Shankar IAS Summary: Environmental Impact Assessment - 3 | Famous Books for UPSC Exam (Summary & Tests) PDF Download

Components of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

• Primary distinction: The main difference between Comprehensive EIA and Rapid EIA is the temporal scope and depth of the data collected and analysed. Comprehensive EIAs use multi-season, long-term baseline studies; Rapid EIAs use shorter, focused data sets to screen or rapidly assess impacts.
• Assessment of damage to terrestrial flora and fauna includes evaluation of the effects of air pollution, changes in land use, and alterations to the landscape.

Terrestrial Flora and Fauna

• Assessment of damage to aquatic and marine flora and fauna examines impacts on habitat, population dynamics and commercial fishing livelihoods caused by physical disturbances (dredging, reclamation) and other alterations (pollutant discharges, salinity changes).
• Prediction of biological stresses in the project impact zone forecasts likely ecological responses (population decline, invasive species, trophic disruptions) to planned activities.
• Delineation of mitigation measures sets out practical, site-specific strategies to prevent, reduce or compensate for environmental damage. Mitigation may include engineering controls, habitat restoration, buffer zones and management actions.

Land Environment

• Study of soil characteristics and existing land use within the impact zone, including soil type, fertility, contamination risk and suitability for proposed activities.
• Assessment of topography, landscape features and drainage patterns to understand erosion risk, run-off behaviour and stormwater management requirements.
• Estimation of project impacts on land use, landscape, topography, drainage and hydrology, with recommendations to avoid or remediate adverse effects.
• Identification of potential utility of treated effluent for land application and evaluation of associated environmental and health impacts.
• Estimation and characterisation of solid wastes, together with environmentally compatible disposal and reuse options (e.g., composting, material recovery, engineered landfills).

Land Environment

Socio-economic and Health Environment

• Collection of demographic and socio-economic data for populations within the impact zone: population size, age-sex structure, occupations, income sources and dependence on natural resources.
• Collection of epidemiological data, including prevalence of endemic diseases, morbidity and mortality rates, and baseline public health indicators.
• Projection of anticipated changes in socio-economic and health aspects due to the project (jobs created, livelihoods lost or altered, pressure on health services).
• Delineation of measures to minimise adverse impacts, for example traffic management to reduce congestion, provision of health camps, or livelihood support schemes.
• Assessment of impacts on important historical, cultural and archaeological sites with suggestions to avoid or mitigate damage.
• Evaluation of economic benefits to local and regional communities, balanced against environmental and social costs.
• Where relevant, evaluation of rehabilitation and resettlement needs, with particular attention to scheduled areas and vulnerable groups.

Risk Assessment

• Identification of hazards using methods such as hazard indices, inventory analysis, dam break probability calculations and natural hazard probability assessments for earthquakes, floods, cyclones, etc.
• Conducting Maximum Credible Accident (MCA) analyses to determine worst-credible scenarios (e.g., major chemical release, dam failure) and their likely impacts.
• Analysis of consequences of potential failures or accidents: fire, explosion, hazardous releases and dam breaches, including human and ecological impacts and downstream effects.
• Undertaking Hazard & Operability (HAZOP) studies and similar systematic techniques to identify process hazards and operability issues in industrial projects.
• Assessment of risk by combining probability and consequence information and prioritising high-risk scenarios for mitigation.
• Preparation of onsite and offsite Disaster Management Plans describing response arrangements, roles, communication, evacuation routes and recovery measures for affected communities.

Environmental Management System

Environment Management Plan (EMP)

• Outline of mitigation measures covering prevention and control strategies for each environmental component, plus required rehabilitation and resettlement plans where displacement occurs.
• Definition of a monitoring scheme specifying parameters, frequency, methods and institutional responsibility to ensure compliance with conditions and to detect unforeseen impacts.
• Details of an implementation plan that includes a schedule, resource allocation (human and financial), performance indicators and responsibility matrices to ensure EMP actions are carried out.

