Precautionary Principles of Sustainability versus Promotion of the Ease of Doing Business in the Proposed EIA Regulation in India: A Critical Analysis and Application of an Ex-Ante Framework to Review the Regulation


  • A.K.A. Rathi

    Faculty of Planning and Public Policy, CEPT University, Ahmedabad, 380059, India

Received: 21 July 2023 | Revised: 13 September 2023 | Accepted: 14 September 2023 | Published Online: 10 October 2023


The tenets of environmental policy evolved in India and how precautionary principles of sustainability are sidelined in the draft EIA regulation 2020 are analyzed. The emphasis on exempting several categories of projects from the EIA requirements and public consultation, standardization of sector-specific terms of reference and environmental clearance conditions, and decentralization of the decision-making to simplify and fast-track the environmental clearance procedure for development projects is apparent. The list of projects/activities requiring prior environmental clearance and the procedures reveal that promoting the ease of doing business scores over precautionary principles. Efforts to increase the effectiveness and improve transparency in monitoring the implementation of environmental clearance conditions are visible. Still, the prime issues of improving the efficiency and efficacy of the EIA framework and institutional reforms in the EIA system need to be earnestly addressed. The evaluation using an ex-ante framework unveils the areas needing meticulous attention to revamp the EIA regulation.


EIA effectiveness, EIA follow-up, EIA framework, EIA policy, EIA system, Scoping


[1] Strengthening the Science-Policy Interface: A Gap Analysis [Internet]. United Nations Environment Program (UNEP); 2018. Available from:

[2] Esseghir, A., Khouni, L.H., 2014. Economic growth, energy consumption and sustainable development: The case of the Union for the Mediterranean countries. Energy. 71, 218-225. DOI:

[3] Marques, A.C., Fuinhas, J.A., Pais, D.F., 2018. Economic growth, sustainable development and food consumption: Evidence across different income groups of countries. Journal of Cleaner Production. 196, 245-258. DOI:

[4] Nita, A., Fineran, S., Rozylowicz, L., 2022. Researchers’ perspective on the main strengths and weaknesses of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) procedures. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 92, 106690. DOI:

[5] Fischer, T.B., 2022. ‘Simplification’ of environmental and other impact assessments—an international trend?. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 40(5), 355-355. DOI:

[6] Fonseca, A., Sánchez, L.E., Ribeiro, J.C.J., 2017. Reforming EIA systems: A critical review of proposals in Brazil. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 62, 90-97.

[7] Lawrence, D.P., 2013. Environmental impact assessment: Practical solutions to recurrent problems and contemporary challenges. John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken.

[8] Pope, J., Bond, A., Morrison-Saunders, A., et al., 2013. Advancing the theory and practice of impact assessment: Setting the research agenda. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 41, 1-9. DOI:

[9] Strategic Environmental Assessment in South Africa [Internet]. Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR); 2000. Available from:

[10] Jha-Thakur, U., Gazzola, P., Fischer, T.B., et al., 2009. Effectiveness of strategic environmental assessment—the significance of learning. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 27(2), 133-144. DOI:

[11] Partidário, M.R., 2012. Strategic Environmental Assessment Better Practice Guide [Internet]. Available from:

[12] Rathi, A.K.A., 2016. Environmental impact assessment: A practical guide for professional practice. Akar Unlimited: Ahmedabad.

[13] Shammi, M., Halder, P.K., Tareq, S.M., et al., 2022. From environmental impact assessment to strategic environmental assessment in Bangladesh: Evolution, perspective, governance and challenges. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 97, 106890. DOI:

[14] Therivel, R., González, A., 2020. Is SEA worth it? Short-term costs v. long-term benefits of strategic environmental assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 83, 106411. DOI:

[15] Hironaka, A., 2002. The globalization of environmental protection: The case of environmental impact assessment. International Journal of Comparative Sociology. 43(1), 65-78.

[16] Rathi, A.K.A., 2018. Environmental management in the Indian context. Environmental Analysis and Ecological Studies. 3(5), 1-4. DOI:

[17] Morgan, R.K., 2012. Environmental impact assessment: The state of the art. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 30(1), 5-14. DOI:

[18] Jalava, K., Pasanen, S., Saalasti, M., et al., 2010. Quality of environmental impact assessment: Finnish EISs and the opinions of EIA professionals. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 28(1), 15-27. DOI:

[19] Sadler, B., 1996. Environmental Assessment in a Changing World: Evaluating Practice to Improve Performance [Internet]. Available from:

[20] 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. DOI:

[21] Jha-Thakur, U., Khosravi, F., 2021. Beyond 25 years of EIA in India: Retrospection and way forward. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 87, 106533. DOI:

[22] Mathur, S., 2016. Environmental Impact Assessment Overview [Internet]. [cited 2016 Nov 29]. Available from:

[23] Paliwal, R., 2006. EIA practice in India and its evaluation using SWOT analysis. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 26(5), 492-510. DOI:

[24] Sinha, R.P., 2014. Environmental Laws and Constitutional Provisions in India [Internet]. [cited 2019 June 10]. Available from:

[25] National Environmental Policy 2006 [Internet]. [cited 2018 Sep 5]. Available from:

[26] Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union of India and others. 1996. AIR SC 2715: 5 SCC 647.

