The success of ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT Is still a distant dream for India!!

Human developmental activities hugely impact the environment. More often these activities are harmful to the environment than benign. However mankind today cannot live without taking up these activities for its food, security and other needs. It is desirable to ensure that the development options under consideration are sustainable. Consequently, there is a need to harmonise developmental activities with the environmental concerns. Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is one of the tools available with the planners to achieve the above-mentioned goal. In doing so, environmental consequences must be characterised early in the project cycle and accounted for in the project design. ROLE OF EIA

EIAs have two roles - legal and educational.The legal one is quite straight forward: to ensure that development projects such as a housing estate, a road/bridge or some such construction project has a minimal impact on the environment in its entire 'lifecycle' - i.e. during design, construction, use, maintenance, and demolition. Many countries now have laws stipulating that unless an EIA study is carried out (particularly for large infrastructure projects), permission for construction will not be granted by the local authority. But countries in Africa will possibly see EIA processes as a 'hinderance' to development as environment is not yet a priority!The educational one is equally important and probably a forerunner to the legal role - to educate everyone one involved - professionals and users included, of the potential environmental impacts of anything we do. We need to look at all our daily actions as eventually and cumulatively affecting the environment. This includes our daily choices, where a delicate balance between financial and environmental considerations need to be made automatically - without thinking!

Evolution of EIA and its Indian JourneyEIA is one of the successful policy innovations of the 20th Century for environmental conservation. Around four decades ago there was no EIA but today it is a formal process in many countries and is currently practiced in more than 100 countries. EIA as a mandatory regulatory procedure originated in the early 1970s, with the implementation of the National Environment Policy Act (NEPA) 1969 in the US. A large part of the initial development took place in a few high-income countries, like Canada, Australia, and New Zealand (1973-74). However, there were some developing countries as well, which introduced EIA relatively early - Columbia (1974), Philippines (1978). The EIA process really took off after the mid-1980s. In 1989, the World Bank adopted EIA for major development projects, in which a borrower country had to undertake an EIA under the Bank's supervisionEIA in India was started in 1976-77 when the Planning Commission asked the then Department of Science and Technology to examine the river-valley projects from environmental angle. This was subsequently extended to cover those projects, which required approval of the Public Investment Board.These were administrative decisions, and lacked the legislative support.The Government of India enacted the Environment (Protection) Act on 23rdMay 1986. To achieve the objectives of the Act, one of the decisions that were taken is to make environmental impact assessment statutory. 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 modernisation 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. The MoEF notified new EIA legislation in September 2006. The notification made it mandatory for various projects such as mining, thermal power plants, river valley, infrastructure (road, highway, ports, harbours and airports) and industries including very small electroplating or foundry units to get environment clearance. However, unlike the EIA Notification of 1994, the new legislation has put the onus of clearing projects on the state government depending on the size/capacity of the project. Certain activities permissible under the Coastal Regulation Zone Act, 1991 also require similar clearance. Additionally, donor agencies operating in India like the World Bank and the ADB have a different set of requirements for giving environmental clearance to projects that are funded by them.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN THE DEVELOPED AND DEVELOPING WORLD (incl. INDIA)THE STATUS OF LEGISLATIONWhen one looks at the Developed world, in most of the developed countries, a well-framed EIA legislation in place. For instance, in Canada, Canadian Environmental Assessment Act regulates EIA while EU countries are guided by Directive on EIA (1985). The story is however opposite in the Developing world with a conspicuous lack of formal EIA legislation in many developing countries. For instance, EIA is not mandatory in many African countries. India, thankfully, has a formal legislation for EIA. It has been enacted by making an amendment in the Environment Protection Act 1986.WHO PARTICIPATES IN EIAIn developed countries, there is active involvement of all participants including competent authority, government agencies and affected people at early stages of the EIA. This makes the process more robust and gives a fair idea of issues, which need to be addressed in the initial phase of EIA. But in the Developing countries, including India, there is limited involvement of public and government agencies in the initial phases. This often results in poor representation of the issues and impacts in the report, adversely affecting the quality of the report.APPROACH OF EIAIntegrated approach to EIA followed in the Developed world. All aspects including social and health are taken into account. But the Developing countries cant afford to do so and mainly environmental aspects are considered generally neglecting the social or health aspects. For instance, there is no provision in place to cover landscape and visual impacts in the Indian EIA regulations.In Developed Countries there is proper consideration of alternatives while conducting EIA unlike the developing countries where no such consideration is given. In Developed countries the process of SCREENING is well defined. For instance, in EU countries competent authorities decide whether EIA is required after seeking advice from developer, NGO and statutory consultees. In Japan, screening decision is made by the authorizing agency with respect to certain criteria. In Canada, federal authority determines whether an environmental assessment is required or not. In Developing countries, screening practice in EIA is weak. In most cases, there is a list of activities that require EIA, with or without any threshold values. Like in India screening done on the basis of a defined list. Threshold values on the size of the project has been used to decide whether the project will be cleared by the state government or the central government.In Developed countries, the SCOPING process is comprehensive and involves consultation with all the stakeholders. In many countries like US, Netherlands, Canada and Europe, the involvement of the public and their concern are addressed in the scoping exercise. Besides this, funding organisations such as World Bank, ADB and ERDB have provision for consultation with the affected people and NGOs during identification of issues in scoping exercise. But, Scoping process in most developing countries is very poorly defined. In many countries including China, Pakistan, etc. there is no provision for scoping. In some countries like in Nigeria and Indonesia, a term of reference is followed for scoping while in some countries like Ghana, Taiwan and Chile, a general checklist is followed. In countries where it is undertaken, there is no public consultation during scoping. Moreover, in most developing countries, scoping is often directed towards meeting pollution control requirements, rather than addressing the full range of potential environmental impacts from a proposed development. In the case of India, in 1970s and 80s scoping was done by consultant or proponent with an inclination towards meeting pollution control requirements, rather than addressing the full range of potential environmental impacts from a proposed development. However, the new notification has put the onus of scoping on the expert committee based on the information provided by the proponent. Consultation with public is optional and depends on the discretion of the expert committee.WHO CONDUCTS EIADeveloped Countries follow a multi-disciplinary approach. Involvement of expert with expertise in different areas. However, a conspicuous lack of trained EIA professionals often leads to the preparation of inadequate and irrelevant EIA reports in developing countries. In India, Preparation of EIA is done by consultants. Therefore, the selection criterion for the organisation is fees/cost rather than the expertise of EIA team.

