A K A Rathi
CEPT University, Ahmedabad, India;Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar, India
The environmental approval for a project is generally granted with a set of terms and conditions to the project proponent. The environmental clearance (EC) letters for 33 infrastructure projects were examined for the relevance, adequacy, and enforceability of the EC conditions. Using the basic tenets of the EIA process, it is found that the long list of irrelevant, inadequate, and unenforceable conditions is greenwash and unsuited for best practice EIA follow-up, hence meeting the EIA objectives. The conditions should be directed at measuring the environmental performance of the project to catalyze achieving sustainability targets. The conditions for stringent supervision and frequent inspection of the site activities in the construction phase could help ensure the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures for infrastructure projects. A comprehensive environmental impact assessment framework may use the principles of the ABC analysis to prioritize the properly specified EC conditions, resource allocation, and stakeholder engagement for the best practice EIA follow-up and hence strengthen the EIA system.
[1] Pradyumna, A., 2015. Health aspects of the environmental impact assessment process in India. Economic & Political Weekly. 50(8). https://www.epw.in/journal/2015/8/special-articles/health-aspects-environmental-impact-assessment-process-india.html
[2] Leknes, E., 2001. The roles of EIA in the decision-making process. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 21(4), 309-334.
[3] Menon, M., Kohli, K., 2007. Environmental decision-making: Whose agenda? Economic & Political Weekly. 42, 2490-2494.
[4] Menon, M., Kohli, K., 2015. Environmental regulation in India: Moving “forward” in the old direction. Economic & Political Weekly. 50(50), 20-23.
[5] Nomani, M.Z.M., 2011. Legal Framework for Environment Impact Assessment in India: Contemporary Appraisal in Corporate Perspective. Chartered Accountant. 59(12), 1872-1879.
[6] Rathi, A.K.A., 2017. Evaluation of project-level environmental impact assessment and SWOT analysis of EIA process in India. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 67, 31-39.
[7] Pabreja, H., Tiwari, N., 2021. Being appraised by experts: A review of the role of expert appraisal committees in the environmental clearance process and judicial intervention. Diduck AP, Patel K, and Malik AK. (Eds.) Advancing environmental justice for marginalized communities in India: Progress, challenges and opportunities. (Oxfordshire): Routledge.
[8] Rathi, A.K.A., 2021. The Need for a robust review system to improve the quality of environmental impact statements: An Indian case study analysis. Environmental Protection Research. 1(1), 38-49.
[9] Rathi, A.K.A., 2021. Handbook of environmental impact assessment: Concepts and practice. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
[10] Morrison-Saunders, A., Arts, J., 2004. Handbook of EIA and SEA follow-up. London: Earthscan.
[11] Ministry of Environment and Forests, 2006. Environmental impact assessment notification. New Delhi: MOEF.
[12] Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, 2020. Draft environmental impact assessment notification. New Delhi: MOEF.
[13] Petts, J., (Ed.) 1999. Handbook of Environmental Impact Assessment. London: Blackwell Science.
[14] Pinto, E., Morrison-Saunders, A., Bond, A., et al., 2019. Distilling and Applying Criteria for Best Practice EIA Follow-Up. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management. 21(2), 1950008.
[15] Jha-Thakur, U., Fischer, T.B., Rajvanshi, A., 2009. Reviewing design stage of environmental impact assessment follow-up: Looking at the open cast coal mines in India. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 27(1), 33-44.
[16] Jha-Thakur, U., 2011. Environmental impact assessment follow-up in India: Exploring regional variation. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management. 13(3), 435-458.
[17] Paliwal, R., Srivastava, L., 2012. Adequacy of the follow-up process in India and barriers to its effective implementation. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 55(2), 191-210.
[18] Arts, J., Caldwell, P., Morrison-Saunders, A., 2019. Environmental impact assessment follow-up: Good practice and future directions- findings from a workshop at the IAIA 2000 conference. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 19(3), 175-185.
