Elephanta Caves' 'Adoption' Triggers Familiar Row With Stakeholders

India | Asia | Heritage Management

In an unprecedented step that heralds a new chapter for India’s approach to heritage conservation, Maharashtra’s iconic Elephanta Caves have been adopted by a private firm, marking it as the first monument in the state to fall under the Archaeological Survey of India’s (ASI) ambitious 'Adopt a Heritage’ scheme. 

This adoption comes as a turning point in India’s conservation ethos, where private corporations are invited—through Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives—to take on the responsibilities of not merely safeguarding but actively enhancing the country’s cultural legacy. 

The adopting company is now tasked with developing and maintaining essential visitor facilities, an assignment that involves refurbishing pathways, constructing restrooms, and creating shelters for tourists who flock to this historic site.

Elephanta Island, housing ancient fifth to seventh century rock-cut temples and sculptures venerating Lord Shiva, has stood as a testament to India’s cultural prowess and artistic grandeur for centuries. The adoption of this UNESCO World Heritage site under the ASI’s renewed ‘Adopt a Heritage 2.0’ programme is a move that signals a shift in India’s preservation strategy. 

Launched in 2023, this new phase of the scheme aims to strengthen public-private partnerships to manage not only the physical upkeep of these sites but also the quality of the visitor experience. Through such collaborations, the government intends to allocate some financial responsibility to private players, thereby sharing the fiscal load and enhancing heritage site management.

Under the programme’s terms, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the ASI and the private entity carefully delineates the latter’s involvement, ensuring that the firm’s role is confined strictly to maintaining peripheral amenities, leaving all aspects of ticket pricing, entry control, and monument preservation squarely under government control. This delineation, in theory, creates a balanced setup where the core sanctity of the heritage site remains untouched by corporate influence, while tourists benefit from improved services. The framework promises a win-win model, where preservation and enhanced visitor experience can co-exist, seemingly without compromising heritage integrity.

Yet, not all stakeholders see this as a victory. The scheme has sparked fervent debates across political and public spheres. Proponents view this public-private partnership as a sensible step that alleviates the taxpayer's burden in preserving these treasures, but the opposition raises alarms over what they perceive as a dangerous path towards the commodification of national monuments.

The opposition's criticism has been particularly fierce; they accused the government of "leasing out" India’s cultural assets under the pretense of adoption, demanding the scheme be rolled back. The argument reflects a deeper apprehension that corporate involvement might alter the meaning and purpose of these historic sites, reducing them to mere commercial assets at the risk of losing their cultural resonance.

This controversy brings to mind the heated public backlash witnessed in 2018 when the Dalmia Group adopted the Red Fort. Despite government assurances that corporate adopters would be held to rigorous standards, critics feared a slow transformation of heritage sites into commercial hubs. To many, the Red Fort incident was an ominous precursor to the current debate—a reminder of the need for stringent regulations and transparent public communication to dispel public concerns.

For opponents of the ‘Adopt a Heritage’ scheme, the overarching question remains: Will India’s national treasures retain their solemn cultural and historical significance, or will they transform into polished yet impersonal tourist attractions? With Maharashtra’s Elephanta Caves as the latest focal point, the implications of this scheme touch the very core of India’s heritage philosophy. As voices on both sides of the debate weigh in, the true success of the programme may lie in striking a delicate balance—one where private players genuinely contribute to the preservation of heritage, rather than merely exploiting it.

Elephanta Island is home to centuries-old rock-cut temples and structures

When the Dalmia Bharat Group signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the Indian government in 2018 to adopt the Red Fort under the “Adopt a Heritage” scheme, it marked a significant shift in the management of India’s historical monuments. The initiative, led by the Ministry of Tourism in partnership with the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), sought to bridge gaps in infrastructure and enhance visitor amenities at heritage sites by allowing private players to adopt and maintain specific locations. The Red Fort, a UNESCO World Heritage site and a symbol of India’s independence, was chosen for this pioneering partnership, with Dalmia Bharat Group committing approximately ₹25 crore over five years for the development of tourist amenities. 

While intended as a move towards preserving national heritage, the adoption sparked intense public debate and political controversy. Critics argued that the scheme undermined the sanctity and public ownership of a heritage site emblematic of India’s independence struggle. Concerns ranged from fears of excessive branding and commercialisation to questions about the competency and sensitivity of private entities in managing heritage conservation.

Whether the ‘Adopt a Heritage’ scheme ultimately elevates or erodes India’s cultural legacy remains to be seen. For now, Elephanta Island stands as both a symbol of progress and a touchstone in the dialogue between modernisation and tradition. The journey of these historic structures, and of the scheme itself, is just beginning, and its outcome may shape the future of heritage conservation in India.