Meta-analysis of EIA public hearings in the state of Gujarat, India: its role versus the goal of environmental management

Abstract

Public consultation is an important decision-aiding process in environmental impact assessment (EIA) and aids in building up consensus between various stakeholders, primarily the local public. In this meta-analysis, proceedings of 100 public hearings (PHs) recorded in the Indian state of Gujarat were analysed for the views of local public between environmental issues and others while an industry is being set up across five sectors – bulk drug and drug intermediates, cement, highway projects, oil and gas exploration and thermal power plants. The analysis shows that environmental issues are only 33% of the total issues raised, while socio-economic, infrastructure, PH process, track record and other general issues cover 21%, 13%, 2%, 12% and 19%, respectively. This implies that irrespective of sector or project local socio-economic and developmental concerns outweigh environmental issues and the current PH process is not able to get the appropriate inputs and insights from the stakeholders in improving the environmental decision-making. In light of these, some alternatives for strengthening the EIA-PH process is proposed in the paper.

Keywords::

• environmental impact assessment
• environmental decision-making
• India
• public hearing
• track record

Introduction

Public consultation (PC) is a component of environmental decision-making and/or environmental impact assessment (EIA) process for many proposed projects or activities. These consultations can be in the form of written or verbal communication from a range of stakeholders who have a plausible stake in the environmental impacts and the assessment needs to appropriately address these. As the local/regional community has a major stake in these activities and to ascertain their views, public hearing (PH) was introduced. PH is a forum for both presentation of the proposed activity and to address how environmental concerns are addressed or managed. While a number of studies have been carried out on the performance and contribution of PH in EIA and these provided some insights, their impact on the process was limited as these observations were focused on one sector/project. In order to further understand and improve the contributory role of PH in EIA, a systematic analysis of these issues across different sectors and class of issues of interest to public is needed. Such a study can help in improving the conduct of the PH process, leading to an improved understanding of stakeholder's environmental priorities, awareness and local knowledge. This paper aims at a meta-analysis of these issues across multiple sectors and presents its observations in the context of the targeted environmental goals that PH needs to facilitate through the stakeholder participation.

Public participation and its role

Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration (UNITAR 2013), adopted by Heads of State and Governments at the 1992 Rio Summit, promotes access to information, public participation and access to justice in environmental matters. Principle 10 is gaining increasing importance in a growing number of multilateral environmental agreements and other international initiatives which promote stakeholder participation in environmental decision-making. EIA being the primary component of environmental decision-making is defined by International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA) as the process of identifying, predicting, evaluating and mitigating the biophysical, social and other relevant effects of development proposals prior to major decisions being taken and commitments made. Accordingly, the process should provide opportunities to inform and involve interested and affected public and their inputs/concerns should be addressed explicitly in the documentation and decision-making (IAIA 1999). In this context, public participation has been defined as the involvement of individuals and groups that are positively or negatively affected by a proposed intervention subject to a decision-making process or are interested in the outcomes (André et al. 2006). Public participation, as mentioned in the Framework of the Dutch–Romanian Government to Government Programme (Framework 2010), can have one or more of the objectives – give information about the project and its consequences, get ideas or solve problems, get feedback on existing ideas, obtain local knowledge and information, increase public confidence, reach consensus or a better public acceptance, avoid conflicts, create support and valuing of impacts.

EIA and PC process in India

In India, EIA was made mandatory by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) since 1994 under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The concept of PH was later added in 1997. The current EIA process, revised in 2006 (MoEF 2006), comprises a maximum of four stages: screening, scoping, PC and appraisal, depending on the activity. As per this notification, the PC refers to the process by which concerns of local affected persons and others who have a plausible stake in the environmental impacts of the activity are ascertained with a view to taking into account all material concerns as appropriate. The PC process comprises:

• a PH at the site or in its close proximity – district-wise for ascertaining concerns of local affected persons and

• obtaining responses in writing from other concerned persons having a plausible stake in the environmental aspects of the project or activity.

The regulatory authority is mandated to provide wide publicity of the draft EIA of the proposed activity using online, print or other media and invite responses from all the concerned stakeholders in either written form or during the conduct of the PH. During PH, every person present at the venue is granted the opportunity to seek information or clarifications on the project from the proponent. All these are recorded and forwarded to the proponent, who in turn will make appropriate changes to the EIA addressing the issues raised. The final EIA report, so prepared, shall be submitted by the proponent to the concerned regulatory authority for environmental clearance (MoEF 2006). These hearings are considered as an effective platform to hear the public views considering the level of public participation.

