7th International Science Congress (ISC-2017).  International E-publication: Publish Projects, Dissertation, Theses, Books, Souvenir, Conference Proceeding with ISBN.  International E-Bulletin: Information/News regarding: Academics and Research

Big promises, underwhelming results: evaluation of shortcomings of environment impact assessment mechanism in India

Author Affiliations

  • 1PG Research Scholar, School of Ecology and Environment Studies, Nalanda University, Rajgir, Nalanda, Bihar, India

Int. Res. J. Environment Sci., Volume 6, Issue (3), Pages 58-65, March,22 (2017)

Abstract

Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) is a practice to be done before any venture or significant movement is attempted to guarantee that it will not at all damage the environment on a long haul premise. Any formative effort entails not adjust in-depth examination of the need for such a venture, fiscal expenses, and advantages but also, it requires a nitty gritty appraisal of the impact of a proposed venture. The point of an EIA is to guarantee that potential effects are distinguished and tended to at an early stage in the ventures arranging and plan. To accomplish this point, the appraisal finding is conveyed to all, who will settle on choices about the proposed ventures, the venture engineers, and their financial specialists and in addition controllers, organizers and the government officials. So that EIA can shape the venture with the goal that its advantages can be accomplished and managed without bringing about unfriendly effects. Lately, significant ventures have experienced genuine troubles in light of the fact that deficient record has been brought of their association with the encompassing environment. Many new ventures have been observed to be unsustainable on account of asset exhaustion and their unfavorable effects. Although the purpose of introducing EIA in India was like other country in world to use it as a device for safeguarding that environmental anxieties, which are cohesive into the development project or programme planning process, however after more than 20 years, still it doesn\'t appear as a powerful device to \" ‘safeguard’ the environment and socioeconomic arrangement of the communities in the country. Thus, this article, by tracing the evidence from various case studies related to the EIA from various sources of secondary data, including from various literatures, texts, articles, news, archives, explores the notable inadequacies in EIA processes and practices in India and finally by analyzing the loopholes, it distinguishes opportunities for exploiting the present conditions for reinforcing the EIA procedure. Hence this article, by tracing the evidence from history provides a background, how over the year and the EIA is converted into the project justification tool rather than project planning tool.

