Chapter

Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development have been the cornerstones 0

the policies and procedures governing India's industrial and other developmental activitie
The Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEF&CC&CC) is the centr .
government's nodal agency for overseeing the implementation of India's environmental an
forest policies and programs related to the country's natural resources.
'
One such initiative is the Notification on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of
Developmental Projects 1994 under the Environment (Protection) Act, ~ 986 provisiona.

Tbe objective of EL\:

The objective of EIA is to foresee potential environmental problems that would arise
from the proposed development and address them in the project's planning and design stag~
to prevent tu'"fue liabilities or expensive alterations in project design. •

11\plftcance of EIA:
❖ Harmonising development activities with environmental concerns.

❖ Integration of the environmental concerns in the developmental activities right at th~

time of initiating for preparing the feasibility report. I
❖ Assist planners and government authorities in the decision-making process by
identifying the key impacts/issues and formulating mitigation measures.

•:. An integral component of sound decision-making.

0 All ,igbb r.,.r,,d. lio part •f 1h11 m11trlal may be ,oproduced In any form or by ony means, wllhoul permission In wriU•i· I
►
.& ~€Wl~~.! 'Erwfr0t1mnrt
::SIA CfCI• and Procedure,
screening
screening_ is d~ne to sec whether a project requires environmental clearance as per the
statutory notifications. Screening Criteria are based upon:
► Scales of investn1ent·,
. ~ -llllliii .-
► Type of development; and,
j

► Location of development.
S(:OPfng
~ Scoping is a process of detailing the terms of reference of
E~A. It has to be done by the consultant in consultation (
with the project proponent and guidance, if need be,"
from the Impact Assessment Agency.
❖ The Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate ' I
change ha~ published sector-wise guidelines
(Comprehensive terms of reference) that outline the ~"IB~::.::.;~~J~~~~~~,:·_.......· 1

significant issues that have to be addressed in the EIA

s~d~s. (
❖ Quantifiable impacts are to be assessed based on"
magnitude, prevalence, frequency, and duration === I
❖ Non-quantifiable impacts (such as aesthetic or'~- ~
recreational value), significance is commonly determined _
through the socio-economic criteria.
❖ After the areas, where the project could have significant'
impact,_are identified, the baseline status of these should -~iiMiiJiliiliiird'II! j-
be monitored. ~J

❖ The likely changes in these on account of the construction ( JJAf!IPISIIT !MIi •

and operation of the proposed project should be predicted. "
Baseline Data

❖ Baseline data ?esc~bes the existing envi~onmen~al (3=e- .... IIMiiil... J

status of the 1dent1fied study area. The s1te-spec1fic - ~ - _
primary data should be monitored for the identified
parameters and supplemented by secondary data if available.
Impact Prediction

❖ Impact prediction is a way of mapping the environmental consequences of the

significant aspects of the project and its alternatives.
❖ The environmental impact can never be predicted with complete certainty, which
underscores the importance of considering all potential factors and taking every possible
precaution to minimize uncertainty.

All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced In any form or by any means, "ithout permi~sion in writing. (D
►
 I• I• ••

l SHANKAA .. 'fi •
-=-:.;.•_IA..!:~=(£-:!!:!~:=p_=E!f-:=!.:!...-_____ ______ ______ __IUJ
__ lf~
T:he following Impacts or the project 1hould be a11e11ed:
.
-- ·-

❖ Changes in ambient levels and ground level concentration

I

❖ Respiratory problems, s.
AIR Soil, and material damage.
.
❖

❖ Changes in ambient levels ~

I,

1'0181 ❖ Disturbance to fauna and human health

.

❖ Changes in quality, --.........

+ Sediment transport,

WATER
+ Ingress of saline water
•••• Harm to aquatic life, human consumption, and
•••• Competing users

•••• Changes in land use, drainage pattern, land quality--.

.
I.DD •••• Erosion, waste disposal issues, shoreline/
•:• · Riverbank instability
-
j

•••• Deforestation, tree cutting, habitat shrinkage

BIOLOGICAL •••• Loss of fauna and flora; endangered species, , •
•••• Migratocy path. .disruption: .
. .
• . ' )'
-
A11e11ment ofAlterilatlves, Delineation of Mitlptlon Meuure,, and Environmen
Impact A11e11ment Report •-. • ·. ·. ·
'. ,
(• For every project, possible alternatives should be identified and environmental attribute
compared.
❖ It should cover both project location and process technologies and consider no projec _
option also. : _.,, .-.. ,
❖ Then must be ranked for selection of the best environmental option for optim
economic benefits to the community at large. ... ·
•:• Once alternatives have been reviewed, a mitigation plan should be drawn up for th
selected option and supplemented with an Environmental Management Plan (EMP~
to guide the proponent toward environmental improvelllents. I
•:• The EMP is a crucial input to monitoring the clearance conditions and therefore details!
of the monitoring should be included in the EMP. . -
•:• An EIA report should provide clear information to the decision-maker on the differenl
environmental scenarios
• All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form or by any means, without permission in writing,
 ~MY•
~~-=--=- .
. ~thOiit the project,
1
. ~~ the project, and
2
.. 3. · with project alternatives.
• _......hide• ahoiild· be reflected.,_
&11 the BIA report
goCI'.....-
•
,-,uc g,arlng .
• • •
♦ LaW requires tha t the public
· a pro pos ed
st be informed and con sult ed on
development after the completionmu of the EIA report. •
;
b th
, Anyone like ly to be affectedEli have access to th~
~ gxecutive Summary of the . e proposed project is entitled _to . .
'fhe affected persons may include:
.1. Bonafede local residents;
2. Local associations;
3. Environmental groups: active in the area
4. Any oth~r person located at the project site
/ sites of displacement
ns to the State Pollution Control
❖ They are to be allowed to make oral/written suggestio•
Board. -
1,unronment Man age men t Pla n
The Environment Management Plan should incl
ude:
1. Delineation of mitigation and compensation
measures for all the identified significant
. .
imp~~t~ '-. . . . . 1
•