PH and its challenges

A review of international literature suggests abundant scope for improving effectiveness of PH and hence the EIA process (general: Hartley & Wood 2005; general in Kenya: Okello et al. 2009 and Mwenda et al. 2012; in China: Du et al. 2010; in Pakistan: Nizami et al. 2011; in Western Uganda: Kahangirwe 2011; dike relocation case in the Netherlands: Cuppen et al. 2012; in Canada: Sinclair et al. 2012; in Nigeria: Silas 2013; gas pipeline and tank farm: Lawal et al. 2013). Few studies on PH in Indian EIA have shown that the issues raised are limited to safety issues, new road construction and jobs, with little consideration to environmental impact (Sinclair & Diduck 2000). Some also note that public inputs in EIA are still weak (Diduck et al. 2007) and there is a need to reform the process for effective participation of local public in decision-making (Rajaram & Das 2006). While these observations are based on a specific sector or project, another study by Paliwal (2006) also identified several limitations including inadequate public awareness.

Meta-analysis of PHs in the state of Gujarat, India

In this study, the PH across five sectors covering an array of social, economic, environmental and developmental issues has been analysed comprehensively to assess the priority of issues to local public within the broad ambit of environmental and non-environmental categorization. All these industrial projects can be considered as large projects with measurable impacts across relatively large areas and hence are representative of their sectors and the environmental outcomes over the region. The five sectors are bulk drugs and drug intermediates (hereinafter drugs), cement, highways, oil and gas exploration (hereinafter oil) and thermal power plant (hereinafter thermal). These were selected based on their temporal and spatial impacts on environment including health and also similar works in related literature (Diduck et al. 2007; Du et al. 2010; Kengne et al. 2013). The PH proceedings of these sectors were reviewed for the state of Gujarat, during the period 2007–2012, from over 100 proceedings. Those that were bereft of any environmental concerns, very few queries/responses and very generic and open responses were dropped from this study. The PH minutes were obtained from the website (http://www.gpcb.gov.in) of the Gujarat State Pollution Control Board (GPCB 2013). The details of the units considered for the study are summarized in Table 1. As the study focuses on local public involvement, the views of others such as non-governmental organizations, government officials and industry association representatives were not considered for this analysis.

Table 1 Details of the number of proceedings analysed.

Year	Drugs	Cement	Highway	Oil	Thermal	Total
2007	1	1	0	2	3	7
2008	4	10	5	4	2	25
2009	5	0	2	1	4	12
2010	1	1	0	1	2	5
2011	6	0	4	12	4	26
2012	6	1	3	7	8	25
Total	23	13	14	27	23	100

Methodology

The issues raised in these proceedings ranged from common ones to sector specific based on local knowledge. In order to analyse these responses systematically and effectively across sectors, these issues were grouped into six categories. They are environmental and pollution, socio-economic, infrastructure, PH process, track record and general/non-specific issues. The categorization is based on relevant literature available which suggests one or the other groups of issues (USGAO 1996; Sinclair & Diduck 2000; Rajaram & Das 2006; Chávez & Bernal 2008; Kolhoff et al. 2009; Du et al. 2010) and the notifications of the regulatory authority – MoEF.

The environment and pollution issues include air, water and land pollution; socio-economic consists of employment, land acquisition, compensation etc.; infrastructure consists of roads, drinking water, etc.; PH process covers language, level of technical depth, etc. and track record covers the proponents performance in earlier social and environmental commitments. All other issues were categorized under general/non-specific issues such as project location, religious issues and so on. Table 2 shows a summary count of participant numbers and issues across these sectors, whereas Table 3 shows the count across the categories. The issues in percentage terms are also mentioned in parenthesis.

Table 2 Details of persons and issues raised sector-wise at the PH proceedings.

Details	Drugs	Cement	Highway	Oil	Thermal	Total
Persons	130	43	93	142	274	682
Issues	275	73	166	258	550	1322
Projects	23	13	14	27	23	100

Table 3 Sector-wise summary of categorization of issues raised at PH proceedings.

Issue category	Drugs	Cement	Highway	Oil	Thermal	Category total
Environmental	97 (35.3%)	19 (26.0%)	39 (23.5%)	74 (28.7%)	215 (39.1%)	444 (33.6%)
Socio-economic	46 (16.7%)	15 (20.6%)	27 (16.2%)	79 (30.6%)	108 (19.6%)	275 (20.8%)
Infrastructure	23 (8.4%)	17 (23.3%)	19 (11.5%)	30 (11.6%)	80 (14.6%)	169 (12.8%)
PH process	5 (1.8%)	0	3 (1.8%)	5 (1.9%)	15 (2.7%)	28 (2.1%)
Track record	79 (28.7%)	6 (8.2%)	2 (1.2%)	28 (10.9%)	42 (7.6%)	157 (11.9%)
General	25 (9.1%)	16 (21.6%)	76 (45.8%)	42 (16.3%)	90 (16.4%)	249 (18.8%)
Total	275	73	166	258	550	1322

Sector-wise analysis

While Table 3 shows the summary spread of issues across these sectors, this section discusses the sector-specific and local knowledge base unique to these thus providing further insights to the way these responses are recorded.

