Adequacy of the follow-up process in India and barriers to its effective implementation

Abstract

This paper examines the effectiveness of EIA procedures in India in terms of the follow-up process. It provides an insight into the legal framework, roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders and the focus of Terms of Reference (TOR) provided for the follow-up. A ‘practice analysis’ was carried out to assess actual enforcement and implementation of environmental stipulations, based on information derived from the official records of regulatory authorities for the industrial estate of Haldia. The analysis was further substantiated through discussions with various stakeholders and personal observations. Several inadequacies were observed during the implementation of the process, in terms of ambiguous conditions, ineffective measures to ensure compliance, vested interests of industrial units, lack of co-ordination and inadequate resources available with implementing agencies. In order to ascertain effective follow-up practice, integrated efforts, i.e. focused and elaborated Terms of Reference (TOR), better monitoring support, extended legal powers, co-ordination among regulators for timely action, self-regulation among proponents and the involvement of local people, are essential.

Keywords:

• Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
• follow-up
• compliance status
• industries
• India

Acknowledgement

This research is part of a completed PhD work at the Centre for Regulatory & Policy Research, TERI University, New Delhi. It was supported by the University Grants Commission (UGC), New Delhi under the Junior / Senior Research Fellowship Program. The authors sincerely acknowledge the support of officials from the regulatory agencies and industrial units who co-operated in this research in several ways.

Notes

1. Follow-up is a post decision activity in the EIA process and is referred to as PPM in India.

2. In a policy process, linear and interactive models are widely discussed (Thomas and Grindle 1991, Sutton 1999). The linear model is commonly used, which suggests that a policy is a sequential process where, after recognising a problem, a course of actions to deal with the problem are identified, and after evaluating all alternatives the best one is selected, based on which a policy is implemented-successfully or unsuccessfully. However, an interactive model argues that it is not so simple; and policy or reforms are altered in the process of implementation by the pressure and reaction of stakeholders who are involved in the process. These stakeholders may include administrative staff, managers, project proponents, local people etc., because of which any policy may have multiple potential outcomes. Thus, certain intermittent corrective measures are required to take care of uncertainties and deviations.

3. Waste oil and oil emulsions, tarry wastes from refining and tar residues from distillation or prolytic treatment, sludge arising from treatment of waste waters containing heavy metals, toxic organics, oils, emulsions and spent chemical and incineration ash are categorised as ‘Hazardous’ under Hazardous Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1989.