• ••, , .. _ • • • ·-
• •

2. Delineation of unmitigated impacts

3. Phy~ical planning including
I I f

Work program
on and
1. Schedule and locations for putting mitigati
2. Compensation systems in place
of
❖ Delineation ·of a financial plan for
implementing the mitigation measures in the form
usion in the project budget estimates.
budgetary estimates and demonstration of its incl
Decision Making •
ation between the project proponent
❖ The decision-making process involves consult
ent authority (assisted by an expert
(assisted by a consultant) and the impact assessm
group if necessary)
❖ The decision on environmental clearance is
arrived at through several steps including
••
•evaluation of EIA and EMP.
..

--- --- --- --: --~ --- --- :-~ :-: -~ ---
-~lssJoa =- ~= -~
... ..~,~ •
. . . ~rlp -~d.---
. .:--t,-·e ---
N•. ·• rt' ,· bl . t i 1·m'ay be reproduced In any form or by any means, wlih'o
.
ut ·pe,m 1a·wr1thii:
.
. ••
pa o t . ma er a . ,:
.•
.o
. . . . .. I • . • '. .

; . _: . . . • • .
 A 51-fANKAA ,.
A
-la!
IAS ACADEMY
... .. ... - ...........
'fnvi/i
Monitoring the Clearance Conditions
❖ Monitoring should be done during both the construction and operation phase8
project. ()f

❖ This is not only to ensure that the commitments made are complied with but al
observe whether the predictions made in the EIA reports were correct or not. S() 1
❖ Where the impacts exceed the predicted levels, corrective action should be taken.
❖ Monitoring will enable the regulatory agency to review the validity of prediction
the conditions of implementation of the Environmental Management Plan (EMpt a~,
Sallent Feature• of the 2006 Amendment
The Environment Impact Assessment Notiftcatlon of 2006 has decentralized
environmental clearance projects by categorizing the developmental projects into two catego ~h
i.e., Category A and Category B. l1ea

• l

• All rights reserved. No part of this malcrial may he reproduced in any form or by any means, without permission in writing.
 it'-l~Y"
~ lill-fTJ -
f,wlrph/nmt
~er the 2006 Amend ment, the EIA cycle comprises tour stages
t .
> screening
> scoping
> Public hearing
> Appraisal
fbUS category A projects and Category B1 projects undergo the complete EIA process
ress Category 8 2 proJects are excluded from the complete EIA process.
«11e

.
tJnder the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, the Ministry of Environment, Forest
4 ~ate ~hange (MoEF&CC&CC) published the draft Environment Impact Assessment
.0WNotification 2020 to replace the 2006 notification.
(& k ..
s
50111e of the ey provi ions of the 2020 EIA Notification include:
❖ A reduction in the public hearing period from 30 to 20 days.
+ The classification of projects, such as into A, Bl, and B2, are exempted from public
scrutiny.
❖ Changes in post-clearance compliance reporting, shifting from semi-annual to annual
submissions.
❖ Requirement for project proponents to prepare the EIA report exclusively.
❖ The omission of reporting violations and non-compliance by the public.

❖ Introduction of post-facto clearance, allowing projects operating without prior

environmental clearance to apply for it.
❖ Imposition of penalties on firms found violating their establishment terms.
Component, of IIA
❖ The difference between Comprehensive EIA and Rapid EIA is in the time scale of the.
data supplied. _
- ~ -, . - . -- -

--~--------•---------------
Scope Rapid assessment of poten- Comprehensive assessment of all potential
tial environmental impacts environmental ~pacts
Methodology Uses existing data and lim- Detailed field surveys and data collection
ited field surveys for all environmental components (air, wa-
ter, noise, land, biological, socio-economic)
Depth of Analysis Broad overview of potential In-depth analysis of impacts for each envi-
impacts ronmental component

All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form or by any means, without permission in. writing. •
 -~J/fl,

l-- Sl-tANKAA
IASACAOEMV
..
-
.............----.
I
'fnviton,n~(~;
Timelines I Completed in a shorter time Takes longer duration to complete~
fmme extensive data collection and analysis to
Cost trss expensive compared to More exdensive due to extensive f l ~
EElA veys an analysis llt.

Accuracy Provides a quick estimate of More accurate assessment of fmpa~,

impacts to detailed analysis lie .

