately compensated and there are reports that the compensation offer was far less than the land’s market value. Resettlement has also caused discontent. Some farmers claim that clear plans for relocation and support for finding new livelihoods have not been provided. During a local meeting held to discuss the project one farmer said, “I’ve cultivated this land for decades. It’s not just my home. It’s my history and my family’s future.”

Lucknow Airport expansion, land acquisition, protest and Aerocity plans

Rose Bridger airport expansion , , , , , , , , , , ,

Satellite image of Lucknow Airport (Chaudhary Charan Singh International Airport) dated 20/10/2024. Location of Terminal 3 and some of the villages affected by land acquisition for airport expansion are shown.

Lucknow Airport (also known as Chaudhary Charan Singh International Airport), located 14km southwest of the capital city of Uttar Pradesh, is already the 11th busiest airport in India and traffic will increase with recent and ongoing expansion. A third terminal began operations on 30th March 2024, with capacity for 8 million passengers per year, set to rise to about 13 million upon completion of phase two. Land from Bhaktikhera village was used for the third terminal and runway extension and in March 2018 the Airports Authority of India (AAI) agreed to pay Rs 32 crore for relocation of about 600 residents. Compensation for acquisition of 70 acres of land from Bhaktikhera, Gurera and Aurangabad Jagir villages, for runway extension and other facilities, was still being negotiated in June 2018. Airport expansion had been stalled for a decade due to difficulties with land acquisition. But in June 2019 the AAI announced that ‘decks are cleared for the construction of the wall around the airport and expansion of the runway’. The district administration committed to helping AAI build the wall to keep out people ‘trespassing the area’ and stray animals posing safety risks.

Demolition notices and farmers protest boundary wall construction

Construction of houses near Lucknow Airport also raised safety concerns. At the end of August 2024 authorities served demolition notices on 50 houses which had been built next to the airport boundary without authorization. A Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) official said a builder had posed as a contractor without obtaining the requisite No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the airport administration, acquired land directly from farmers and pocketed the money. A month later construction of the airport boundary wall led to a clash between a group of farmers and police. After commencement of excavations works, with two JCBs in the presence of police, a large number of farmers, between 150 and 200, gathered and began to protest, saying the airport administration was forcibly occupying their land. The farmers, from Rahimabad and Mohammadpur Bhakti Kheda villages, said a disputed land petition was pending adjudication in the Allahabad High Court.  The protest forced authorities to temporarily halt land reclamation operations for airport expansion. Farmers argued that the land had been cultivated for many generations and that land acquisition notification in the 1950s lacked important details including plot numbers, land area and the names of the landowners, thus raising questions about the legitimacy of the acquisition process.

In response to the protest the district administration postponed the land reclamation drive until 15th October. The owner and operator of Lucknow Airport, Adani, one of India’s largest multinational conglomerates, plans to reclaim approximately 260 acres on the southern edge of the airport for extension of the runway to 3,500 metres to accommodate large, wide-body aircraft and construction of two parallel taxiways. Speaking anonymously, an official stated that a total of about 400 acres owned by the airport for over 70 years would be reclaimed for airport expansion and a survey would be conducted to compensate farmers with crops growing on the land. The principal petitioner against the land reclamation said the farmland had not been legally acquired, farmers had not received any compensation and Adani was attempting to forcibly construct the airport boundary wall. 

Boundary wall construction continues and Aero City plans

On 25th October the Supreme Court dismissed the farmers’ plea against expansion of Lucknow Airport, allowing LDA to proceed with the project. Lucknow Development Index announced on X that, after deployment of a ‘heavy police force’ in response to resistance, ‘work is still progressing amid farmers clashes’. A ‘massive area’ was being reclaimed and construction of the boundary wall had re-commenced. An official source said a 400-acre area was being reclaimed and a fourth terminal and an Aero City was planned on the land.

 Few months previously, on 5th February 2024 Times of India had reported ‘ambitious plans’ for Lucknow Aerocity, a 1,500 acre development with ‘an array of upscale amenities, such as world-class convention centres, large parks and seven-star hotels’, announced by Uttar Pradesh finance minister Suresh Kharna. The LDA was tasked with identifying land for the project, likely to be located in Rahimabad and Gahru villages. In addition to Lucknow, Adani owns several airports in India including Mumbai, Mangaluru, Jaipur, Ahemedabad, Thiruvanthapuram and Guwahati. Plans for aero cities adjoining Adani’s airports were reported in July 2022. The Economic Times stated that Adani plans to develop ‘aero cities’ on more than 500 acres at all its airports, with hotels, convention centres, retail, entertainment, healthcare, logistics, offices and other real estate sectors.