Key Elements of an Initial Project Description (IPD) and Scoping

• Key environmental issues related to project characteristics are outlined in sectoral guidelines prepared periodically by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF).
• The Initial Project Description (IPD) is a concise document used for project screening and scoping, providing essential information that determines the need and depth of a full EIA.
• Specific details typically included in the IPD:
  1. Location and current land use, territorial boundaries, contours and conformity to proposed development plans.
  2. Details of the proposed project activity, including estimated project cost and major inputs/outputs.
  3. Outline of key project elements during pre-construction, construction and operation phases, often guided by an attached questionnaire.
• The IPD may also list off-site activities, associated activities and project-induced activities (e.g., new roads, raw material transport) and present major project activities using a PERT chart or flowchart that delineates unit processes with input-output relationships.
• After scoping, the project proponent must provide the environmental information required for a detailed EIA. Reviewers should concentrate on critical aspects of project location and characteristics when evaluating the report.

Project Scope

Project Location(s)

• Careful site selection is the most effective means to minimise the need for later mitigation measures.
• Proposed project locations should be assessed using both regulatory and non-regulatory criteria, considering ecological sensitivity, land use and community impacts.
• Project siting restrictions depend on the sensitivity of the surrounding environment and proximity to ecologically sensitive zones (ESZ) notified by MoEF.
• Siting criteriaadvised by MoEF include:
  1. Avoid conversion of prime agricultural land or forest into industrial sites wherever possible.
  2. Acquired land should be minimal but include provision for a green belt where treated wastewater, if suitable, can be reused.
  3. Provide adequate space for storing solid waste and future reuse options.
  4. Design the project layout and form to harmonise with the landscape and preserve scenic features.
  5. Associated townships, if any, should use landscaping (for example a photographic barrier) and consider prevailing wind direction in siting residential areas.

Logo of MOEF

• Additional specified distancesto be maintained from sensitive features:
  1. Coastal areas: at least 0.5 km from the high tide line.
  2. Estuaries: at least 200 m from estuary boundaries.
  3. Flood plains of riverine systems: at least 500 m from flood plains or modified flood plains.
  4. Transport corridors (major highways, railways): at least 500 m from their centrelines for certain project types, subject to regulatory conditions.
  5. Major urban settlements (population ≈ 300,000): normally at least 25 km from projected growth boundaries, depending on the project category and local planning rules.
• Review the proposed project location with respect to ambient air, water and noise standards, proximity to critically polluted areas, susceptibility to natural disasters and availability of critical infrastructure such as water, electricity and adequately sized roads.

Procedure for Public Hearing

Process: Applicants for environmental clearance must submit their application to the relevant State Pollution Control Board (SPCB). The SPCB organises the environmental public hearing on behalf of the state authority.

Notice of Public Hearing

• The State Pollution Control Board publishes notice of an environmental public hearing in at least two newspapers widely circulated in the region; one must be in the local vernacular language. The notice must state the date, time and place of the hearing.
• The notice invites public suggestions, views, comments and objections within thirty days of publication.
• All interested parties-including bona fide residents, environmental groups and people in areas of displacement/impact-may participate and give oral or written submissions to the SPCB.

Composition of the Public Hearing Panel

The public hearing panel typically includes:

• A representative of the State Pollution Control Board.
• The District Collector or their nominee.
• A representative of the relevant State Government 
• A representative of the State Department dealing with the environment.
  Question for Shankar IAS Summary: Environmental Impact Assessment - 3

  Try yourself:

  What does the Initial Project Description (IPD) provide essential information for?

  • A.

    Project screening and scoping
  • B.

    Detailed Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
  • C.

    Pre-construction, construction, and operation phases
  • D.

    Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF) guidelines

  Explanation

  - The Initial Project Description (IPD) serves as a crucial document for project screening and scoping.
  - It provides essential information about the project location and characteristics.
  - The IPD outlines key elements such as location, land use, project activity details, and project cost.
  - It also includes information on pre-construction, construction, and operation phases.
  - The IPD helps the reviewer assess crucial aspects of the project and determine its environmental impact.
  - After suitable scoping, the project proponent provides environmental information for consideration in the detailed Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

  Report a problem

  Cancel Report

  View Solution

  ---

  Environmental Impact Assessment in the Indian System - Drawbacks

  Applicability

  Composition of Expert Committees and Standards

  Public Hearing Issues

  Quality of EIA Reports

  

  Environmental Impact Assessment

  
  

  Monitoring, Compliance and Institutional Arrangements

  ---

  Recommendations to Improve the EIA System

  Applicability

  All projects with the potential to significantly alter ecosystems must undergo environmental clearance; no industrial development should be allowed in ecologically sensitive areas.