Applicability '
I Used for preliminary Used for comprehensive assessmen~1
I screening of projects projects •

.:. The key difference is that REIA is a rapid assessment using limited data whi~
involves detailed field surveys and comprehensive analysis of all potential environnien~i
impacts of a project. ~ ~

❖ EEIA provides a more accurate and in-depth assessment but takes longer and costl
more compared to REIA. . . •.
❖ Identifi~tion, quantification, and evaluation of other potential emissions (includinl
those of vehicular traffic) ~thin the impact zone and estimati~n of cumulati-ve all
the emissions/ impacts. I
❖ Prediction of changes in t_he ambient air quality due to point, line, and area source
emissions through appropriate air quality models. I
❖ Eval-µatlon of the adequacy of the proposed pollution control devices to. meet gaseous
emission and ambient air quality ~tandards. ·,- •• :
❖ Delineation of mitigation measures at source, pathways, and receptor.
Noise Environment
. . .
❖ Monitoring the present status of noise levels within the impact zone, -and prediction
fu~e noise _levels _resulting from the proposed project and related ·a~tivities includinl'
an mcr~ase m vehicular movement. . .• •.. • •. •.. •
I
. t • - !: ~

❖ Identification of impacts due to any anticipated rise in noise levels on the surroundin
environment. .. ',.; '; :
... .
' '

❖ Recommendations on ~itigation measures for noise pollutio1:1,

Water Environment
l ,l •.

❖ Study of existing ground and· surface water resources concerning quantity and quali
within the impact zone of the proposed project , . ., .
. .

❖ Prediction of impacts on water resources due to the proposed water use/ pumping o
account of the project ••
❖ Quantification and characterization of wastewater including toxic organic, from th
propose~ activity •
I

• All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form or by any means, without permission in writing,

; . I
 _ _ _,..,...., ~....... ..----

,.......-
~- 'fnuU'oomen!
,~ tion of the proposed polluU0 t m
~e.1uaggestions on modificaf .f n pr~ventlon and wastewater treatme nt •Y• e
t ~d su ton, i required
• tion of impacts of effiuent d' h . b 0 dy I
predtC •ate m th . . isc arge on the quality of the receiving water ,l
t using appropn a e1nattcal/ simulation models '1

Assessment of_ thteh_feasiblllty of \Vater recycUng and reuse and delinea tion ol a
t detafled plan in is regard . 1

~ Sllvtronment

~ surveY of flora and fauna delineating season and duration.

~

Assessment of flora and fauna present within the impact zone of the project
♦
Assessment of potential damage to terrestrial and aquatic flora and fauna due to
♦
dfsCha..cre
•a
of effluents and gase .
oua emissions from the proJect
Assessment of damage to terrestri al flora and fauna due to air pollution, land use, and
♦ iandscape changes

♦ Assessment of dam~ge to_ aquatic and marine flora and fauna (including commercial
fishing) due to physica l disturba nces and alterations ·
♦ prediction of biological stresses within the impact zone of the proposed project
♦ oelineation of mitigation measur es to prevent and/ or reduce the damage.
. ..
.,.a laftlUament
'
+ Studies on soil charact eristics , existing land use and topography, landsca pe and . ~.-;~;
drainage pattern s within the impact zone ~-? ... ~

+ Estimation of impacts of the project on land use, landscape, topography, drainag e, •••.
' ,_ I>

and hydr~logy •. --:·J

__ , .;
+ Identification of the potentia l utility of treated effluent in the land application and
subseque?t impacts
+ Estimation and characte risation of solid wastes and delineation of management options
for minimization of waste and environmentally compatible disposal
loclo ecoaoade and Health Bllftronment
'i
+ Collection of demographic and related socio-economic data ;
I
+ Collection of epidemiological data, including studies on prominent endemic diseases (e.g.
fluoroais, malaria, ftlarla, malnutrition) and morbidity rates among the population
within the impact zone.
+ Projection of anticipated changes in the socio-economic and health due to the project and
related activities includin g traffic congestion and delineation of measure s to minimize
adverse impacts.

Al rlpts ftlerved. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form or by uny means, without permission in writing. •

6
l-~ tA!!~~~~v
SHANKAR ..
. . . .
It •
~nv~!ll~
.

❖ Assessment of impact on s1gn1ficant lustoncal, cultural, and archaeological sites/

in the area. 1
pa_~
❖ Assessment of economic benefits arising out of the project.
❖ Assessment of rehabilitation requirements with special emphasis on scheduled
. area,
1f any. ··1

Rlak A11e11mtnt
❖ Hazard identification taking recourse to hazard indices, inventory analysis, ~
break probability, Natural Hazard Probability, etc. ~~
❖ Maximum Credible Accident (MCA) analysis to identify potentially hazardous seen~"
""101
❖ Consequence analysis of failures and accidents resulting in fire, explosion, hazardo
releases dam breaks, etc. ~
❖ Hazard & Operability (HAZOP) studies
❖ Assessment of risk based on the above evaluations
❖ Preparation of an onsite and off-site (project affected area) Disaster Management pJ

't
❖ Delineation of mitigation measures-in cluding prevention and-coritrol for eacJ
environmental component and rehabilitation and resettlement plan.
❖ Delineation of monitoring scheme for compliance of conditions
❖ Delineation of implementation plan including scheduling and resource allocation
Key Blementa of an lnltlal project Deacrlptlon ancl Scoplna
❖ The key environmental issues to be considered in relation to a proje_ct characteristics
are discussed in Sectoral Guidelines published by MoEF & CC & CC from time to rund
❖ An Initial Project Description (IPD) should at the very least, provid~- the ~eviewer wiJ
all the information necessary to ena~le project screening and scopitj~. ••
❖ Specific information that must be covered by the IPD includes:
1 •••