References

  1. Scorer R.S. (1994)., Earth in the balance, Al Gore, Houghton Mifflin, Boston and Earthscan Publications (London), 1992. No. of pages: 406., Int. J. Climatol., 14(1) 116-117. doi:10.1002/joc.3370140118
  2. Spechler M.C. (2000)., David Held, Anthony McGrew, David Goldblatt, and Jonathan Perraton, Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture., Journal of Comparative Economics,28(3), 629-631.
  3. Wapner P. (1995)., Politics beyond the state environmental activism and world civic politics., World Politics, 47(03), 311-340.
  4. Gray K.R. (2000)., International Enviromnental Impact Assessment-Potential for a Multilateral Environmental Agreement., Colo. J. Int
  5. Knox J.H. (2002)., The myth and reality of transboundary environmental impact assessment., American journal of International law, 291-319.
  6. Robinson N.A. (1992)., International trends in environmental impact assessment., 19 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 591, Available from http://digitalcommons.pace.edu /lawfaculty/382/.Accessed on 1st December 2016.
  7. De Moor A. and Calamai P. (1997)., Subsidizing unsustainable development: undermining the earth with public funds., POPLINE.
  8. Zhao S. (2008)., China, Journal of Contemporary China, 17(55), 207-227.
  9. Paliwal Ritu (2006)., EIA practice in India and its evaluation using SWOT analysis., Environmental impact assessment review, 26(5), 492-510.
  10. Madhusoodanan G. (2003)., Greening the Red Silently: A Case Study from India., Capitalism Nature Socialism, 14(1), 37-54.
  11. Bharali G. (2009)., Tribals rise against displacement in North-eastern India., Beyond relocation: The imperative of sustainable resettlement. Sage, 218-239.
  12. Banham W. and Brew D. (1996)., A review of the development of environmental impact assessment in India., Project Appraisal, 11(3), 195-202.
  13. Morgan Richard K. (2012)., Environmental impact assessment: the state of the art., Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 30(1), 5-14.
  14. Panigrahi J.K. and Amirapu S. (2012)., An assessment of EIA system in India., Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 35, 23-36.
  15. Environmental Impact Assessement Notification-2006. S.O.1533 (E), (2006)., Published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-II, and Section 3, Sub-section (ii) MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS., Available from http://envfor.nic.in/legis/eia/so1533.pdf , Accessed on 3rd December 2016.
  16. BW Online Bureau (2015)., 10 Facts About Pollution In India., 08June, 2015 Available from http:// businessworld.in/article/10-Facts-About-Pollution-In-India/08-06-2015-82296/ , Accessed on 3rd December 2016
  17. Ravindra K., Kaur M., John S., Mor S. and Pyne S. (2015)., of the Report: Air Pollution in India: Bridging the Gap between., 1-29.
  18. Rai B. (2013)., Pollution and conservation of Ganga river in modern India., International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 3(4), 1-4.
  19. Rai R.K., Upadhyay A., Ojha C.S.P. and Singh V.P. (2011)., The Yamuna river basin: water resources and environment., Springer Science & Business Media, 66.
  20. Walsh B. (2007)., The world, Time Magazine, 1-3.
  21. Panagariya A. (2005)., India in the 1980s and the 1990s: A Triumph of Reforms., India’s and China’s Recent Experience with Reform and Growth. Palgrave Macmillan UK, 170-200.
  22. Murthy A. and Patra H.S. (2005)., Environment Impact Assessment Process in India and the Drawbacks., Environment Conservation Team, Vasundhara, Bhubaneswar. Available from https://elibrarywcl.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/environment-impact-assessment-process-in-india-and-the-drawbacks-1.pdf Accessed on 3rd December
  23. Green peace (2016)., What’s wrong with the Jaitapur EIA?., Available from http://www.greenpeace.org/ india/en/What-We-Do/Nuclear-Unsafe/Nuclear-Power-in-India/Jaitapur-nuclear-power-plant/Environmental-Impacts/Whats-wrong-with-the-Jaitapur-EIA/ , Accessed on 3rd December 2016
  24. AMERVP (2013)., Analysis Of Moef’S EAC On River Valley Projects The Expert Approval Committee Has Zero Rejection In Six Years April 2007 To December 2012., Sun Shine Process, Delhi: South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People, 2017. Web. 19 Jan. 2017. Available from http://sandrp.in/env_governance/TOR_and_EC_Clearance_status_all_India_Overview_Feb2013.pdf Accessed on 15th December 2016