Locals resisted eviction for Guwahati Airport expansion

At the beginning of September 2021, a month before operation of Guwahati Airport (the busiest airport in northeast India) was handed over to Adani, there were reports of locals resisting eviction to make way for expansion. An eviction notice was served to 54 households, outside the walled area of the airport in Koitasidhi village. An airport official said the land, adjacent to the runway, was to be developed as an approach area, especially for larger aircraft on international flights. Villagers said that several plots of land had been acquired for construction and expansion of the airport since 1962. Some villagers said, “We would rather give our blood than give up our land”. Continuing protest was reported on 8th September; a local person said “We heard that the Adani group which has been given charge of the Airport for 50 years under a lease agreement by the Government of India wants to do expansion work here. But we want to clarify that we will not leave our land even if we are given adequate compensation”. Some other locals said they would not give their land to Adani. On 15th September 2021 the Times of India reported that villagers were fiercely resisting giving up land for airport expansion. A tearful farmer in his late 70s said his family had been compelled to give up land for airport expansion in the 1960s, which if sold today would fetch a much higher price. His family was left with ownership of just one residential plot. More recently, in June 2024, announcing the schedule for opening of a new terminal at Guwahati Airport in April 2025, Chief Airport Officer Utpal Baruah said plans for subsequent expansion phases included a maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) facility, aerocity and helipad.

‘Mindfulness City’ megaproject begins with expansion of Gelephu Airport

Rose Bridger airport expansion , , , , , , , , , , ,

Gelephu Airport, one of only four airports in Bhutan, is a domestic airport located in the southern Himalayan foothills, close to the Indian border. In August 2023, as formulation of the master plan for expansion of Gelephu Airport neared completion and groundwork preparations began, there was growing speculation among landowners with properties in the proposed site regarding replacement land and compensation. Acquisition of land was to be determined by the government. The groundbreaking ceremony for Gelephu International Airport took place on 23rd December 2023. Satelite imagery dated 1st January 2024 reveals a large area of low-lying scrub land has been cleared for the airport expansion.

Satellite imagery shows clearance of a large area of low-lying scrubland for expansion of Gelephu Airport, including the new runway, and construction of a dry port south of the existing runway.

Expansion of Gelephu Airport is a key component of an even larger megaproject, a new city, and some residents are concered about losing land to the project. On 15th December 2023 Forbes reported that King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck would be announcing development of a new ‘megacity’ in Gelephu, called Bhutan Mindfulness City, on Bhutan’s National Day, the 17th December. Initially there were plans for the announcement to take place in Gelephu, but the town, with just 10,000 residents, lacked the requisite infrastructure such as accommodation for international guests so the event was relocated to the capital city, Thimpu. Ahead of the official announcement the article cautioned that the new city project might be met with ‘strong opposition from Bhutan’s nearly 800,000 citizens’ and that ‘fears of government land grabs and the displacement of farmers in Gelephu have already taken root, according to several Bhutanese residents’. Sources with knowledge of Mindfulness City said the King was ‘trying to avoid the preception that families will be forcibly transferred to make way for the project’.

Mindfulness City was indeed the focus of the King’s 116th National Day address. The Bhutanese reported the King’s description of the new city, explaining that it will cover 1,000 square kilometres, about 2.5% of Bhutan’s total land area. Major public investment in roads, bridges and airports is planned, with an inflow of foreign investment anticipated for construction of offices, residencies, schools, hospitals, shops, hotels and restaurants. The new city was also referred to as Gelephu Special Administrative Region (SAR), an ‘economic hub’ that will have ‘autonomy to formulate laws and policies’. Ten of the twelve gewogs (groups of villages) in the Sarpang Dzongkhag (District) – Tareythang, Umling, Chhuzagang, Serzhong, Gelephu, Samtenling, Dekiling, Shompangkha, Gakiling, and Singye – were designated for the Gelephu Mindfulness City project. Kuensel Online reported that residents and landlords were ‘excited about the the upcoming development initiative’, attributing some landlords’ anxiety and fear of losing all of their land to the project to ‘lack of awareness regarding private properties’. There was reassurance of compensation following international practices and provision of replacement land in the city area. It appeared that acquisition of private land would be limited to areas allocated for road and airport construction.