► Location/ current land use along with contours and wheth~r. it conforms to th
development plans proposed for that area.
► Details of proposed project activity including the project cost. _
► Outlining the key project elements during the pre-construction, the constructio,
and the operation phases etc. as per the list of documents to be attached with th'
questionnaire
The IPD may also include.
►
Off-site activities
____
► _ ____
Associated ______________________
activities ..--r
All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced In any form or by any means, without permission in wri·fog
1
•

..
 ~ -
~~ d::;,:. ::::::--
,-. i,cpecte proJec induced
:t:. ~------ -----..1 1.IHL DtlBI
activities
activities as PERT h
'o.-niect
> process
"• "J es with input c art
-output.
and process as a flow chart delineating
. • unit

> This would facilitate the reviewer's task.

~ The pro~ect propone~1t after suitable scopin should provide environmen tal
information hfor .ldcons1deration in detailed Elf. The reviewer while assessing
the report• s• ou focus on the crucial . aspects involving project
. 1ocat'ion and
cbaractensti cs.

t LOC•tlon(•)
,..,te°'l'lle site(s) selection can be an effective approach in minimising the requirement of
~ mitigation measures.

~ pcopa_sed project locations should be reviewed based upon regulatoiy and non-regulato ry
critena.
~ J>roje~~ ~iting reS t rictions depe~d on the sensitivity of the surrounding environm:n t.
sens1tiV1ty s?oul~ be assessed 1n relation to proximity of the project to the places/ sites
listed in the identified ecologically sensitive zones (ESZ) notified by MoEF & CC & CC.

1" udll orlttna d1lln11tod by Momr•cc lnolud11

❖ As far as possible prime agricultural land/ forest land may not be converted into an
industrial site
+ Land acquired should be minimum but sufficient to provide for a green belt wherein the
treated wastewater, if pos~ible / sui~able, could be utilised from wastewater treatment
systems
+ Enough space may be provided for storing solid wastes. The space and the waste can
be made available for possible reuse in future
+ Layout and form of the project must conform to the landscape of the area without
unduly affecting the scenic features of that place
+ Associated township of the project if any to be created must provide for space for phyto-
graphic barrier between the project and the township and should take into account
predominant wind direction.
In addition the following distances should be maintained:
t Coastal Areas: at least 1/2 km from the high tide line (within 0.5 km of High Tide
Line (HTL), specified activities as per CRZ notification , 1991 are permitted) (The HTL
is to be delineated by the authorised agency only.
t Estuaries: At least 200 metres from the estuary boundaries
+ Flood Plains of the Riverine systems: at least 500 metres from flood plain or modified
......____flood plain or by flood control systems
All ri&hta reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form or by any means, without permission in writing. •
 ' , . n , - ~ ~ U......, , _ Q . . _ ·--W~'•'"'"~=•••-•u~"4Ul)I,!~
\ .
:. ~

,.'· 'I.
T

-' · · .l IAS 'FRIJUi • (~

~.. '
SHANKAR
-- .. ...___.....,.
ACADEMY
.
_,
~ :,1 ❖ Transport/Communication System: at least 500 metres from highway and rail'-" '
❖ Major Settlements (3,00,000 population) at least 25 km from the projected gro ~
boundaxy of the settlement ~
❖ In additim1 to the siting c1iteria ~isted ~bov<;, the proposed project location sholll •
reviewed in relation to the following sahent issues: cl h
► Ambient air, water and noise quality standards
► Critically polluted areas
► Natural disaster prone areas

► Ecologically sensitive areas

► Availability of water and other critical infrastructures like electricity, roads Wi

adequate width and capacity t

Procedure ror Public Hearln1

(1) Process of Public Hearing:
Whoever apply for environmental clearance of projects, shall submit to the concerned Stat
Pollution Control Board. ••
(2) Notice of Public Hearing:
❖ The State Pollution Control Board shall cause a notice for environmental pubij
hearing which shall be published in at least two newspapers widely circulated in th
region around the project, one of which shall be in the vernacular language of th
locality concerned. -.
❖ State Pollution Control Board shall mention the date, time and place of public hearin
Suggestions, views, comments and objections of the public shall be invited within •
days from the date of publication of the notification.
❖ All persons including bona fide residents, environmental groups and_ others located
the project site/ sites of displacement/ site~ likely to be affected cap participate in
public hearing. • . •. . . ..
❖ They can also make oral/written suggestions to the State Pollution Control Board.
•' I • •, "

•.~ (3) Composition ofpublic hearing panel: I • • •

The composition of Public Hearing Panel 1:Jlay

' ,. . . . .namely:
consist of the following, .
- _

❖ Representative of State Pollution Control Board;

❖ District Collector or his nominee;
•!• Representative of State Government dealing with the subject;
~: ❖ Representai;ive of Department of the State Government dealing with Environment;
~··
❖ Not more than three representatives of the local bodies such as Municipalities
, panchayats;
:
:
.. .,.. ❖ Not more than three senior citizens of the area nominated by the District Collector.