[19] Hegde, M., Patel, K., Diduck, A.P., 2022. Environmental clearance conditions in impact assessment in India: moving beyond greenwash. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2025689
[20] Tang, L.Y.N., Fan, L.D., Ni, M., et al., 2016. Environmental impact assessment in Hong Kong: a comparison study and lessons learnt. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 34(3), 254-260.
[21] Braniš, M., Christopoulos, S., 2005. Mandated monitoring of post-project impacts in the Czech EIA. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 25(3), 227-238.
[22] Tinker, L., Cobb, D., Bond, A., et al., 2005. Impact mitigation in environmental impact assessment: paper promises or the basis of consent conditions? Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 23(4), 265-280.
[23] Gallardo, A.L.C.F., Sánchez, L.E., 2004. Follow-up of a road-building scheme in a fragile environment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 24(1), 47-58.
[24] Morrison-Saunders, A., Bake, J., Arts, J., 2003. Lessons from practice: Towards successful follow-up. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 21(1), 43-56.
[25] International Association for Impact Assessment & Institute for Environmental Assessment UK, 1999. Principles of Environmental Impact Assessment Best Practice. (Fargo): IAIA International Headquarters.
[26] Marshall, R., Arts, J., Morrison-Saunders, A., 2005. International principles for best practice EIA follow-up. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 23(3), 175-181.
[27] United Nations Environment Program, 2002. Environmental impact assessment training resource manual, 2nd edn. Geneva: Industry and Economics, UNEP.
[28] Ministry of Environment and Forests, 2014. Online submission & monitoring of environmental clearances. (Accessed 2021 Oct 25). https://environmentclearance.nic.in/onlinesearch.aspx?pid=ecg
[29] Quality Council of India, 2015. Scheme for Accreditation of EIA Consultant Organization, version 3. New Delhi: National Accreditation Board for Education and Training, QCI.
[30] Ministry of Environment and Forests, 1972. Wildlife (Protection) act. New Delhi: MOEF.
[31] Ministry of Environment and Forests, 1980. Forest conservation act. New Delhi: MOEF.
[32] Central Pollution Control Board, 2019. Water quality criteria. New Delhi: CPCB.
[33] Ndlovu, N.M., 2015. A critical assessment of EIA follow-up conditions formulated for Environmental Authorisations in Mpumalanga Province. North-West University, Potchefstroom (South Africa).
[34] Khanal, M., Hodgkinson, J., 2021. Subsidence prediction versus observation in Australia: A short comment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 86, 106479.
[35] Marara, M., Okello, N., Kuhanwa, Z., et al., 2011. The importance of context in delivering effective EIA: Case studies from East Africa. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 31(3), 286-296.
[36] Joseph, C., Gunton, T., Rutherford, M., 2015. Good practices for environmental assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 33(4), 238-254.
[37] Rathi, A.K.A., 2019. Development of environmental management program in environmental impact assessment reports and evaluation of its robustness: an Indian case study. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 37(5), 421-436.
[38] Ramos, T.B., Caeiro, S., de Melo, J.J., 2004. Environmental indicator frameworks to design and assess environmental monitoring programs. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 22(1), 47-62.
[39] Devlin, J.F., 2011. Community engagement for adaptive management in environmental assessment follow-up final report. N.T. Yap Environmental Systems Analysts Limited, Ontario.
[40] Rathi, A.K.A., 2016. Environmental impact assessment: a practical guide for professional practice. Ahmedabad: Akar Unlimited.
[41] Jalava, K., Haakana, A., Kuitunen, M., 2015. The rationale for and practice of EIA follow-up: an analysis of Finnish road projects. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 33(4), 255-264.
[42] Jenkins, B.R., 2020. Outcome-based management for sustainability. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 38(4), 287-298.
[43] Baker, J., Dobos, R., 2001. Environmental assessment follow-up: a framework for Environment Canada, paper presented at IAIA’01 Impact assessment in the urban context conference, EIA follow-up: outcomes and improvements workshop. Cartagena, Colombia.
Copyright © 2022 Author(s)
This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.