Bulk drugs and drug intermediates

In this sector, the public is concerned primarily about the efficiency of common effluent treatment plants, waste disposal methods adopted and air pollution. Although this indicates a greater awareness towards environmental impacts, the importance given to track record brings forth their views of environmental compliance by the proponent. In spite of such awareness, it is interesting to note that employability emerges as the single significant factor for locals (Table 5) even though the skill-expertise needed in this sector is considerable.

Cement industry

Cement industries with captive power plants (i.e. generate electricity primarily for own use) and co-located mining operations were also included in this category. It is observed that the local populace being aware of effective air pollution handling by this sector is more generally concerned about other issues such as job-creation, plant location and infrastructure provisions. But, specific local environmental issues like concentration of units in a cluster leading to high pollution, impact on crops, orchards and salt pans were also raised depending on the plant location.

Highway projects

Alignment of highway, a general category issue, is predominant here as it affects both their asset levels (i.e. land holdings) and livelihood options. The public's concern over the details of the land parcels affected, alternative alignments and disturbance to utilities (water mains, canals, storm-water drains) indicate that environmental issues take a backseat. The primary environmental concern was regarding risk to life due to accidents caused by increased speeds and proximity to people and livestock.

Oil and gas exploration

While the public was primarily concerned with socio-economic and environmental aspects, both of these stem from the fact that they were looking for suitable compensation for the impacts/damages on their current and future land holdings, respectively. While the former covered land compensation processes such as mode of acquisition (purchase or lease), modalities to define the quantum and years of acquisition, the later pertained to land restoration and effect on crops.

Thermal power plants

Although the awareness of the air polluting potential of these was evident and its management raised, the access to power and related infrastructure leading to economic advantages outweigh these concerns. Also, providing jobs to locals is considered as a major positive in the region.

Importance ranking and assessment

Ranking provides a means for assessing the context and this self-concept can affect later outcomes by influencing actions and decisions (Murphy & Weinhardt 2013). In this paper, ranking is based on response volume to each category within the sector, and is expected to provide a clue on the efficacy of the PH process and a means to understand the impact of its larger objectives. The rank score shown in Table 4 is the average rank across sectors and shows that socio-economic and general issues hold a high rank within non-environmental category.

Table 4 Rank of categories based on issues raised and its rank score.

	Industry-wise priority of category
Category of issues	Drugs	Cement	Highway	Oil	Thermal	Rank score and rank
Environmental	1	1	2	2	1	1.4 (I)
Socio-economic	3	4	3	1	2	2.6 (II)
Infrastructure	5	2	4	4	4	3.8 (III)
PH process	6	–	5	6	6	4.6 (IV)
Track record	2	5	6	5	5	4.6 (IV)
General	4	3	1	3	3	2.8 (II)

Discussion

Though as per the notification (MoEF 2006), the PH needs to ascertain the views of all stakeholders in ‘environmental impacts’ of the activity and incorporate means at mitigating and managing them, it is observed from this analysis across sectors and projects that non-environmental issues corner more than two-thirds of the responses (Table 3). This contrasts with the mandate of the PH in EIA in absolute terms, which shows that the high ranked categories of socio-economic, infrastructural and others tend to side-step environmental issues (Table 4). Based on the review of proceedings and related literature, it can be attributed to a range of issues including daily life requirements, economic levels, social and literacy levels and prevailing government policies. While PH is earnestly followed, these results indicate a limited impact to environmental decision-making. It is worth to note that other case studies of PH in environmental assessment elsewhere (Chávez & Bernal 2008; Niyaz & Storey 2011; Lawal et al. 2013) also support the view that emphasis on economic gains such as employment opportunities outperform the environmental concerns. As can be seen from Table 5, employment was the single most prioritized issue for the affected public in three industrial sectors and overall accounts for 10.2% (135 responses) across all sectors. It is noticed that this perceptional bias towards economic development even at the cost of environmental degradation, an unintended outcome of PH process, may be altering the PH goals and hence PH process may need to be recast suitably. (Sinclair & Diduck 2000; Kengne et al. 2013; Lawal et al. 2013).

Table 5 Sector-wise predominant issue.