. ., • All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form or by any means, without permission In wrltlllC•
 _..-
,,. tobfllty:
JPPII '(bere are s~ral projects with significant environmental impacts that are exempted from
~ the notification e1th_er bec~use they are not listed In schedule 1, or their investments
ere Jess than what is provided for in the notification.
~o~ of expert commit tees and standards: .
It is being found that the team fonned for conducting EIA studies is lacking the expertise
~ in various fiel~s such as environmentalists, wild life experts, Anthropologists and
social Scientists (to study the social impact of the project). I
I
t There is a lack of exhaustive ecological and socio- economic indicators for impact
assessment.
p,,1,IIC ,_,;rag:
♦ public comments are not taken into account at the early stage, which 'often leads to
conflict ~t the later stage of project clearance.
1
♦ A number of projects with significant environmental and social impacts have been
excluded from the mandato ry public hearing process. •
♦ The documents which the public are entitled to are seldom available on time.

♦ The data co]Jectors do not pay respect to the indigenous knowledge of local people.

. .
+ One of th~ bigg~st concerns with t_he environmental clearance process is related to the
quality of EIA report that are being carried qut. The reports are generally incomplete
and provid~d with false data. i
..
♦ EIA reports ignore several aspects while carrying out assessm ents and significant
information is found to omitted .
..
♦ Many EIA. report are based on single season data and are not adequate to determine
whether environmental clearance should be granted. All this makes the entire exercise
contrary to its very intent.
+ Conflict of Interest: The project proponent funds the Environmental Impact Assessment I

(EIA), making it biased toward project approval.

+ Lack of Unbiased Reports: Even if a consultant provides a critical review, the final
report may still favor the project.

All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced In any form or by any means, wit~out permission In writing.
•
 ❖ Inexperienced consultants: Sometimes, firms without relevant expertise are assi&n~
to conduct ElAs. •
kample: The BIA for an oil exploration project off the Ori••• coa1t ••• •••lttt
to Berhampur Unlventty•• Life Science Department, which lacks ezperti,~ ~
turtle con1e~tlon.
❖ The EIA document in itself is so bulky and technical, which makes it very difficult
decipher so as to aid in the decision making process.
❖ There are so many cases of fraudulent EIA studies where erroneous data has bee
used, same facts used for two totally different places etc.
❖ This is due to the lack of a centralized baseline data bank, where such data can
cross-checked.
❖ There is no accreditation ofEIA consultants, therefore any such consultant with a tra
record of fraudulent cases cannot be held liable for discrepancies. c
❖ It is hard to imagine any consultant after being paid lakh of rupees, preparing a rep0
for the project proponents, indicating that the project is not viable.
❖ In nearly every case, the consultants try to interpret and tailor the info~ation looki
for ways and means to provide their clients with a report that gives them their mane
worth.
llomtoriq, compllanoe and ln1tltutlonal arran1ement1:
❖ Often, and more so for strategic industries such as nuclear energy projected, the EM
are kept confidential for political and administrative reasons
❖ Details regarding the effectiveness and implementation of mitigation measures
often not provided.
❖ Emergency preparedness plans are not discussed in sufficient details'and the infonnatio
not disseminated to the communities.
Rloomm111datlon1
~ Independent EIA Authority
~ Sector wide EIA needed
~ Creation of an information desk
~ Creation of a centralized baseline data bank
•~ Dissemination of all information related to projects from notification to clearance t
local communities and general public
AppllcabWty:
❖ All those projects where there is likely to be a significant alternation of ecosystems ne
to go through the process of environmental clearance, without exception.
❖ No industrial developmental activity should be permitted in ecologically sensitive area

• AJI right• rescrvtd. No part of this materhll may he reproduced In 1my form or by nny means, without permission in wrUloJ,
~~

: • $1-!Art't~Mv·
' .,~.....,...................
'[,w(ronmPfll
.:-;c hearing:
J'II • f • ts which
pUblic hearings should be applicable to all hitherto exempt categories O proJeC
❖ have environmental'impacts.

QUality:
~ The focus of EIA needs to shift fro1n utilization and exploitation of natural resources
.. to conservation of natural resources.
❖ At present EIA reports are extremely weak when it comes to assessment of biological
diversity of a project area and the consequent impacts on it. This gap needs to be
plugged through a specific guidelines and through necessary amendments.
❖ The checklist needs to include impacts on agricultural biodiversity, biodiversity related
traditional knowledge and live hoods.
❖ All EIA reports should clearly state what are the adverse impacts that a prop~sed proj~cts
will have. This should be a separate chapter and not hidden within technical details ..
❖ The sub components or subsidiary reports of EIA reports
1,1,AINIIIDntl ofBtod!YtrlitJ implOtl done by 11ub OOlll1dtant) 111ould be m■d•
patiUGi, 1ooeNlbll u 1taad alone report, with t1lt SIA, Tllil 1hould 1'1 aftila1tle
oa tlla •••atte• of tile lloff&CC,
❖ EIAs should be based on full studies carried out over at least one year. Single season
data on environmental parameters like biodiversjty, as is being done for several rapid
assessments is not adequate to gain understanding of the full impact of the proposed
project.
❖ It is critical that the preparation of an EIA is completely independent of the project
proponent.
❖ One optionfor this could be the creation of a central fund for the EIAs which contains
fees deposited by project proponents while seeking that an EIA be done for their proposed
project.
❖ State and central governments should maintain a list of credible, independent and
competent agencies that can cany out EIAs. similarly the EIA consultant those are
making false reports should be black listed.
❖ •At national level accreditation to environment con·s~ltancy should be adopted