  25. Duflo E. and Pande R. (2007)., Dams., The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(2), 601-646.
  26. Central Water Commission (1994)., National Register Of Large Dams., Available from http://www.cwc.nic.in/main/ downloads/new%20nrld.pdf , Accessed on 15 January 2017
  27. Dandekar Parineeta (2017)., WII’s Cumulative Impact Assessment of Ganga hydel projects on biodiversity: A small step in the right direction, but still a long way to go. Report., April 26, 2012. Accessed January 15, 2017. http://sandrp.in/ hydropower/WII_Cumulative_Impact_Assessment_of_Ganga_hydel_projects_A_small_step_and_a_long_way_to_go.pdf
  28. Sood Jyotika (2017)., Cleared at cost of biodiversity., Down To Earth , Tuesday 31 January 2012, Available from http://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/cleared-at-cost-of-biodiversity-35664 , Accessed on 15 January 2017
  29. Gadgil M. (2014)., Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel., Economic & Political Weekly, 49(18), 38-50.
  30. Bose Rajanya (2014)., 6 points made by MadhavGadgil report that Centre ignored., Thu, 28 Aug 2014-12:54pm , Mumbai , DNA webdesk, Available from http://www.dnaindia.com /india/report-6-points-made-by-madhav-gadgil-report-that-centre-ignored-2014329, Accessed on 19 January 2017
  31. Banham W. and Brew D. (1996)., A review of the development of environmental impact assessment in India., Project Appraisal, 11(3), 195-202.
  32. Valappil Muraleedharan, Devuyst Dimitri and Hens Luc (1994)., Evaluation of the environmental impact assessment procedure in India., Impact Assessment, 12(1), 75-88.
  33. Menon M. and Kohli K. (2007)., Environmental Decision-Making: Whose Agenda?., Economic and Political Weekly, 2490-2494.
  34. Kohli K. and Menon M. (2005)., Eleven years of the environment impact assessment notification, 1994: How Effective Has It Been., Kalpavriksh Environmental Action Group.
  35. Chowdhury Nupur (2014)., Environmental Impact Assessment in India: Reviewing two decades of jurisprudence., IUCN Academy of Environmental Law eJournal, 5, 28-32.
  36. Rodriguez S. and Sridhar A. (2008)., Dhamra Port: how environmental regulatory failure fuels corporate irreverence., Marine Turtle Newsletter, 121, 21-24.
  37. Johnston Paul and Santillo David (2007)., The Dhamra-Chandbali Port Expansion Project, Orissa, India., Greenpeace, Available from http://www.greenpeace.org/ india/ Global/ india/report/2007/5/ critique-of-the-environmental.pdf, Accessed on 19 January 2017
  38. Mukherjee P. (2012)., EIA scams: Decaying the EIA legal regime in India., Journal of Environmental Research And Development, 6(3), 507-513.
  39. SANDRP (2016)., DRP News Bulletin 19., Sep 2016,Available from https://sandrp.wordpress.com/ 2016/09/19/drp-news-bulletin-eac-panel-defers-clearance-to-yadadri-power-project-tsAccessed on 19 January 2017
  40. Chand R. (2014)., Himalayan tsunami: disaster natural but damage man-made., International Journal of Multidisciplinary Approach Study, 1(4), 51-64.
  41. Valdiya K.S. (2014)., Damming rivers in the tectonically resurgent Uttrakhand Himalaya., Current Science, 106(12), 1658-1668.
  42. Sagar Kundan (2016)., Dichotomy of Rain: The Dilemma of Cloud Bursts in Uttarakhand (India) and Challenges to Disaster Management., Int. Res. J. Environment Sci., 5(11), 65-77. Accessed December20, 2016. http://www.isca.in/ IJENS/Archive/v5/i11/9.ISCA-IRJEvS-2016-145.pdf
  43. Clark A.L. (2009)., Environmental challenges to urban planning: fringe areas, ecological footprints and climate change., proceedings from the Governance, Socio-economic, and Environmental Issues Workshop, 1-8.
  44. Sagar Kundan and Mohanty Abinash (2016)., Bihar Sharif as smart city: Metamorphosis plan and its challenges to sustainable development., Proceedings of International Conference on Climate Change Mitigation and Technologies for Adaptation, 2016 (IC3MTA 2016), Synod College, Shillong, 793002, Meghalaya, 1st ed. Vol. 2. 105-09.ISBN 978-93-81693-07-2
  45. Sagar Kundan (2017)., Integrating Disaster Risk Reduction and Urban Planning: Evidence from Class III City- Rajgir, India., International Journal of Advance Research And Innovative Ideas In Education, 3(1), 237-252
  46. Chauhan Chetan (2014)., Prakash Javadekar clears 240 projects in 3 months., Hindustan Times Updated: Sep 11, 2014, Available from http://www.hindustantimes.com/ india/ prakash-javadekar-clears-240-projects-in-3-months/ story-WCrxd2rhSxQ3ozpOBZ7YiN.html Accessed on 19 January 2017