Eco-damaging Changes in the EIA Notification

Context

Draft Environment Impact Assessment Notification 2020, to make changes in the existing environmental clearance laws.

Background

The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) has proposed a draft Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) notification to replace the current notification. The new draft is still at the stage of public comments and it is essential that its provisions be vigorously debated so that the dilution of norms it envisages does not become official policy.

The extension reiterates the established principles of public participation in environmental governance. The EIA Notification 2020, which will supersede 2006 notification, has come under severe criticism from environmentalists who have demanded its early withdrawal. Indeed, the draft notification’s regression and dilution of environmental criteria conflict with the established principles of international law.

EIA in India

The Indian experience with Environmental Impact Assessment began over 20 years back. It started in 1976-77 when the Planning Commission asked the Department of Science and Technology to examine the river-valley projects from an environmental angle. This was subsequently extended to cover those projects, which required the approval of the Public Investment Board. Till 1994, environmental clearance from the Central Government was an administrative decision and lacked legislative support.

On 27 January 1994, the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests (MEF), Government of India, under the Environmental (Protection) Act 1986, promulgated an EIA notification making Environmental Clearance (EC) mandatory for expansion or modernization of any activity or for setting up new projects listed in Schedule 1 of the notification. Since then there have been 12 amendments made in the EIA notification of 1994.

Environmental Impact Assessment or EIA is the process or study which predicts the effect of a proposed industrial/ infrastructural project on the environment. It prevents the proposed activity/ project from being approved without proper oversight or taking adverse consequences into account.

Eco-damaging Changes

• A list of projects has been included under Category B2, expressly exempted from the requirement of an EIA (Clause 13, sub cl. 11). The projects under this category include offshore and onshore oil, gas and shale exploration, hydroelectric projects up to 25 MW, irrigation projects between 2,000 and 10,000 hectares of command area, small and medium mineral beneficiation units, small foundries involving furnace units, some categories of re-rolling mills, small and medium cement plants, small clinker grinding units, acids other than phosphoric or ammonia, sulphuric acid, micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) in dye and dye intermediates, bulk drugs, synthetic rubbers, medium-sized paint units, all inland waterway projects, expansion or widening of highways between 25 km and 100 km with defined parameters, aerial ropeways in ecologically sensitive areas, and specified building construction and area development projects.
• The projects in this list are, under existing norms, identified on the basis of screening by Expert Appraisal Committees, rather than being exempted through listing in the Schedule. Also, coal and non-coal mineral prospecting and solar photovoltaic projects do not need prior environmental clearance or permission in the new scheme.
• It provides for a reduction of time period from 30 days to 20 days for the public to submit their responses during a public hearing for any application seeking environmental clearance. It also requires that the public hearing process be completed in 40 days, compared to 45 days under the 2006 notification. The main reason stated for reducing the time is that it would become easy for new investments to complete the formality of EIA.
• Another problem relating to the new notification is the extension of the time given for submitting a compliance report throughout the term of the project. Earlier notification required that the project proponent submit a report every six months, showing that they are carrying out their activities as per the terms on which permission has been given. However, the new notification requires the promoter to submit a report only once every year.

Perspective

Government’s View

The government aims to promote ease of doing business to move towards a single-window system for environmental clearance (EC), which materialised with the launch of Pro-Active and Responsive facilitation by Interactive, Virtuous and Environmental Single-window Hub on August 10, 2018. It is an online portal for submission, monitoring and management of proposals submitted to the MoEF&CC by project proponents seeking various types of clearances.

Environmentalists’ View

In the latest Environmental Performance Index (EPI), India figured in the bottom five countries. It went from 141 in 2016 to 177 in 2018 out of 180 countries.

The poor environmental performance can partially be attributed to a weak EIA process in India, which is diluted further by changes in policy and practices. The EIA is treated more as a means to get EC than as a tool to evaluate the actual impact of the project(s) on the environment and the community. In March 2017 the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) report on environmental clearance and post-clearance monitoring highlighted that the clearance process was marred with major procedural deficiencies.

Environment Vs Economic Growth

Put differently, we need to answer two questions. First, does protecting the environment adversely impact economic development? And is it possible for India’s environmental and economic objectives to converge?

To understand if our environment is detrimental to the economy, we need to understand the economic value of healthy environments. The term used in environmental economics for this value proposition is ‘ecosystem services’. Water security is one such ecosystem service.

For example, all rivers in peninsular India have their watersheds in the forests and grasslands located in hilly regions, like the Western Ghats. These forests absorb rain water like huge sponges and release them slowly, through the year. If these forests are gone, rains will result in massive floods that reach the ocean in no time, leaving our rivers dry and the entire agrarian economy and our food security at risk. In the scenario where our organised economic sectors are looking at the rural economy as the next big growth engine, the implications of this are obvious.

Disaster prevention is another key ecosystem service. North Kerala and Coorg in Karnataka showed us how denuded hills cause major floods, resulting in the loss of human lives and property. Without the protective shield of mangroves, cyclones cause heavy damage not just in coastal areas but in the hinterland as well. The disappearance of lakes and marshlands is resulting in intense flooding in most of our cities every monsoon.

Conclusion

A healthy environment is the backbone of a resilient economy is not an exaggeration. The environment provides a wide range of services that in turn drive long-term economic growth. And this mechanism far outweighs short-term gains that can be derived by overlooking the environment. Importantly, the impact of environmental degradation is far greater on India’s poor.

Connecting the Article

Question for Prelims

Consider the following statements, with reference to the Environment Performance Index.

1. It is released by United Nations Environment Programme.
2. The poor environmental performance of India may be attributed to a weak Environmental Impact Assessment process.

Which of the Statements given above is/ are correct ?

(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Question for Mains

‘Environment is the key for economic development’. Comment