Danish architecture firm BIG, known as a masterplanner for other megaprojects such as Neom, a glass-walled linear city in Saudi Arabia, duly unveiled its masterplan for Mindfulness City, including an international airport. Connectivity was a recurring theme of BIG founder Bjarke Ingels’ description of the new city; he said “Gelephu becomes a land of bridges, connecting nature and people, past and future, local and global”. Apparently, the project will ‘be shaped by 35 rivers and streams that run through the site’. Neighbourhoods will be connected by several ‘inhabitable bridges’ hosting facilities including a university, a healthcare centre and a spiritual centre. Connectivity claims extended to the airport, its timber terminal to act as a bridge. But its runway, crossing over several rivers, while facilitating connectivity for global air travellers, will cause major disruption to hydrological systems. And how does a new city highly dependent on fossil-fuel dependent international air travel square with the Gelephu Mindfulness City website claim of ‘Sustainability as a carbon negative country’? Buildings will incorporate local materials and be ‘informed by Bhutanese architecture‘. But will techniques and structures resonating with local cultural identity be integral to the function of new buildings, or merely aesthetically pleasing adornments? Perhaps the most striking showpiece feature of Mindulness City is the plan for a hydro-electric dam containing a temple. Will the new city be, as Ingels said, “founded on Bhutanese nature and culture”, or merely garnished with it?

A 6th January 2024 Kuensel Online article stated that that Gelephu Mindfulness City would commence with expansion of Gelephu Airport and landowners with land in the area earmarked for the airport had been given replacement land or compensation. Landlords confused about the future of their holdings had been told that they had ‘nothing to worry about’ as the project would include everyone and leave nobody behind, indeed ‘the entire Bhutanese citizenry would be part of the historic project’. This claim of inclusivity is at odds with the Gelephu Mindfulness City website promotion of new city aiming to ‘attract global top talents who are global and creative’ and ‘serve as a hub of global top minds’, i.e. for an international elite. By February 2024 six JCBs had cleared about 1,800 acres of land, working towards the goal of clearing 2,500 acres. Just south of the airport, a dry port was under construction. After considering three models for the airport expansion officials had selected the Asian Development Bank (ADB) masterplan. A new runway next to the existing runway will be 3km in length; possible extension of the runway to 3.5km to accommodate the Airbus A380 would cross over two rivers. Building a new runway will allow continuation of airport operations using the existing runway, enabling visitors involved in the development of Mindfulness City to fly in and out. The initial cost estimate of the ADB masterplan was Nu 8 billion (USD96 million) but a more recent estimate by the Airport Authority of India indicated a far higher figure, possibly as high as Nu 20 billion (USD240 million).

Mohali Aero City expansion impacts on rural livelihoods

Rose Bridger land rights , , , , , , , ,

A study focussing on three villages affected by land acquisition for expansion Mohali Aero City, southwest of Shaheed Bhagat Singh International Airport, raised concerns over threats to rural livelihoods.

Proposed acquisition of 5,438 acres (2,200 hectares) of land from 14 villages – Bakarpur, Naraingarh, Kishanpura, Safipur, Rurka, Matran, Bari, Chatt, Saini Majra, Seon, Kurari, Chau Majra, Manauli and Paton – for AeroCity expansion, called ‘Aerotropolis’, was confirmed by Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) in 2017. A 2021 article in the Journal of Land and Rural Studies by Thomas Reuter, Sarbjeet Singh, A.K. Sinha and Shalina Mehta, Land Grab Practices and a Threat to Livelihood and Food Security in India? A Case Study from Aerocity Expansion Project from S.A.S. Nagar, Punjab, analyses the project as an example of large-scale acquisition of highly fertile agricultural land. The authors describe ‘blatant land grab practices by the state authority in the name of development, which act as barriers to the food security and threaten the livelihoods of those whose land will be acquired’. The study focussed on three affected villages – Patton, Kurari and Seon. Fieldwork conducted in April 2019 included in-depth interviews with 50 displaced farmers.