Grant of clearaace:
❖ The notification needs to make it clear that the provision for site clearance does n·ot
imp!y any commitment on the ~rt 0£ the impact Assessment agency to grant full
enVIronmental clearance,

All rights reserved• No part of t h.1s materIaI may be reproduced m

• any form
• or by any mt•ans, without permission in writing. A
V
 ··--••--''-'"''_.,,._, .... ,.,...,.,...,l!'ih'l"l."'1-vl~-••·'~WU..T':••TI,.....,.,;-w ...._-n.NU-<~tft•4"•l"!"~•uarfHlf.£/i'W-,1"~qp; 11'.~-}r;j~
••• ,4••• u,J.:.a4lu '·,1i11i;,-~}
11J. I ti•
#~i (Nt;
{j r,,.i.

l
--
SHANKAR
.IAS ACADEMY
..
.... .....,t,,Nl!--C....,. frwironllli.
'

❖ The prior inforn1ed consent of local communities and urban wards o r ~

s1
association needs to be tnade tnandatory before the grant of environmental cle de~
The consent should be from the full general body. ara_~~
❖ The language used for specifying conditions of clearance must be clear and sp .
ec1nt
Composition of expert committees: •
❖ The present executive com1nittees should be replaced by expert's people frorn v .
stakeholder groups, who are reputed in environmental and other relevant field ario
s.
❖ The process of selection of those committees should be open and transparent
minutes, decisions and advice by these committee should be open to public. •
onitoring, compliance and institutional arrangements:
❖ The EIA notification needs to build within it an automatic withdrawal of clearance if
conditions of clearance are being violated, and introduce more stringent punishr-n t
• •11e
for non- compliance.
❖ At present the EIA notification limits itself to the stage when environ~~~tal clearan
is granted.
❖ The MoEF&CC should set up more regional offices with advisory Expert ~ommittee
each with smaller areas ofjurisdiction, to effectively monitor the compliance of clearan
conditions. •
❖ A robust monitoring mechanism should be established by the state department
address compliance of both sets of clearance conditions together- and to take puniti
action against the project proponent in case of non-compliance.-. . . . ·...
❖ Local communities should be brought in to the formal monitoring and reporting proce!I
of the compliance of conditions presently done by the regional offices. .of the. MoEF&C .
Redressal: ...

❖ The composition of the NGT needs to be changed to include more judicials from
field of environment. .- __ ., .
..
❖ Citizen should be able to access the authority for redressal of all yio~ation of the E
notification as well as issues relating to non-compliance. • • •• •
Capacity building:
.-.
❖ NGOs, civil society groups and local communities need to build their.capacities to use
the EIA notification towards better decision making on projects that can impa •
their local environments and live hoods. Capacities can be built to proactively
effectively use the notification rather than respond in a manner that is seen as negati\
or unproductive.

• All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced In any form or by nny means, witbout permission in nritin:·
 -~
~-··
[~li,;
- M'·t '"'

AA'
~i·

,
i
~~ANlAoEMY
IA~~ ..~~1:1
;~l"'
'E,,vironmtnl
,:. .-1rc,n-.nentally Sensitive Places
fJIIY' .J:"
V,t o Reli~\l s and historic places
> -.~
rch~ological 1nonuments / sites
)' A ;'f.
sceni¢ areas
> . ,'I, .
,.1m resorts / mounta ins/ hills
► n •·
aeach resorts
> . '
► ff~ili~OO~ .
> coastal areas nc. h in
.
corals, mangroves, breeding grounds O f specific species
> Estuaries rich in mangroves, breeding ground of specific species
' '
> Gulf ar~s
► Biosp~~'re reserves
► Nation~ park and wildlife sanctuaries
► Natur~ lakes, swamps Seismic zones tribal Settlements
► Areas ~f scientific and geological interests
► Oefens~ installatio.ns, specially those of security importance and sensitive to
pollution.
r

► Border areas (international)

·' . ' .
► Airport :
► Tiger reserves/ elephant reserve/turtle nestling grounds
► Habitat (~r migratory birds
. t,· ,'. :.~·.·,.
► Lakes; ·i:~servorrs, dams
f/
► Stream ~ rivers/ estuary / seas
.
~~
I'., •
...
► Railwax; ~es
. ·l .
► Highways
•f' •
► Urban\agglomeration
' ·,/ .

+•An Environmental Supplemental Plan (ESP) is an environmentally beneficial project

-~ / . > • •

or activity that is not required by law, but that an alleged violator of Enviro nmenta l
Impact Assessment Notification, 2006 agrees to undertake as part of the proces s of
environmental clearance.
,,·'"•
: I
. .
+ "Environ111:~ntally beneficial" means an Environmental Supplemental Plan must
remediate, improve, protect the environment or reduce risks to public health or the
environmeQt, • .

Al ri&kk rtstrved. Ni _part~ thl1 material may he reproduced in any form or by any means, without perml<1slon
In writing.
Proposals under ESP

❖ ESP would allow violator companies to continue their activities by paying a fin
penalty. . a.ncia1

❖ This would then be invested in an "environmentally beneficial project or acu11b"

for an affected target group of stakeholders. '1'

Advantages

❖ Many developmental projects have been currently been stalled to non-compliance w·

EIA regime or for preparing~ improper EIA. ESP would enable reviving these proje~

❖ The "Bad Loans" issue currently plaguing the Banking sector can be substantiaIJ
resolved through reviving the stalled projects.