EIA Process in INDIA and the associated challengesEIA process in India involves four basic steps, (a) screening and scoping, (b) preparation of the EIA report, (c) review and decision-making and (d) post project monitoring. In EIA notification, 2006, the project activities listed in Schedule-I are categorized in two major categories A and B. It has been done based on the spatial extent of potential impacts on human health and natural and man-made resources. Category-A projects clearance are to be granted by the MoEF while Category-B projects are to be cleared by the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA).However the contemporary EIA practice is facing several challenges. Some of which are:1. Sound legal provisions but weak administrative set upIn India the legislative provisions and guidelines for EIA are quite comprehensive. The EPA, 1986 and various other laws, to which EIA process is linked and draws its meaning, explicitly states penalties and fines along with imprisonment in case of any infraction of the legal provision. However, a lack of implementing mandatory requirements for EIA including no use of powers to impose fines is resulting in the development and operation of many projects, likely to cause environmental and socio-economic impacts, without undergoing an EIA. Furthermore, proponents are aware that the responsible authorities lack the enforcement machinery. Thus projects for which EIA is carried out, it takes place after procurement of site or even some cases after start of construction and hence EIA becomes just a formality.

2. Lack of coordinationThe coordination between EIA proponents, consultants, MoEF, CPCB, SPCB, Planners and decision-makers is generally weak. This is leading not only to the inadequate scoping, impact assessment and consideration of concerned departments views in the EIA report but also to the start of the developmental projects prior to getting EIA clearance. In the present Indian context the financial institutions and utility service providers are not responsible to ensure EIA clearance before providing loans and utility connections. Once the development works take off, the possibilities of alternatives or modifications in project design during construction are meagre or none in many cases.3. Inadequate screening and scopingThe screening process in Indian system is linked to the various types of project activities listed in schedule-I of EIA Notification, MoEF, 2006.It doesn't define anything on level of impacts, type of pollutants, size of project and technology used as considered in other countries. 4. Poor quality of EIA reports and limited reviewThe overall quality of EIA reports in India is unsatisfactory. The lack of expertise of EIA professionals and approval authorities along with reluctance on part of the proponents to allocate resources are some of the encumbrances to better quality EIA. The reviewing of EIA reports is generally process and substance oriented except some comments on the quality of impact assessment by EIA expert appraisal committee. Lack of expertise and limited resources with executing authorities result in inferior decision-making..5. Inadequate public participationThe Indian system provides good guidelines for public consultation like many EIA regimes around the globe. Most of the developed nations in the world public involvement are mandatory at various stages of EIA i.e screening, scoping, report preparation and decision making. But in India public hearing is conducted once, just before making decisions. Moreover the points raised in public hearing are rarely involved in the planning and decision making. Hence, the effectiveness of the public participation in Indian EIA system is yet to be evaluated.6. Inadequate implementation of mitigation measures and monitoringThe implementation of an Environment Management Plan, mitigation measures and post-decision monitoring are some of the weaknesses of Indian EIA system. These shortfalls are due to the lack of enforcement machinery and environmental authorities. There is an encouragement from government, since the project proponents are powerful and contribute substantially to improve socio-economic conditions of the project locality.

The challenges for EIA are political rather than technical. In order to make EIA more than a ritual, changes in attitudes and behaviours of political leaders and public officials will be necessary. These changes can come from strong base in environmental policy, law and rights. EIA is universal, but situations do change from culture to culture. Even if the technical and financial issues are dealt with in an appropriate manner to produce desired results, the quality of EIA cannot be achieved unless socio-political context in which the EIA system has to operate is favourable. The need of the hour is to transform political will in favour of development but not at the cost of environment.