Mohali Aerotropolis
GMADA location map of proposed sites for Aerocity expansion. Graphic: Aerotropolis Mohali, 23/11/2020 https://www.facebook.com/451195685303715/photos/pb.100064020934387.-2207520000/1041176552972289/

Impacts on marginal rural people

A consolidated demographic profile of Patton, Kurari and Seon from the 2011 census showed that the total number of affected people was 3,031. A significant number, 955, belonged to the scheduled caste population, the most marginal rural people, many of them landless labourers, some of whom farm on leased land and other providing menial services. Land acquisition renders them homeless and they receive no compensation. The scheduled caste community of Patton village were marginal farmers owning only 1-2 acres of land. Scheduled caste people of Kurari and Seon did not own any land and depended entirely on agricultural activities. The working population was divided into two categories. ‘Main workers’ included marginalised individuals regularly hired by affluent farmers to work in their fields and people engaged in pastoral activities in a more favourable economic situation. ‘Marginal workers’ comprised migrant workers primarily from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar along with seasonal workers from other states coming to the area for work harvesting paddy and wheat. Agriculture was the primary economic activity in the three villages. Several farmers had modern equipment such as tractors, tillers and adequate irrigation with tube wells for which free electricity was provided by the state. Farmers getting cash compensation for surrendered land tend to lose these subsidies, along with minimum price support for cereal crops.

Narratives from three affected farmers

The article includes narratives from three farmers affected by land acquisition for the Aero City Expansion. A 59-year old man from Kurari village grieved that the pace of urbanisation would convert lush green fields into a concrete jungle. He worried that wheat, rice, maize and other cereal crops would disappear. GMADA and private builders offered different compensation packages, causing friction among those surrendering prime agricultural land and also between farmers and the state, resulting in litigations and delays in land acquisition and launch of construction activities. A respondent from Patton said that a decade ago the land was unsuitable for farming and nobody wanted to settle in the village. Residents worked hard and within two years had made all the available land suitable for agriculture. Most farmers grew vegetables and cereals which they sold at nearby farmers’ markets. When GMADA notified the village for land acquisition for the Aero City Expansion project farmers feared compulsory acquisition and sold their land to private builders. He said that when the government acquires land compensation is inadequate and the payment process often gets trapped in legislation. He had worked hard on the land he was forced to sell and was unsure of the productive capacity of new land he had purchased. A Seon villager whose land was acquired by GMADA for the Aero City Expansion had not been paid adequate compensation. He retained six acres but there was a possibility this would also fall under the proposed land acquisition, leaving him without any means of livelihood.

Loss of pastoral activities and social stability

Livestock provided an important subsidiary source of income in the three villages. Cows and buffalo were reared mainly for milk and cows also for manure. Pastoral activities in the three villages were mainly pursued by women waking up early to milk cows and buffalo. Land acquisition can deprive women of this primary economic activity making them far more vulnerable, especially when they run single-parent households. The case studies suggested that animal rearing as a livelihood became unviable because land used for pasture was no longer in villagers’ possession. Loss of agricultural land can cause cessation of pastoral activities, as most displaced households are not compensated with sufficient land to accommodate dairy animals.

Residents of the villages were content with acquisition of small portions of land along roads as it brought them improved connectivity. But acquisition of their fertile land for development of housing for wealthy urbanites and creation of infrastructure in which they were not equal stakeholders left locals feeling cheated. Their lives were marked with upheavals and displacement threatened close-knit social networks. The authors conclude that the Aero City Expansion project was ‘an ambitious ideas but executed without due diligence and groundwork’. Land acquisition brought revenue to the state but measures to support the interests of local residents were inadequate. Urban planners failed to foresee the risks of social tensions and the Aero City epxansion led to social and political instability. The article warned of agricultural decline and the prospect of food insecurity.

VVIP airport for Indonesia’s new capital city triggers land tensions

Rose Bridger Indonesia, land rights , , , , , , ,

In East Kalimantan on the east coast of Borneo a new VVIP (Very Very Important Person) airport is being constructed to support development of Nusantara (IKN), the future capital city of Indonesia. With a VVIP and VIP terminal covering an area of 7,350 square metres and three helipads IKN VVIP Airport will support the mobility of the President, high-ranking officials, state guests and investors. The international airport will have a 3,000 metre runway to accommodate Airbus A400 military airaft and will be used in coordination with the Indonesian Air Force (IAF). Development of IKN VVIP Airport was accelerated by Presidential Regulation No. 31 on 6th June 2023.

