Impact Assessment or Impact Indifference?
“HERE WE LOOK AT THE CONTROVERSIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT BILL 2020”
EIA 2020: A Perspective
2020 has become a keystone towards establishing a new normal. The global pandemic, while endangering the lives of millions, has also set into motion a series of events, which will shape this world permanently. For India, one such event was the Bhopal Gas Tragedy of 1984. A gas leak at a pesticide plant in Bhopal, where over 500,000 people were exposed. Fast forward to 2020, and the Visakhapatnam Gas Leak exposed people to highly toxic styrene gas, leading to 11 people losing their lives. Apart from the obvious similarities between the two events, they were followed by changes in the Environmental Impact Assessment process which is now a topic for debate amongst the learned.
The EIA Act first came into existence in the year 1986. Though India was not the first to come up with the idea, the effort and the act were appreciated. It underwent a major amendment in 2006, and in 2020, the government has proposed a bill to give it a major overhaul, which has sparked the dissent of various NGOs and people in India.
Let’s look at some of the concerns raised against the Draft EIA Bill 2020:
Possibility for Ex-Post Facto Clearance
After a notification by the Environmental Ministry to consider ex-post facto clearance for projects functioning without any environmental clearance, it has been made a permanent feature in the 2020 bill.
Reduced Public Participation
The current EIA procedures require approval from an expert committee, as well as public hearing of any projects. The public is thus included in the decision-making process, giving them 30 days to raise any concerns about the project before the approval is provided. This period is being reduced to 20 days, while allowing for projects less than 150,000 sq. meter in land to continue without a complete Environmental Clearance (EC), but an Environmental Permission (EP), which doesn’t require expert committee approval.
Accessibility of EIA Report
A public hearing is preceded by the submission of an EIA report, which can then be inspected by the general public, allowing them to raise any objections with regards to the project. With the new draft bill, this EIA report will be made available only in English, that too only for Electronic inspection after a written request. This reduces the accessibility of the EIA report to general public.
Reduced Project Appraisal Time
The bill has proposed a reduction in the project appraisal time from 60 days to 45 days, while this may allow faster processing and approval of projects, it also prevents the expert committee to conduct fresh studies pertaining to the project. This reduces the accuracy of impact assessment, both by reducing the time as well as removing the scope for relevant studies to be conducted.
Avoidance of Public Hearing
Public hearing is a major part of any EIA approval, yet the new draft proposes to limit the need for public hearing in many projects. The new bill proposes to allow the Central Government to omit the public hearing of a project, which concern “national defence and security or involving other strategic considerations”. At the outset, it might seem relevant, but the definition of “strategic considerations” is not provided, giving central government arbitrary powers.
Moreover, projects in “Border Area” are also saved from a public hearing. This again might seem reasonable, until you consider the definition of “Border Area” as “100 km of aerial distance from line of control”. This definition will essentially include majority of North-East India, Andaman & Nicobar and Lakshadweep Islands, and major parts of India, which might hinder public hearing of projects.
It may seem now, that the current EIA bill is a step backwards. The concerns raised seem valid and based in fact. Why then is the government pushing to enact this bill as a law? Why didn’t the policy makers understand the gravity of these concerns, and if they did, why did they still choose to include them in the draft? As with everything, there is another side to the story.
Let’s see why the supporters of this bill, proclaim it as a big step in the right direction.
Expansion of the “Impact” Assessment
While the Environmental Impact of projects is essential, the impact is not limited to environmental aspects. People, lives, businesses and cultures are often impacted by new projects. The new EIA Bill proposes to expand the definition of impact assessment to Economic and Social Impacts. As per the new bill, an Economic and Social Management Plan (ESMP) is needed before the approval of the project.
Faster Approvals
Though speed is often associated with lack in quality, the new draft proposed a Rapid Environment Impact Assessment (REIA), which still requires the necessary approvals from Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) and the Pollution Control Board. This move is aimed to better compliance, while making sure the quality of assessment is maintained.
Increasing the domain
The new bill proposes to include Coastal Regulatory Zones (CRZ) and Island Coastal Regulatory Zones (ICRZ) under the law, which is not present in the current law.
Decentralising the Decision making
The new law proposes to set-up Environmental Impact Assessment Authorities by States and Union Territories, allowing decentralisation of power, relevant and pertinent decision making and faster processing of EIA proposals.
The Draft EIA Bill might be a step in the right direction, but it has its own demons. Petitions and requests by public have raised their concerns, while many have also praised the law for its proposals. We are yet to see the official enactment of this bill, and with the right feedback, fact-based policy decisions and proper discourse, this could set India on the right path towards truly sustainable development.