  Public Hearing

  Quality Improvements

  Grant of Clearance

  Composition and Transparency of Expert Committees

  Monitoring, Compliance and Institutional Strengthening

  Redressal

  

  Biodiversity

  
  

  

  Logo of National Green Tribunal

  
  

  Capacity Building

  NGOs, civil society groups and local communities should build capacity proactively to use the EIA framework for informed decision-making, monitoring and redressal, rather than merely responding to crises.

  ---

  List of Environmentally Sensitive Places

  

  Gir National Forest Park

  
  

  Question for Shankar IAS Summary: Environmental Impact Assessment - 3

  Try yourself:

  What are some examples of environmentally sensitive places?

  • A.

    Religious and historic places
  • B.

    Urban agglomerations
  • C.

    Shopping malls
  • D.

    Industrial areas

  Explanation

  - Religious and historic places are considered environmentally sensitive due to their cultural and historical significance.
  - These places often have unique ecosystems and biodiversity that need to be protected.
  - They may also be vulnerable to pollution and degradation due to their high visitor numbers.
  - Preservation and conservation efforts are necessary to maintain the integrity of these places and ensure their environmental sustainability.
  - Urban agglomerations, shopping malls, and industrial areas, on the other hand, are not typically considered environmentally sensitive places as they are more focused on human activities and infrastructure development.

  Report a problem

  Cancel Report

  View Solution

  ---

  Environment Supplement Plan (ESP)

  Proposals under ESP

  Advantages

  • ESP can enable revival of stalled development projects that are impeded by non-compliance issues or inadequate EIA preparation, potentially addressing economic concerns such as bad loans in the banking sector.

  Disadvantages and Criticisms

  • ESP is criticised as a mechanism that may effectively legalise EIA violations and allow violators to continue operations by paying penalties, undermining the Polluter Pays Principle.
  • About 41% of cases filed in the National Green Tribunal (NGT) involve faults with EIA assessments, indicating systemic problems that ESP alone cannot resolve.
  • Valuation of environmental loss is complex and cannot always be justly compensated by financial payments.
  • Doubts exist about the collection, management and utilisation of funds collected under ESP; unless clear mechanisms are defined, funds may not be used for genuine restoration.
  • ESP risks becoming an escape mechanism that circumvents proper EIA clearance processes if not tightly regulated and transparently administered.

  

  • The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) has stated legal bases for certain ESP measures in some judgements, but courts do not condone post-facto regularisation of EIA violations as a routine exit route for violators.

  ---

  PARIVESH (Pro-Active and Responsive facilitation by Interactive, Virtuous and Environmental Single-window Hub)