Industry sector	Single major issue within the industry sector	Responses received
Drugs	Employment	37
Cement	Employment	13
Highway	Alignment of highway	28
Oil	Compensation/lease	44
Thermal	Employment	65

However, in certain other cases the participants did enlarge the discussion to include other existing environmental problems, sought environmental management plans/options and other regulatory approvals such as Coastal Regulation Zone, ground water department, forest department approvals and so on. The public questioned the track record in cases where expansions of existing units were proposed including notices and/or closure orders, if any. Especially, in the case of the power, cement and drug sectors, reservations were expressed about impacts shown unit-wise which may not be realistic in comparison to the cumulative impacts when all the units commence their operations. A similar point was raised by Badr (2009) and this suggests that the current EIA format is unable to handle such cumulative impact scenarios when the baseline itself shifts. On the other hand, certain expansion units were not opposed when the public considered earlier performance of the operations and corporate social responsibility activities.

The choice of alternatives can be considered a poor area, as these were limited and often not shared with the public, as observed in case of alignments of highways and plant location in other sectors. Similar observations were made by Gray and Edward-Jones (2003), Paliwal (2006), Martin (2007), Sandham and Pretorius (2008) and Jalava et al. (2010).

It is also observed that the methodology adopted in the PH process is dominated by technical description of the project where impacts are difficult to comprehend given the social and educational background of the local populace (Diduck et al. 2007; Martin 2007). In addition, it can be argued from these responses and related literature (Niyaz & Storey 2011) that the proponents may also be responsible for using non-environmental issues to offset the large impacts/concerns of the environment and tilt these proceedings to benefit them. This indicates that the PH process and hence EIA process needs to be revisited before recasting the same.

Suggestions/recommendations

Effective PH in decision-making processes can enhance the process by bringing in local knowledge of the stakeholders, including their problems, constraints, skill levels and interests and making them partners in sustainable development. Accordingly, this paper provides the following suggestions to improve the EIA-PH process.

• It is observed from the proceedings and the literature that the knowledge base of the public needed to comprehend the impacts may be rather limited, especially in regions of low literacy and social development. Hence, terms of references (TORs) need to be updated regularly across the sectors to include the environmental pollution issues sought by the public in similar earlier units elsewhere, so as to map the right context for the sector-specific characteristics within the EIA.

• It is deeply felt that the time has come for use of modern and cost-effective IT tools and methods, especially geospatial models and concepts in the environmental management measures in India. This will be very useful in communicating and convincing the public, including illiterates, about the project proposal with more conviction rather than statements of compliance or commitments during hearings in developing countries. New ideas and approaches are required in order to improve the effectiveness and usage of EIA reports with interactive maps and simulated spatial outcomes, especially during the PH process to help evaluate the alternative scenarios.

• From a cumulative impact standpoint, it is suggested that the EIA process for a new versus an expansion proposal has to be different with the latter accounting for both the commitments made (compliance/track record) and the cumulative impact scenarios. Where pollution levels are under watch, there needs to be a mechanism including IT tools to track proposed units for their cumulative pollution potential and impacts.

• Furthermore, if a new activity is proposed in an industrial development area (IDA) or in a cluster, the EIA (Pinho et al. 2010; Morgan 2012) should discuss the already existing problems in the IDA and how it will be managed or mitigated by this additional activity.

• The current model of notification for PC, by issuing in newspapers, may be improved with the use of electronic media for an active public involvement.

• It is observed that the major non-environmental issues are employment and compensation. These issues need to be delinked and considered at a macro level, i.e. plans, programmes and policies, for effectively addressing it. This focused approach will lead to better discussions and outcomes from PH on environmental issues. In this context, a move towards strategic environmental assessment in the environmental legislation in India can better handle these comprehensively (Paliwal 2006). Similar observations in the context of developing countries are made elsewhere (Badr 2009).

Conclusions

This analysis reviewed and presented the observations with regard to the performance of PH process in addressing the stakeholder views vis-à-vis the handling of the environmental impacts in five relatively large sectors. The categorization of the issues helped analyse the responses and to highlight the sector-wise patterns in the PH proceedings. Environmental issues ranged from 23.5% to 39.1% depending on the sector, pollution potential, pre-existing challenges and local environmental knowledge base. Across sectors, in spite of awareness of environmental impacts, the socio-economic- and infrastructure-related issues occupy 25.1–43.9%, indicating that the primary environmental purpose of PH in EIA is not being addressed sufficiently. In this context, the paper suggests a host of measures including revision of existing TORs and EIA format.

It is observed that while the socio-economic and other issues seem to outweigh the environmental concerns, a well-framed impact assessment if presented in a more interactive and appreciable mode might provide for making PH a platform for larger public involvement in environmental decision-making towards the goal of sustainability. Though the study provided good insights across sectors in one of the largely industrialized states of India, it is suggested that a similar comprehensive study across other developing regions can further help in improving the plans and policies for environmental management.

Notes

^1. Email: [email protected]