Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a mechanism of assessing the possible environmental impacts in terms of socio-economic, cultural, and health of biodiversity which anticipated projects may have in the long run. According to the United Nations Environment Programme, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is an instrument created to determine the environmental, social, and economic impacts of a project before implementation. It targets to predict the environmental impacts at an early stage, while the project is being deliberated and designed, tracing methods and manners to reduce adverse impacts, shaping initiatives to outline the local environment, and present the predictions and possibilities to decision-makers. Environment Impact Assessment in the Republic of India is statutorily backed by the setting Protection Act, 1986 that contains varied provisions on EIA methodology and method.
India’s Role in EIA
The Indian proficiency with Environmental Impact Assessment began over twenty years back. It all began in 1976 when the Commission requested the Science and Technology Division to view the river-valley assignments from an environmental outlook. Till 1994, environmental clearance from the Central Government was a directorial verdict that was short of legislative support.
An EIA notification was issued on 27th January 1994 under the Environment Protection Act that made Environmental Clearance mandatory for growth or modernization of any activity or for putting in new tasks indexed in Schedule 1 of the notification. However, unlike the EIA Notification of 1994, the new rules have placed the obligation of clearing initiatives at the state-run government depending on the scope and competence of the projects.
Apprehensions regarding the recent notification
Streamlining the EIA procedure and bringing it in step with current judgments are the motives given by way of the government for cutting-edge notification. The Draft EIA Notification inactivates it, minimizes its scope, and eliminates the only tooth it had. The most devastating blow to the EIA administration is the introduction of an ex-post-facto clearance route. There were several ongoing projects which were operating even without getting the EIA clearance and continued to violate the norms. Now, such a project will be hit with fines for such defilements.
In cases where ex-post-facto clearances were granted with analyzing the negative impact, it had on the biodiversity in that region. Such projects will be labeled as unlawful by the court of law. This step will check the legality of the authorities that are involved in the process of EIA. The draft notification also condenses the time for the public to deliver suggestions and queries regarding the project. The people who are most affected by its operation may find themselves in a difficult place to put forth their reviews regarding the respective project due to lack of technology.
Further, the reporting and monitoring time has been reduced from six months to one year which has extended the validity period for approvals in essential sectors including mining. Industries that previously required a full-fledged evaluation have been demoted. The construction industry could be one such beneficiary, where even the simplest, as well as biggest projects, might be examined fully. While defense and national protection installations were justifiably exempted from the EIA process, an indistinct new grouping of projects related to other tactical deliberations will even now be unfastened from public session requirements.
Current Industrial Misfortunes
Plants that have been operating without a legitimate environmental clearance for decades have given rise to catastrophes in the industrial sector. Oil India Limited’s oil wells in the Tinsukia district, Assam is one such horrific incident of this month where the plant went up in flames. It is situated only some kilometers far from the protected forest. Furthermore, there became a deadly fuel leak at LG Polymers’ Visakhapatnam plant in May. Such incidents have highlighted that environment clearance needs to be granted only after analyzing the impacts that the projects will have on the biodiversity and that negligence on behalf of the authorities will only lead to loss of life.
Outlook for the future
The draft notification has a clause committed to classifications of numerous terms associated with EIA. It is suitable within the sense that it consolidates the EIA regulations and can alleviate some ambiguity within the scope of law. The ministry, rather than lowering the time for public consultation, should aim to focus on the access to statistics as well as attention about the public listening and its impact upon the whole EIA process. Typical delay of 238 days in granting environmental clearance should be lowered by the government, which emanates from bureaucratic delays and complex laws. Continual development should be the aim as prevention is better than cure. Proper regulation of industries and plants must balance damage to the surroundings with sustainable development but the new notification lays more emphasis on the benefits of development over environmental protection and so it ought to be reviewed.