  • PARIVESH is a unified environmental management system that provides a single-window integrated platform for multiple clearances, including Environment, Forest, Wildlife and Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) clearances.
  • It introduces a streamlined process with a single registration and sign-in facility for project proponents and issues a unique project ID usable across different clearance processes.
  • Key features include a comprehensive single-window interface enabling submission and tracking of applications for diverse clearances, improving efficiency and transparency.
  • PARIVESH aims to simplify clearance procedures while maintaining environmental safeguards through standardised submissions and improved record keeping.
• ESP allows companies found to be in violation to propose financially supported remedial projects; the violator pays a penalty that is invested in specified environmentally beneficial projects for affected stakeholder groups.
• An Environmental Supplemental Plan (ESP) is an environmentally beneficial project or activity voluntarily undertaken by an alleged violator of the Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006 as part of the environmental clearance or redressal process.
• "Environmentally beneficial" means the ESP must remediate, improve or protect the environment or reduce risks to public health or the environment.
• Religious and historic places
• Archaeological monuments and sites
• Scenic areas and hill resorts/mountains
• Beach resorts and health resorts
• Coastal areas rich in corals, mangroves or important breeding grounds
• Estuaries with mangroves and specialised breeding grounds
• Gulf areas of ecological significance
• Biosphere reserves
• National parks and wildlife sanctuaries
• Natural lakes and swamps
• Seismic zones
• Tribal settlements and culturally sensitive areas
• Areas of scientific and geological interest
• Defense installations of security importance that are sensitive to pollution
• Border areas (international)
• Airports
• Tiger reserves, elephant reserves and turtle nesting grounds
• Habitats for migratory birds
• Lakes, reservoirs, dams
• Streams, rivers, estuaries and seas
• Railway lines and highways
• Urban agglomerations
• Strengthen the National Green Tribunal (NGT) by including more judicial experts in environmental law and science.
• Ensure citizens have accessible redressal mechanisms for EIA notification violations and non-compliance issues.
• Introduce automatic withdrawal of clearance if conditions are violated and strengthen penalties for non-compliance.
• Set up more regional offices of the Ministry (MoEF) with advisory expert committees having smaller jurisdictions to monitor compliance effectively.
• State departments should establish robust monitoring mechanisms and the authority to take punitive action against project proponents for violations.
• Formally involve local communities in monitoring and reporting compliance, supported by training and transparent reporting channels.
• Replace executive committees with panels of recognised experts across stakeholder groups, with reputations for independence and competence.
• Make the selection process open and transparent and publish minutes, decisions and advice from these committees for public scrutiny.
• Clarify that site clearance does not guarantee full environmental clearance; site clearance is a procedural step only.
• Make prior informed consent of affected local communities mandatory before final clearance. Consent should be obtained through representative bodies or full general bodies where available.
• Specify clearance conditions in clear, unambiguous language to aid enforceability.
• Shift the focus of EIA from resource exploitation to conservation and sustainable use.
• Strengthen methods for assessing biodiversity and include guidance addressing agricultural biodiversity, traditional knowledge and livelihood impacts.
• Require that adverse impacts are stated transparently in a separate chapter of EIA reports, not hidden within technical annexes.
• Make subcomponents (for example biodiversity assessments) available publicly as standalone reports on the MoEF website.
• Require EIAs to be based on comprehensive studies covering at least one year; single-season data is not sufficient for many parameters.
• Consider independent financing for EIAs (for example, a central EIA fund into which proponents pay fees while an EIA is conducted) so that the EIA is independent of the proponent.
• Maintain lists of credible, independent agencies and blacklist consultants who provide false reports; introduce national accreditation for environmental consultancy.
• Public hearings should be mandatory for all categories previously exempted when they have demonstrable environmental impacts.
• Establish an autonomous EIA Authority to oversee quality, accreditation and independence of assessments.
• Require comprehensive sector-wide EIAs where projects have cumulative or regional impacts.
• Set up an accessible information desk at state level for public access to EIA documents and guidance.
• Create a centralised baseline data bank to provide reliable, shared environmental baseline information and reduce duplication.
• Ensure transparent sharing of all project-related information, from notification through to clearance, with local communities and the public.
• For strategic industries, Environmental Management Plans (EMPs) are sometimes kept confidential for political or administrative reasons.
• Information on the effectiveness and actual implementation of mitigation measures is often missing from reports and public records.
• Emergency preparedness plans are frequently insufficiently detailed and are not adequately disseminated to affected communities.
• EIA reports are commonly incomplete and, in some cases, contain false or misleading data.
• Important aspects are sometimes omitted; many reports rely on single-season data, which is inadequate for seasonal parameters such as biodiversity and hydrology.
• Because the project proponent commissions the EIA, there is potential for bias in reporting.
• EIA documents are often technical and bulky, making decision-making difficult for non-specialists.
• Fraudulent EIA practices occur where consultants reuse the same baseline data across different locations due to the lack of a centralised baseline data bank.
• Absence of accreditation and accountability for EIA consultants allows poor-quality or manipulated reports to persist without liability.
• Public comments are often not solicited or considered at an early project stage, producing conflicts later in clearance processes.
• Several projects with considerable impacts are excluded from mandatory public hearings.
• Documents needed by the public are frequently unavailable on time, limiting informed participation.
• Data collectors sometimes fail to respect indigenous knowledge and local perspectives.
• EIA teams often lack balanced expertise (environmental scientists, wildlife experts, anthropologists, social scientists) needed to study social and ecological impacts comprehensively.
• There is an absence of exhaustive ecological and socio-economic indicators required for robust impact assessment.
• Some projects with potentially significant environmental impacts are exempted from the notification because they are not listed in the applicable schedule or their investments fall below prescribed thresholds.
• Up to three area representatives nominated by the District Collector, preferably senior citizens or community leaders.