The Centre’s proposal to relax environment norms has raised concerns about whether it is pushing ahead with large development projects without properly weighing ecological costs against benefits or seeking the necessary public consultation. The Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change has issued a series of notifications and office memos over the past week that have raised concerns among environmental experts. One of the draft notifications seeks environmental clearance (EC), for existing and future hydropower, nuclear, and mining projects.
The EC will be in effect for 13 years for hydro projects, but it will be extended to 15 for nuclear projects. Similar to mining projects, the government proposed to extend EC to 50 year. The MoEFCC cites long gestation times, geological surprises and land acquisition as reasons for extending the EC window. Another such notification states that the government would like to abolish public hearings for projects exceeding 40% of the existing capacity. A second notification would allow projects in bordering areas to be exempted form the EC requirement, due to the strategic nature of linear infrastructure.
Alarm bells are ringing because of the rapid pace at which these norms can be relaxed. Specialists fear that the easing of norms to streamline procedures could lead to the loss of critical biodiversity and ecological equilibrium. The removal of public hearings for roads, mining, and built-up areas could have a negative impact on the long-term fates of the displaced people without giving them the opportunity to voice their concerns. Despite the safeguards, exempting highways in ecologically sensitive areas from EC could cause irreparable damage.
These proposals, in addition to requiring wider public consultation, are required to address the full gamut of issues-economic, social, and environmental. The Centre is being challenged in court over the controversial draft Environmental Impact Assessment 2020 notification. Activists accuse it of pushing new norms to circumvent the bottlenecks. The MoEFCC should not avoid uncomfortable questions, but rather engage with stakeholders to provide much-needed clarity.