Satellite imagery shows land clearance and earthworks. The image on the left is from 18th March 2023 before works began. On the right is an image from 16th February 2024 where development of the IKN VVIP Airport terminal, runway and access road are clearly visible.

Demarcation of a 360-hectare site began within a few days and triggered reaction from some affected residents. On 30th June Muslimah News reported that hundreds of residents from five sub-districts – Gersik, Jenebora, Pantai Lango, Kelurahan Riko and the Maridan village area in Sepaku – were protesting take-over of land they occupied by the Land Bank Agency for construction of the VVIP airport. They refused to hand over their land to the Land Bank Agency because stakes were installed without prior notice and the government’s promise, made the previous year, to provide land for agrarian reform had not yet been fulfilled. There was a lot of evidence that construction was consuming residents’ land and authorities were ignoring their protests. Protest was not just in response to construction of the airport; there was also some controversy over whether the land bank serves public interest or corporate projects. The Land Bank Agency made reassurances that residents’ rights to replacement land would be accelerated and that agrarian reform land was being prepared for this purpose.

On 3rd August 2023 many palm farmers gathered at their former plantation area where they unfurled banners and made speeches demanding compensation for land affected by the VVIP airport construction project. A lawyer representing some of the residents said that oil palm land previously managed by them was suddenly cleared with heavy equipment. Palm oil trees had been damaged and razed to the ground but the farmers said they had not received compensation and there had been no discussions or meetings with authorities.

Land clearance and installation of boundary markers continued and on 10th January 2024, during socialisation for communities impacted by construction of the VVIP airport and access toll road, it was announced that 400 hectares of replacement land had been prepared for them. Yet complaints about the land acquisition process continued. On 14th January 2024 TribunKaltim reported that some farmers whose land was used for construction of the VVIP airport were unable to farm the land and had no clarity regarding replacement land. The land declared for the airport was the only land they owned and they relied upon it for their livelihoods. Many affected farmers owned one or two hectares of land. Many residents who lost their land had still not received compensation.

On 9th February 2024 Acting Regent of North Penajam Paser, Makmur Marbun, said the number of people whose land was allocated for the VVIP airport but had not yet been acquired had reduced from 80 to 22, explaining that the land of these 22 people is in the area that will be the runway and vital for the airport project. The residents had brought a lawyer to the airport site where they met with officials but Makmur Marbun said he would continue to attempt to resolve the issue through discussions. Completion of IKN VVIP Airport and commencement of operations is targeted for early August 2024.

Opposition to acquisition of farmland for airport in Parandur

Rose Bridger land rights , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thousands of farmers and residents have urged the Tamil Nadu state government and Central government of India not to implement a proposed second Chennai airport in Parandur that would destroy their agrarian activities and livelihoods. Parandur is an agricultural area in the Kanchipuram district and the State government plans to acquire land in 12 villages for the airport project. The proposed site in Purandur is approximately 57 kilometres eastwards of the existing Chennai Airport and to the north of the Chennai-Bangalore national highway which is being constructed in stages. Below is a slideshow of a map of the proposed airport site and Google Earth satellite imagery showing several of the villages that might be impacted by land acquisition.

  • map of proposed airport in Parandur
  • Villages the may be impacted by land acquisition for airport in Parandur

A Times of India article states that the 12 villages from which land for the airport will be acquired are: Parandur, Valathur, Nelvoy, Thandalam, Polavur (Podavur), Madapuram, Ekanapuram, Akkammapuram, Singilipadi, Mahadevi Mangalam, Gunakarambakkam and Edayarpakkam. Other villages to be impacted by land acquisition are listed in other sources referenced in this blogpost, namely Nagapattu, Koothavakkam, Uthyarpakkam and OM Mangalam.

Concerns over acquisition of farmland and environmental issues

On 1st August Union Minister of State for Civil Aviation Vijay Kumar Singh announced that the Parandur site has been finalised after consultation with the Tamil Nadu government. Some Purandar residents demanded suitable replacement land and employment from the government in return for acquiring their land; others said that acquisition of their agricultural land will render them jobless as it is the only work they have known. Some villagers have spoken to media outlets about reluctance to give up their land and uncertainty over provision of compensation:

Ramasamy, from Ekanpuram village, said “A huge tract of our agricultural land would come under this project. We don’t want to lose our agricultural land for this project because farming is our sole source of livelihood.”