Diaaclvantages

❖ ESP is a clever attempt to legalize EIA violation and gain corporate confidence, thereb
allowing violator to damage the environment and circumvent the EIA process. J

❖ Among all cases filed in the National Green Tribunal (NGT), around 41 % are case
where the NGT found faults with an EIA assessment.

❖ Thus, EIA violation is a major in developmental projects. Allowing such violators t

carry on, defeats the ultim~te purpose of ~IA. . .

❖ Many experts argue that this indirectly allows pardoning of violations. Rather th
building upon the "Polluters Pay Principle", the ESP looks like an attempt to promot
corporate development by using a contradictory "Pay and Pollute" principle.
. .
❖ MoEF&CC stated the notification has legal basis in two judgments, one by the NGT an
the other by the Jharkhand High Court. But neither of the two judgments condone
EIA violations to. be ·regularized post facto nor does it prescribe a way out of these fo
violators. .-

❖ Valuation of environmental loss cannot be just compensated by pecuniary paymen

by the violator,

❖ Whether the fine amount would be collected properly and utilized for restoration i
doubtful. No mechanism has been proposed to utilize the collected funds.

❖ ESP provides an escape mechanis~ to violators. Instead of following the path of~~ ,
clearance, they can get away by paying a penalty through specific investment activities

.o All rights rcr;crvcd. No part of this material may he rc1;roduccd in nny form or by any meiut~, without permission in writing,
,;lJ:· •

'If' ~Nl(AA_ ~• ., ,: ,_ ·::,';: r. pi,f.

IA$ AC ~=----- ==::::: :---"--- -------- ----___ __,;._. .--=--- ------:: ::::::=~ ~iiliili ii

~ H i~ a Sing~e-Window Integrated Environmental Management Syat e~•

~ ~eY features include single registration and single sign-in for all types of clearan ces _(1.e.
Environment, Fores~, Wildlife and CRZ), unique-ID for all types of clearan ces require ?
for a particular pro~ect and a single Window interface for the propon ent !o ~ubm:!
applications for getting all types of clearances (i.e. Environment, Forests, Wtldhfe ~
cRZ clearances). ,

+ Besides EIA, tbe Government of India u~der Environment (Protection) Act 1986
issued a numbe r of other notifications, which are related to environ mental
unpact assessm ent. These are limited to specific geographical areas. They are
+ Prohibiting location of industries except those related to Tourism in a belt
of 1 Ian ~om high tide mark from the Revdanda Creek up to Devgar~ Point
(near Shrivar~~an) as ~ell as in 1 km belt along the banks of Rajpun Creek
Ul: Murud JanJrra area 1n the Raigarh district of Maharashtra (1989)
+ Restricting location of industries·, mining operations and regulating other
activities in Doon Valley (1989) • . .
♦ Regulating activities in the coastal stretches of the country by classifying them
as coas~ regulation zone and prohibiting certain activities (1991) . .
♦ Restricting location of industries and regulating other activities in Dahan u
Taluka in Mahar ashtra (1991) •
♦ Restricting certain activities in specified areas of Aravalli Range in the Gurgao n
district of Haryan a and Alwar district of Rajasthan (1992)
+ Regulating industr ial and other activities, which could lead to pollution and
cong~stion in an area north west of Numaligarh in Assam (1996)

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

AU rights res
en·ed. No part of this material may be reproduced in uny form· or IlY any means, "t·111out 1wrm1ss1on
• . ' .·
m "ntmg.
 ------··--·

THE ESSENCE OF LIFE:

INTRODUCTION TO BIODIVERSITY

Aceording to inistry of Environment, Forest

[1.and Clima Change (MoEFCC), biodiversity Biodiversity
is defined as t •variety and variability of living
0 rganisms and
includes diversi
ecosystems in which they live. It
·thin species, between species,
and of ecosyste .. Biodiversity is essential for
~,
,~~
JI.

ecosystem stabili esilience, and providing services

vital to human we emg.
~. ,..
EcosyStem Re
❖ Areas with hi r species diversity recovered
more quickly r the fires, deD;J.oastrating
how diverse ec;~ytteWfl·c~' better with-
stand and bounce back from environmental
disasters.
❖ Recently, wildfires in Australia highlighted the importance of biodiversity in ecosystem
recovery.
rooct Security ln a Changing Climate
❖ In India, scientists have been working on developing climate-resilient crop varieties
to combat the effects of climate change on agriculture.
❖ These efforts are crucial as they aim to maintain food security in the face of unpre-
dictable weather patterns, ensuring that farmers have access to diverse options for
planting.

AU rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced In nny form or by nny mt-tms, without permission in writing.

b j
 l S1-tANKAA
_,_ fAS_.,_,,,..,...,_,_....,.
ACAOeMY
fll

Health and Pandemic Prevention

❖ The COVID-19 panden1ic underscored the link between biodiversity and health.
❖ A recent study revealed that regions with higher biodiversity experienced Iowe
r r~t
of infectious diseases. ~-

~
'-
. habitats
••• This finding has pro1npted discussions on the importance of conserving
to reduce the risk of future pandemics.
n
~
a1

, Combatting Climate Change

.:• The United Nations recently reported that protecting and restoring ecosysteni8 c
significantly contribute to climate change mitigation. Initiatives like reforestatioll %! •
a~
wetland restoration are gaining momentum, as they not only enhance biodiversity b •
also act as effective carbon sinks. u
► Global Aim: Stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations to prevent dangerous hum
interference with the climate system. a

► Developed Countries' Role: Annex I countries must lead in reducing emission

and provide financial and technological support to developing nations.

