Date : 18/10/2023

Relevance: GS Paper 3- Environment- Environment Governance

Keywords: EIA, UNEP, Environment Protection Act 1986, Environment Clearance

Context-

The Indian Himalayan Region (IHR) is a unique and ecologically sensitive area that requires specialized environmental assessment to address the growing challenges posed by development. Recent environmental disasters, such as the Teesta dam breach in Sikkim and floods in Himachal Pradesh, have highlighted the urgent need for a comprehensive and region-specific approach to environmental impact assessment.

What is an EIA Process?

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process, as defined by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), serves as a critical tool to evaluate the environmental, social, and economic consequences of proposed projects before implementation. It involves a thorough analysis of various project alternatives, the prediction of potential environmental impacts, and the formulation of mitigation strategies. The efficacy of the EIA hinges on the availability of comprehensive and reliable baseline data for informed decision-making.

Significance of EIA / Benefits of EIA

• Promotes Sustainable Development: EIA helps balance economic growth with environmental sustainability amidst activities like industrialization and deforestation.
• Minimizes Negative Impacts and informs Decisions: EIA minimizes the adverse effects of development projects and offers data for informed decision-making, preventing environmental harm.
• Enhances Cost-Effectiveness: EIA aids in selecting and designing projects with long-term viability, reducing future costs. Avoiding environmental issues after project initiation is more expensive.

Historical Evolution of EIA in India

• In India, the precursor to the EIA began in 1976-77 when the Planning Commission tasked the Department of Science and Technology with assessing river valley projects from an environmental perspective. Initially, environmental clearance was solely an administrative decision of the central government.
• However, on January 27, 1994, the Union Ministry of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change promulgated the first EIA notification under the Environment (Protection) Act of 1986, making Environmental Clearance (EC) mandatory for specific projects. This 1994 notification underwent numerous amendments in the following years until it was eventually replaced by the EIA 2006 notification.
• The hallmark of the 2006 notification was the decentralization of the EC process, granting state governments the power to issue EC in certain cases.
• Despite subsequent amendments, the 2020 draft EIA notification faced public criticism for being perceived as industry-friendly and compromising ecological concerns. But, when used diligently, the EIA could be a potent tool for environmental governance to promote sustainable development.

Challenges in the Current EIA Framework

1. Neglecting the IHR's Special Needs:

• The EIA 2006 notification classifies projects under different categories such as mining, natural resource extraction, power generation, and physical infrastructure. Unfortunately, the threshold limits beyond which EIA is required remain uniform across the country, irrespective of the unique environmental challenges faced in the IHR.
• Despite all levels of government being acutely aware of the special needs of the Indian Himalayan Region (IHR), the region’s vulnerabilities and fragility have not been considered separately. While some industries mentioned in the schedule for the notification cannot be set up in the IHR States due to the industrial policies of the respective States, other industries and projects have to meet the same threshold in the rest of the country.
• Even the draft 2020 notification which was floated for public discussion does not treat the IHR differently than the rest of the country and is not cognisant of the special developmental needs of the IHR.

2. Flaws in the Graded Approach

• The Indian regulatory system employs a graded approach, which tailors environmental conditions based on the impact a project may have on specific habitats, such as protected forests, reserved forests, national parks, or critical tiger habitats.
• Regrettably, this graded approach has ignored the IHR, despite its immense ecological importance. The ecosystem services provided by the IHR, including its role as a water tower, have not been factored into the regulatory framework.

The Urgent Need for Reform

• When categorizing projects, it is crucial to consider the impacts of all such initiatives within the context of the fragility and vulnerability of the Indian Himalayan Region (IHR) regarding its ecology and environment. There is a well-established understanding that the Himalayas are inherently susceptible to extreme weather conditions like heavy rainfall, flash floods, landslides, and seismic activity, with climate change exacerbating this vulnerability.
• Despite our awareness of the Himalayas' fragility and vulnerability, there is a noticeable absence of distinct environmental standards tailored to projects located within the IHR.
• The increasing frequency of devastating incidents caused by extreme weather conditions in the Himalayan States highlights the region's heavy toll due to this lack of attention.
• To address the unique needs of these mountains, it is essential to integrate considerations for the IHR at all four stages of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process: screening, scoping, public consultation, and appraisal. This can be achieved by establishing criteria for projects and activities that require Environmental Clearance (EC) in mountainous regions that align with the ecological requirements of the IHR.
• Furthermore, it would be beneficial to include in the general conditions mandated for all projects, a provision specific to the IHR or mountainous areas above a certain altitude or possessing defined characteristics that may heighten the project proponent's responsibility and liability.

Need of Proactive EIA

• At the national level, there is no regulatory body, as recommended by the Supreme Court of India in the 2011 Lafarge Umiam Mining (P) Ltd.; T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union of India case, to carry out an independent, unbiased, and transparent evaluation and approval of projects for Environmental Clearances (ECs) and to oversee the compliance with the conditions set in the EC.
• The current Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process is reactive, responding to development proposals rather than proactively anticipating them. The process tends to lean in favor of project proponents due to their financial involvement. Cumulative impacts, especially those stemming from multiple projects in a particular area, are not adequately considered within the current EIA process, although it does provide some coverage for a project's subcomponents or associated developments.
• In many instances, the EIA is conducted in a superficial and checkbox-style manner, treated merely as a procedural formality to secure EC before commencing a project. These limitations are particularly pronounced in the Indian Himalayan Region (IHR), where the EIA process fails to recognize the unique requirements of the region.
• Policymakers should consider exploring alternative tools, such as strategic environmental assessments, which take into account the cumulative effects of development within an area to address the specific needs of the IHR as a foundational policy approach.

How to Strengthen the EIA Process

• Independent Agency: Entrust the entire EIA process to independent agencies and establish a National Accreditation Body for overseeing EIA agencies.
• Precautionary Principle: Apply this principle when assessing concerns raised by the public, ensuring that even in the absence of scientific certainty, steps are taken to prevent potential environmental damage (e.g., GM crops).
• Justified Clearances: Scrutinize and provide clear justifications for project clearances, avoiding questionable approvals as seen in cases like the Sethusamudram Project.
• Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA): Utilize SEA not only for project evaluation but also for project selection. It offers alternatives and guides project financing. Reflect SEA directives in the National Environment Policy. (Nepal follows a similar approach to SEA).
• Capacity Building: Promote capacity building for NGOs, civil society groups, and local communities to effectively use the EIA notification for better decision-making regarding projects impacting their environments and livelihoods. Engage local communities, including Panchayats and Urban Local Bodies (ULBs), with a special focus on forests and tribal areas. Incorporate traditional local knowledge

Conclusion

In light of the fragile and vulnerable nature of the Indian Himalayan Region, it is essential to overhaul the existing EIA framework to accommodate its unique environmental requirements. Policymakers should explore alternative tools, such as strategic environmental assessments, to assess the cumulative impacts of development in the region comprehensively. Recognizing the special needs of the IHR and implementing a tailored EIA process is not just a legal requirement but a moral imperative to protect the invaluable ecological heritage of the Indian Himalayas and ensure the sustainable development of the region.

Source - The Hindu