MOEFCC has once again given an order to benefit the mining industry but it’s not necessarily a good idea for Environment in the long run.
Through this order, one can avoid public hearing for projects which were granted environment clearance under the Environmental Impact Assessment notification 1994.
Skipping an important step ie. Acceptance of Inputs by the concerned and awakened Public, in implementation of EIA can lead to derailment and dilution of the whole process.
Which sectors require EIA?
40 sectors have been recognised by MOEFCC those require Environmental Clearance before commencing any of the project activity and undertake EIA.
It is however categorised on the basis of activities like industrial projects such as mining, highways, power plants, River Hydel, Thermal power plants etc and the area of the proposed project.
For complete list, click here
What is an EIA and it’s objectives?
Environment Impact Assessment or EIA can act as:
1. A Study undertaken to assess and predict the effect of a proposed activity/project on Environment.
2. A decision making tool to compare various other alternatives for a project and the opportunity cost involved.
3. An idea enclosing the best combination of economic and environmental symmetry.
4. A mould to shape the projects to suit the local environment and engage the local community.
5. A mirror to present predictions made and options derived, to the decision-makers.
How EIA works for Environment?
Properly conducted EIA can lessens conflicts or impediments to Nature and Human Livelihoods by empowering community participation, updating the decision makers, and helping lay the base for environmentally sound projects.
It facilitates better cooperation, smoother processes and transparent access to High quality inclusive information.
A discretion in Present to serve the needs of Future.
Linkages in EIA:
Depending on Country and needs of the project, the stages can differ. However each stage in the process has an indispensable value attached to it and should not be forsaken.
1. Screening: To judge whether the proposed project requires an EIA and in case it does not, then the level of assessment required further.
2. Scoping: Identify the key issues and impacts to be looked after. This stage clearly defines the boundary and time limit of the study.
3. Impact analysis: Prospection of the probable environmental and social impacts on the proposed project.
4. Mitigation: This step suggests actions to reduce the potential adverse environmental consequences of development activities involved and also the methodology to avoid, in case.
5. Reporting: Disbursal of findings from EIA in the form of a report to the decision-making body and other interested parties.
6. Review of EIA: It examines the adequacy and effectiveness of the EIA report and provides the information necessary for decision-making.
7. Decision-making: It decides whether the project is rejected, approved or needs further reform.
8. Post monitoring: This is to ensure that impacts of the project do not exceed legal standards and implementation of the mitigation measures are in the manner as described in the EIA report.
Why Public Hearing is important?
Although there are various issues involved with the public hearing like language barrier or overindulgence of Public Consultants etc, it is undoubtedly one of the fundamental principles of a successful EIA process.
It not only provides an opportunity to those directly affected by a project to express their views on the environmental and social impacts of the proposal but the process encourages transparency in the environmental clearance system.
A brief History of EIA’s evolution:
Across the World:
As one of the successful policy innovations of the 20th Century for environmental conservation, the concept of Environmental clearance originated with the implementation of the National Environment Policy Act (NEPA) 1969 in the US.
Spread and cognisance of the idea spread like fire.
With adaptation ranging from a few high-income countries, like Canada, Australia, and New Zealand (1973-74) to some of the developing countries as well like Columbia (1974), Philippines (1978).
In 1989, a milestone was achieved when the World Bank adopted EIA for major development projects making it mandatory for a borrower country to undertake an EIA under the Bank’s supervision.
What are experts’ opinions on this new proposition?
A senior researcher with the Delhi-based Centre for Policy Research has said:
“An office memorandum is not just selectively reading down what is required by law, but is also taking a myopic approach to public hearings”.
“If a project is already in operation and is seeking an expansion, such hearings bring to light serious legacy issues arising out of non-compliance of mandatory safeguards including pollution, rehabilitation, and occupational health.
Where projects have not begun operations, relying on 15–year to 20-year-old public hearing defies good business practice and sound regulatory logic.
You may have environmental approval, but it would have little or no social legitimacy.”
In India:
This remarkable journey started around 1976-77 when the Planning Commission urged the Department of Science and Technology to examine the river-valley projects from an environmental angle.
In 1994, under Environmental (Protection) Act 1986, EIA notification was issued making Environmental Clearance (EC) mandatory for expansion or modernisation of any activity and for setting up new projects listed in Schedule 1 of the notification.
According to the 2006 amendment, State governments were made legible to provide clearance, depending on the size/capacity of the project.
What does the controversial new draft EIA holds for Environment?
Even United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteurs have expressed several concerns on it.
Challenges to Environment:
1. Proposed exemption of several large industries and projects from public consultation such as chemical manufacturing and petroleum products; building, construction and area development; inland waterways and expansion or widening of national highways.
2. Under the pretext of ‘involving strategic considerations’, it does not require publication of information or holding of public consultation for projects labelled by the Central government.
This is vague and hence could be open to excessively broad interpretations.
3. A dark clause on “post-facto clearance” kills it all. This means that the projects can be started without obtaining the required environmental clearances or permissions.
This is derogatory to the Environmental rule of law.
4. The period of public consultation hearings has been reduced to a maximum of 40 days and from 30 to 20 days, to submit their responses.
As “callous disregard” to forests:
The draft allows declaration of some areas as “economically sensitive areas” without a public hearing or environmental clearance.
It talks of an increased validity of the environment clearances for mining projects (50 years versus 30 years currently) and river valley projects (15 years versus 10 years currently).
These limitations on EIA can actually negate the conservation attempts been undertaken for years, instead of the new measures required to be taken for strengthening our resilience towards Natural threats.
Development that threatens the very existence of communities and Environment is not beneficial in the long run.
Its high time to attain sustainable Development for All.