[27] Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF). 1994. Environmental Impact Assessment Notification. New Delhi: MOEF.

[28] Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF). 2006. Environmental Impact Assessment Notification. New Delhi: MOEF.

[29] Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MOEF). 2020. Draft Environmental Impact Assessment Notification. New Delhi: MOEF.

[30] Mishra, A., Mohanbabu, N., Anujan, K., 2020. Draft EIA 2020 Undercuts India’s Biodiversity and Climate Goals [Internet]. [cited 2020 Dec 16]. Available from:

[31] Draft EIA Notification 2020: Dilutes EIA Process & Encourages Violations [Internet]. South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP); 2020. [cited 2020 Sep 15]. Available from:

[32] Menon, M., Kohli, K., 2020. EIA Regulations: Don’t Ignore the People it Will Affect the Most [Internet]. [cited 2020 Aug 16]. Available from:

[33] Sinha, N., 2020. Why Draft EIA 2020 is Problematic? [Internet]. Available from:

[34] Jolly, S., Singh, S., 2021. Environmental impact assessment draft notification 2020, India: A critique. Chinese Journal of Environmental Law. 5(1), 11-36. DOI:

[35] Gibson, R.B., Doelle, M., Sinclair, A.J., 2016. Fulfilling the promise: Basic components of next generation environmental assessment. Journal of Environmental Law and Practice. 29, 257.

[36] Petts, J., 1999. Handbook of environmental impact assessment. Blackwell Science: London.

[37] Doelle, M., Sinclair, A.J., 2019. The new IAA in Canada: From revolutionary thoughts to reality. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 79, 106292. DOI:

[38] Fonseca, A., Gibson, R.B., 2020. Testing an ex-ante framework for the evaluation of impact assessment laws: Lessons from Canada and Brazil. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 81, 106355. DOI:

[39] Runhaar, H., Gommers, A., Verhaegen, K., et al., 2019. The effectiveness of environmental assessment in Flanders: An analysis of practitioner perspectives. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 76, 113-119. DOI:

[40] Gupta, G.S., Rathi, A.K.A., 1996. Small-scale chemical industry in Gujarat: Structure, conduct and performance. Economic and Political Weekly. 31(48), M79-M84.

[41] Rathi, A.K.A., Puranik, S.A., 1998. Small scale chemical industry in Gujarat-some attributes. Indian Chemical Engineer. 40, 178-186.

[42] Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises (MSME). 2020. Notification on Criteria for Classification of MSME. New Delhi: MSME.

[43] Bichhri Industrial Pollution Case [Internet]. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action (ICELA); 1996. [cited 2019 Aug 16]. Available from:

[44] Mehta M.C. vs Union of India and others. 1987. Oleum Gas Leakage Case at Shriram Foods and Fertilizers, Delhi. AIR SC 965 SCR (1) 819.

[45] Joshi, M., 2008. Chlorine Gas Leak at Jamshedpur [Internet]. [cited 2019 Aug 16]. Available from:

[46] 50 Ill after Gas Leak from German Chemical Plant [Internet]. The Times of India (TOI); 2013. [cited 2019 Jun 10]. Available from:

[47] Hindustan Times (HT), 2017. Chlorine Gas Leak. [cited 2019 Aug 16]. Available from:“GFnmnQDiQA8mLsCBCZoOrM.html

[48] Principles of Environmental Impact Assessment Best Practices [Internet]. International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA); 1999. Available from:

[49] Withanage, H., 2006. Advocacy Guide to ADB EIA Requirement. Manila: NGO Forum on ADB.

[50] Tucker, G., Treweek, J., 2004. The Precautionary Principle in Impact Assessment: An International Review [Internet]. [cited 2020 Sep 10]. Available from:

[51] Zeleňáková, M., Zvijáková, L., 2017. Risk analysis within environmental impact assessment of proposed construction activity. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 62, 76-89. DOI:

[52] Rathi, A.K.A., 2023. Integration of the standalone ‘risk assessment’ section in project level environmental impact assessment reports for value addition: An Indian case analysis. Sustainability. 15(3), 2296. DOI:

[53] Rathi, A.K.A., 2013. Common environmental infrastructure: Case study on the management of common effluent treatment plants. International Journal of Environmental Engineering. 5(1), 93-110. DOI:

[54] CEPI Technical Report [Internet]. Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB); 2017. [cited 2019 Sep 15]. Available from:

[55] Kukreti, I., 2019. NGT Orders Closure of 69 Industrial Areas [Internet]. [cited 2019 Sep 15]. Available from:

[56] 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. DOI:

[57] Rathi, A.K.A., 2021. Handbook of environmental impact assessment: Concepts and practice. Cambridge Scholars Publishing: Newcastle upon Tyne.