Jayakumar, a farmer from Singilipadi, said, “We have been living here for generations. We didn’t know that the airport is coming up here. No one has informed us. If the government suddenly takes away our homes and land, what would we do? Even if they provide compensation, we don’t know what that would be. I am shocked.”

Rajendran, a resident of Thandalam, said, “We are ready to give up land if needed. But we need assurance from the government about good compensation and employment.

Selvaraj from Parandur village said, “We’ve been here in the village for the last 50 years. As per the map released by the government, 5 villages would be destroyed for constructing a new airport. Even if the government gave us compensation for our land, we don’t know what to do for a living, since we know only farming. All of us are shocked by this decision and are planning for a big protest soon. Even last month, the district collector assured us that the airport would not be constructed in Parandur.”

Nachiyappan, a farmer from Koothavakkam, said, ”We are living by farming and if the government acquires our land what will we do for a living? I have small children and want to educate them and am the sole breadwinner for the family. The government will make all sweet talking, but in reality, nothing will happen and we will be the losers. We will protest strongly against this project that will destroy our livelihood as well as the flora and fauna of the area.”

A postgraduate in Economics from Koothavakkam, R. Bindu, said, “Around 800 houses would be demolished in the area and the agrarian economy will be totally destroyed. There are many people in this village who don’t have the patta or the legal rights of the land and they will be totally on the streets.”

Many villagers are employed by the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MNREGS) and are concerned that their livelihoods could be destroyed along with the agricultural fields.

An environmental expert pointed out several hydrological problems that might arise from construction of the airport, from decreased recharge of groundwater to deterioration of water quality and possible flooding during the monsoon. The 4,791-acre site is dotted with water bodies and a large proportion, 2,605 acres, is wetlands. A large number of migratory bird species, especially from eastern Europe, visit the site. Some of the birds fly south to Vedanthangal which would pose a bird strike risk to air traffic. Building a stable structure on wetlands would be challenging. Parandur has a lake where migrant birds – tufted ducks, flamingos and common pochards – are frequently spotted.

An airport on a 4,791-acre site, with a huge aerocity

The proposal is for the new airport, with two runways, to have capacity to handle 100 million passengers annually, almost five times higher than the capacity of the existing Chennai Airport, at 22 million passengers per year. Capacity at Chennai Airport is being increased to 35 million in a seven-year expansion project. The runways at the airport in Purandar would be larger than at Chennai Airport, enabling it to handle larger aircraft carrying more than 600 passengers. Tamil Nadu chief minister Muthuvel Karunanidhi Stalin said the initial estimated cost of the proposed airport is Rs20,000 Crore, more than USD2.5 billion. Details of the break-up of this sum, and the funding route, have yet to be made public.

A Times of India article states that ‘The plan is to develop a huge aero city with facilities for maintenance and repairs, aviation ancillary units, and commercial establishments’. Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) Tamil Nadu Chapter chairman Satyakam Arya has pushed for an aerocity around the new airport, which in addition to aviation related facilities could have a convention centre for global conferences and exhibitions. Shankar Vanavarayar, vice-chairman of CII Tamil Nadu, said the state may introduce special schemes and incentives for industries in order to spur industrialization from Chennai towards Parandur.

The proposed site for the Parandur airport, 4,791 acres (1,939 hectares), is certainly large enough to allocate a significant portion of the site for non-aviation facilities. It is larger than the world’s largest airport, Hartsfield Jackson in Atlanta USA, which, with five parallel runways and a site of 1,902 hectares, handled more than 110.5 million passengers in 2019, before traffic reduced worldwide due to the response to Covid-19. In addition to the 4,791-acre site a further 200 acres of land is required for construction of two airstrips, for which the process of surveys and land acquisition is likely to start soon.

Difficulties acquiring thousands of acres for the airport

Land availability has been the main hurdle stalling the second Chennai airport project since it was first mooted, in 1998. Many attempts at large-scale land acquisition failed until authorities zeroed in on Parandur and an article in The Hindu provides a timeline. In November 2000 a ‘futuristic terminal’ was anticipated on a 3,000-acre site likely to be at Porur in west Meenambakkam, north of the existing Chennai Airport. In May 2007 the then Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, Muthuvel Karunanidhi, said that 4,820 acres would be acquired for the airport in Sriperumbudur. In 2016 the proposed greenfield airport, still planned in the vicinity of Sriperumbudur, was mired in land procurement problems. Union Minister of State for Civil Aviation Jayant Sinha said the thousands of acres required for the new airport were difficult to procure.

