Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) is a formal process used to predict the environmental consequences of any development project. Environment Impact Assessment in India is statutorily backed by The Environment Protection Act in 1986

Rationale behind EIA

 EIA looks into various problems, conflicts and natural resource constraints which may not only affect the viability of a project but also predict if a project might harm to the people, their land, livelihoods and environment. Once these potential harmful impacts are predicted, the EIA process identifies the measures to minimize those impacts.

Objectives of Environmental Impact Assessment

1. Identifying, predicting and evaluating economic, environmental and social impacts of development activities.
2. Providing information on the environmental consequences for decision making.

Promoting environmentally sound and suitable development by identifying appropriate alternatives and mitigation measures.

The Environmental Impact Assessment process

The EIA process or stages is described below

1. Screening: This stage decides which projects need a full or partial assessment study.
2. Scoping: This stage decides which impacts are necessary to be assessed. This is done based on legal requirements, international conventions, expert knowledge and public engagement. This stage also finds out alternate solutions that avoid or at least reduce the adverse impacts of the project. Alternate designs or sites that avoid or mitigate impact are investigated.
3. Assessment & evaluation of impacts and development of alternatives: this stage predicts and identifies the environmental impacts of the proposed project and also elaborates on the alternatives.
4. EIA Report: in this reporting stage, an environmental management plan (EMP) and also a non-technical summary of the project’s impact is prepared for the general public. This report is also called the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
5. Decision making: the decision on whether the project is to be given approval or not and if it is to be given, under what conditions.
6. Monitoring, compliance, enforcement and environmental auditing: monitoring whether the predicted impacts and the mitigation efforts happen as per the EMP.

   Importance of Environmental Impact Assessment

   1. EIA is a good tool for prudent environment management.
   2. It is government-policy that any industrial project in India has to secure EIA clearance from the Environment Ministry before approval for the project itself.

   Environmental Impact Assessment in India

   • EIA started in India in 1976-77 when the Planning Commission directed the Department of Science & Technology to assess the river valley projects from the point of view of the environment. This was extended for all those projects that required approval from the Public Investment Board.
   • Then, in 1986, the government enacted the Environment (Protec­tion) Act which made EIA statutory. The other main laws in this regard are the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act (1972), the Water Act (1974), the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act (1981), and the Biological Diversity Act (2002).
   • In 1982, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change set up the Environmental Information System (ENVIS) with the purpose of collecting, collating, storing, retrieving and disseminating information related to the environment sector. This serves as a web-based distributed network of subject-specific databases. The chief purpose of the ENVIS is to integrate all countrywide efforts to collect, store, disseminate and use environment-information for better managing environmental assessment activities.
   Though it seems a very simplified process, but the whole process of EIA encompasses numerous structural and procedural flaws

   Issues Related to Environmental Impact Assessment

   • Screening and Scoping not well defined—-In the EIA notification 2006, there is a lack of clarity in the overall conductance of the Screening process. As it is the discretion of the State Level Committee to decide which projects are B1 and which are B2, many a time the bias of respective State Governments come into play. The Scoping process faces the same types of issues because of the lack of clarity in guidelines.
   • Misleading EIA reports— Sometimes the EIA reports lack the expected degrees of honesty, owing to bias, corruption, exaggeration and wrong claims. Due to poor knowledge of the project area, the agencies lift paragraphs and sentences from other sources, thus presenting contradictory, inconsistent and outdated information. Moreover, there is no process for punishing the agencies tabling such dishonest EIA reports.
   • Insufficient EIA reports— Agencies or project proponents also prepare incomplete EIA reports, which include incomplete surveys, arbitrary demarcation of EIA study area and unsubstantiated statements. Sometimes the impact with respect to flash floods, landslides, peak precipitation etc. round the year is grossly ignored in reports.
   • Poor quality of EIA professionals—This happens mostly when the proponents themselves conduct the EIA. They intentionally hire local and incompetent professionals to save cost over the whole process or some other vested reasons. These poor professionals prepare a poor quality of EIA reports.
   • Lack of awareness—There is a gross lack of awareness among the local people, about the process of EIA, its significance for them, the role of various players and their own rights and responsibilities. Moreover, there is a communication gap between authorities and local people because the notice for Public hearing is issued in local newspapers only and no separate notices are sent to individual concerned Panchayats. Most of the times local people are unaware of the Public hearing meetings.
   • Unavailability of EIA in local languages— Most of the time EIA reports are unavailable in local languages, thus local people are unable to decipher the reports and are misled by the proponents. This can be interpreted as a clear violation of the right to information on their part. The irony is local people are totally unaware of such implications.
   • Ignorance of officials— The concerned officials, for example, those in Public Hearing committee are ignorant of their roles and responsibilities. Sometimes they don’t even get a copy of EIA report and it is passed without their consent, owing to gross corruption of the system.
   • Over involvement of Public hearing consultants— In the public hearing meeting, the consultants should not be allowed to have a dominant say, except responding to the issues of the people. On the contrary, they get involved in public hearings beyond requirements and thus mislead the local people.
   • Unaddressed issues persist—-The issues raised by people in public hearings remains unanswered and they do not know what happens to the issues, nor do they know if the issues raised are reflected in public hearing reports that are presented to Ministry of Environment and Forests.

Once the assessment is complete, the EIA findings are communicated to all stakeholders viz. developers, investors, regulators, planners, politicians, affected communities etc. On the basis of the conclusion of the EIA process, the government can decide if a project should be given environment clearance or not. The developers and investors can also shape the project in such a way that its harms can be mitigated and benefits can be maximized.

Read Also Aravalli Biodiversity Park