[58] Lyhne, I., van Laerhoven, F., Cashmore, M., et al., 2017. Theorising EIA effectiveness: A contribution based on the Danish system. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 62, 240-249. DOI:

[59] 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), 38-48. DOI:

[60] NAREDCO to Organise It’s 15th National Convention on August 19 [Internet]. [cited 2020 Aug 21]. Available from:

[61] Morrison-Saunders, A., Baker, J., Arts, J., 2003. Lessons from practice: Towards successful follow-up. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 21(1), 43-56. DOI:

[62] Morrison-Saunders, A., Marshall, R., Arts, J., 2007. EIA Follow-up: International Best Practice Principles [Internet]. Available from:

[63] SC Sets Aside NGT’s Directions Regarding Ex Post Facto Environmental Clearance [Internet]. India Legal; 2020. [cited 2020 Sep 1]. Available from:

[64] 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(02), 1950008. DOI:

[65] Arts, J., Runhaar, H.A., Fischer, T.B., et al., 2012. The effectiveness of EIA as an instrument for environmental governance: Reflecting on 25 years of EIA practice in the Netherlands and the UK. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management. 14(04), 1250025. DOI:

[66] United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), 2002. Environmental Impact Assessment Training Resource Manual, Second Edition [Internet]. Available from:

[67] Chanchitpricha, C., Bond, A., 2013. Conceptualising the effectiveness of impact assessment processes. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 43, 65-72. DOI:

[68] Loomis, J.J., Dziedzic, M., 2018. Evaluating EIA systems’ effectiveness: A state of the art. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 68, 29-37. DOI:

[69] Kørnøv, L., Lyhne, I., Davila, J.G., 2020. Linking the UN SDGs and environmental assessment: Towards a conceptual framework. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 85, 106463. DOI:

[70] Morrison-Saunders, A., Sánchez, L.E., Retief, F., et al., 2020. Gearing up impact assessment as a vehicle for achieving the UN sustainable development goals. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 38(2), 113-117. DOI:

[71] Partidario, M., Verheem, R., 2019. Impact Assessment and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [Internet]. Available from:

[72] de Oliveira, A.R., Partidário, M., 2020. You see what I mean?—A review of visual tools for inclusive public participation in EIA decision-making processes. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 83, 106413. DOI:

[73] Rathi, A.K.A., 2023. Pursuing the distilled good practices to improve the quality of environmental impact assessment reports and hence enhance the EIA effectiveness and help address the concerns of project proponents: An Indian context. Macro Management & Public Policies. 5(1), 26-43. DOI:

[74] Wasserman, C.E., 2017. Global Search for Efficient and Effective EIA and Environmental Governance: Using Advances in Technology to Achieve Both [Internet]. [cited 2020 July 29]. Available from:

[75] Enríquez-de-Salamanca, Á., 2021. Simplified environmental impact assessment processes: Review and implementation proposals. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 90, 106640. DOI:

[76] Bragagnolo, C., Lemos, C.C., Ladle, R.J., et al., 2017. Streamlining or sidestepping? Political pressure to revise environmental licensing and EIA in Brazil. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 65, 86-90. DOI:

[77] Directive 2014/52/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, Amendment of the Directive 2011/92/EU [Internet]. European Union (EU); 2014. Available from:

[78] William, L., 2018. Opinion: Environmental Impact Assessments aren’t Protecting the Environment [Internet]. Laurance William’s Blog. [cited 2020 Aug 23]. Available from:

[79] Law, Policy, Institutional Arrangements for EIA [Internet]. [cited 2019 Jul 18]. Available from:

[80] Gupta, D., Nayak, S., Tanvani, K., et al., 2022. The Draft EIA Notification 2020: Reduced Regulations and Increased Exemptions [Internet]. [cited 2022 Dec 18]. Available from:


How to Cite

Rathi, A. (2023). Precautionary Principles of Sustainability versus Promotion of the Ease of Doing Business in the Proposed EIA Regulation in India: A Critical Analysis and Application of an Ex-Ante Framework to Review the Regulation. Macro Management & Public Policies, 5(4), 11–35.


Article Type



Download data is not yet available.