In January 2022 the Airports Authority of India (AAI) began to study four potential alternative sites identified by the State government: Pannur, Parandur, Padalam and Thiruporur. Subsequently this list was narrowed down to Pannur and Parandur. On 1st August 2022 Minister of State for Civil Aviation Vijay Kumar Singh said the Tamil Nadu government had shortlisted Parandur as the site for development of a second Chennai airport. The State government will now submit a proposal to the Ministry of Civil Aviation for ‘grant of site clearance’ for the finalised site. The State is also set to begin preparation of a detailed project report. Land acquisition is likely to begin once the State receives approval from the Centre. State government officials have confirmed they will conduct sittings in all affected villages allowing people to express their views to officials.

2010 protest against land acquisition in Sriperumbudur

The article with the project timeline in The Hindu does not mention that the 2007 identification of land for the airport in Sriperumbudur triggered mass protest by villagers resisting land acquisition. In 2010 Moverment against SEZs in Tamil Nadu reported that a 6,921-acre (2,800-hectare) site in Sriperumbudur, located eastward of Parandur and just 30 kilometres from Chennai’s existing airport, had been earmarked for a greenfield airport. The proposed land acquisition for the new airport threatened to displace 2,800 families, about 37,000 people, from 20 villages. Village representatives opposed the airport project and were not interested in compensation from the government. They said agriculture was viable in the proposed site where they cultivated rice paddies, mangos, jasmine trees and vegetables. The site also containing 77 lakes, 120 ponds and 10,000 trees which would be felled. Six village panchayats – Thirumanaikuppam, Vadamangalam, Vayalur, Thirupandiyur, Kottaiyur and Kiloy – passed resolutions opposing land acquisition in a gram sabha meeting.

Proposed site for secodn Chennai airport in Sriperumbudur
Proposed site for a 2nd Chennai airport in Sriperumbudur, triggering mass protest in August 2010. Image: Down to Earth, 15/09/2010

Villagers drove away officials sent to survey the land on at least three occasions. On 12 August 2010, 3,000 people from 26 villages demonstrated against the project. Police attacked them with a lathi (baton) charge. Villagers who went to meet the District Officer and attempted to present a petition were beaten and around 20 of them had to be admitted to hospital. A jet fuel pipeline to Chennai Airport, routed through Sriperumbudur, seemingly hardwired the area for development of a new airport. Inaugurating the fuel pipeline in 2009 Praful Patel, Minister of State for Civil Aviation from 2004 to 2011, said, “This (pipeline) also passes through Sriperumbudur where another airport is planned. Once it comes up, the pipeline will be extremely useful.”

Earthworks for Kediri Airport and an adjacent development

Rose Bridger Indonesia, land rights , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic, on 15th April 2020, officials from the Indonesian government and the East Java province attended a virtual groundbreaking ceremony for a new airport in the Kediri regency. The event marked the official start of construction works that had actually begun three months earlier in January when heavy machines were levelling soil, following several delays that were partly caused by some affected residents refusing to release their land for the project due to unpaid compensation. Fewer than 20 families, in the villages of Bedreck and Bulusari, remained in the area. A villager told The Jakarta Post “If we accept the price, we won’t be able to buy land and build a house of similar value to what we have now”. She said none of the villagers wished to hamper development of the airport, they simply wanted fair compensation. The Kediri administration said that only 0.6 per cent of the 400 hectares of land required to build the airport had not been acquired.

The Kediri Airport project (also referred to as Dhoho Airport) was approved in 2018. The first of the satellite images above shows the airport site area in April 2018, consisting of villages and farmland. The second image shows the same area in June 2020 after earthworks had levelled large areas of land. The third satellite image is from November 2020, by which time earthworks had progressed and impacted upon a larger area, transforming the landscape from verdant green to a pale expanse of crushed and compacted rock. Adjoining this area, extending to the southwest, additional earthworks and construction of roads can be seen. This airport-adjacent development is shown in the fourth and final image in the slideshow, a graphic of the Kediri Master Plan visualising a future tourism and residential complex in this area. Produced by ARKDESIGN Architects and Planners, the ‘MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, PLANTATION RESORT & RESIDENCES’ shows two commercial development areas, a warehouse, utility complex and parking adjoining the airport terminal and cargo buildings. Extending to the southwest is an area allocated for hotels, residences and various tourism facilities including five lakes. Progress of construction of the one of these artificial lakes, near the centre of the planned development, can be seen in the satellite images. The graphic indicates proximity to Mount Wilis, a solitary volcanic massif amidst the surrounding low-lying plains. The route of a future toll road is shown extending from the southeast of the project site, between the airport and the adjacent development.

Controversy over land acquisition for Kediri Airport dates back to 2017, when residents, aware of large-scale land acquisition, questioned whether it was a government or private project. In March 2019 residents of one of the affected villages, Jatirejo, hung dozens of banners along village roads, stating their refusal to accept the prices offered by land buyers for agricultural land, that they said were too low. In October 2019 37 head of family residents of Bedrek Selatan hamlet, Grogol village, had not released their land for the airport project as they had not agreed compensation. The airport plan had caused the price of land around the project site to soar. Land prices had also gone up in Bulusari village where some residents were confused over where to relocate to. Some who had received compensation were experiencing difficulties in finding places to relocate to because of soaring land prices. A shift in the location of the airport runway had required acquisition of additional land, leaving residents with difficulties finding land to relocate to. In January 2020 45 residents of Grogol village rejected land acquisition, protesting over a drop in the compensation offer that would only be sufficient for them to buy land in far away suburbs. Residents’ coordinator said they were being pressured to give up their land for the airport. In February 2020, just two months before the groundbreaking ceremony, some residents had still not agreed to the compensation offers for land acquisition. Ten families were refusing eviction because, while the price of land in their village had dropped drastically, the price of land in new locations where they might settle had risen; they faced the prospect of a huge loss. A resident of Bedrek spoke of repeated visits by land buyers over several months and being pressured to accept the price offered for land.

At the time of writing some residents are still unwilling to leave their homes and suffer the impacts of airport construction works. Several villages – Tarokan, Tiron, Bangkan, Jatirejo and Grogol – have been demolished for the airport project and most of the inhabitants had left. Tugiyem, one of few villagers remaining in Mbandrek Selatan, spoke in the midst of swirling dust and roaring engines of construction vehicles, staring at a pile of dredged rocks. She had lived there since the 1960s and used to work gazing livestock, but her animals were left dying as the construction company had fenced off the land and she could not reach them. A metal fence erected on one side of Grogol, ostensibly to deter trespassing and reduce pollution from construction works, limits residents’ access to their village. One of the main roads connecting Grogol village has been blocked off to aid construction works. This had forced farmers taking their crops to the city to take longer routes and food stalls and shops near the road had to shut down. Within a month of closing access to the road four shops had gone bankrupt. Owners of surviving shops have to rely on custom from their neighbours, including Siti Anggirawan who was forced to close her textile shop. Waiting for customers outside her grocery store, Sri Katun said air quality in Grogol had deteriorated, “When a strong wind blows, construction dust drifts into the house. I often cough.” But she had no thoughts of giving up the land she had bought after years of saving up money, saying, “This house is witness to my ups and downs alongside my husband. We want to die on this land that has been part of our history.”

Earthworks for the airport project consisted of a cut and fill excavation up to 35 metres high. Rivers are being diverted away from the runway via two enormous box culverts, one 570 metres in length and the other 470 metres, made from reinforced concrete. A 3,300 metre runway is being built, to acommodate the largest world’s largest aircraft such as the Boeing 777 and Airbus A350. Construction of the airport proceeds even though plummetting air traffic since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic casts doubts on the feasibility of traffic predictions. And the projections for Kediri Airport, as reported in ACI World Airport Development News, Issue 4 2020, are ambitious. Upon completion of the first phase of construction, scheduled for April 2022, Kediri Airport is projected to handle 1.5 million passengers per annum, eventually rising to more than 10 million annually. A Transport Ministry offical said Kediri Airport would serve domestic flights for tourism, and might also be used for cargo related to possible future agricultural and industrial activity in East Java. Kediri Airport is the first in Indonesia to be fully funded by the private sector. Tobacco company Gudang Garam will spend up to USD732 million to acquire 457 hectares of land and a subsidiary, Surya Dhoho Investama, will oversee development of the airport.