► Support for Developing Nations: Financial mechanisms (e.g., GlobalEnvironmen

Facility) fund climate change actions, including adaptation efforts.

► Adaptation and Mitigation: Establishes frameworks like •the Adaptatio1t

Committee under the Cancun Framework to address climate impacts and suppo '
sustainable development. •
' •

► Rio Convention Linkage: Collaborates with the Convention on Biologic

Diversity and Convention to Combat Desertification to create synergies ••
addressing global environmental challenges. •

Economic V.alue
❖ The

❖
eco-tourism sector in countries like Costa Rica has been thrivi.rig due to its rica
biodiversity.
Recent reports indicate that eco-tourism contributes significantly to the national eco
• ·: I
omy, highlighting how biodiversity can drive economic growth while 'promoting conse~
1
vation efforts.
Sustainable Development
•:• In a recent initiative, the government of Kenya launched a program to promote sutl
tainable fishing practices that protect marine biodiversity. •

• All rights reserved, No part of this ruutc:rial muy he ri:prnduccd in 1my form or by nny menus, without permission in writing•

L.J
r'\ . 't(;1'1!.'$-L .•~
IL,;:•·· •
~

~HANKAR .. .- f
-~~~! . '[nn,roomrm.
J:;: program
~ 1 •
aims to balance the needs of local communities with the conservation
of fish popu ations, ensuring long-term sustainability.

e Dlvenlty
a,11ed
etic diversity is the variation in the genetic makeup of individuals within a species, al-
aen bTty
towing adapta 1 1 and surviv • al in
• changing
environments.

Determines the exact genetic In 2024, whole-genome sequencin~ of A~iat~c

pllA seqoencing code ?f org~isms to identify lions (Panthera leo persica) in Gu1arat s Grr
genetic vanations. National Park revealed low genetic diversity,
increasing their disease risks.

seter0znoaity ~e~s:ures the proportion of Studies of tigers {Panthera tigris) in

1ndividuals with different Rantharnbore National Park found moderate
l,eft1a heterozygosity levels, indicating a gen~cally
alleles for a gene.
healthy population despite fragmentation.

Examines how often different In 2024, coconut (Cocos nucifera) allele

AJlele FreqUency versions (alleles) of a gene frequency analysis in Kerala showed reduced
ADa1ysia appear in a population. genetic diversity in traditional varieties due
to hybridization. Conservation efforts are
underway.
Species Diversity

Species diversity refers to the variety of species in a particular area, measured through
species richness, evenness, and indices like alpha, beta, and gamma diversity.
1. Species Richness:
► The total number of different species in a given area.
Sample: In 2024, a biodiversity survey in the Western Ghats revealed the presence o.
150 different bird species in a single forest patch, showcasing its high species richness.
2. Species Evenness:
► The relative abundance of species in an area, reflecting how evenly individuals
are distributed among species.
&sample: A study of mangrove forests in the Sundarbans in 2024 showed high specie~
evenness as most species, such as Avicennia marina and Rhizophora mucronata, wer€.
found in similar abundance.
3. Alpha Diversity:
► The diversity within a specific habitat or ecosystem, measured by specief
richness and evenness.

I All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced In nny fol'm or by nny ml·ans, \\ithout permission in writing. 0
I
l~: .,.,._:Ina coral reef ecosystem near.th~ And~an Islands, alph~ ~ive~si~
'frwironn.&.
in 2023 revealed 120 species of fish within a single reef, emphasizing its ecolo ~ •
richness. ~
4. Beta Diversity:
► The comparison of species diversity between different ecosystems or hab:t l~•-
reflecting species turnover.
I

"•
► Example: A 2024 study comparing species in the Himalayan alpine forests
Terai grasslands showed high beta diversity due to distinct species in each re ~~
such as snow leopards (Panthera unda) in the alpine zones and swamp ~0~,
(Ruce1vus duvaucelit) in the grasslands. ~
S. Gamma Diversity:
•. , '\

► The overall species diversity in a large region encompassing multiple ecosystein. 1

3,
► Example: The biodiversity of the Western Ghats in 2024 was assessed, recordi
over 7,000 species across forests, grasslands, and wetlands, highlighting ~
gamma diversity.
Bcoqateml>lftralty
Ecosystem diversity refers to the variety of ecosystems in a given region and includes
the types of ecosystems, their functions, and the interactions between bioti~ and abiotic
components.
1. Ecosystem Types:
>

►
1

Refers to the variety of ecosystems in a region, such as forests, wetl~ds, ~assiands

and deserts. '
he:nple: In 2024, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (India)
identified over 15 ecosystem types in the Himalayan region, ranging from alpine meadows
to subtropical forests, emphasizing the region's ecosystem diversity.!~ , 1 .•
. .'
Functions:
► Assesses the ecosystem processes like nutrient cycling, carbon storage, and water
purification.
Bample: In 2023, researchers highlighted the carbon storage cap~ity.;pf mangrove
ecosystems in India's Sundarbans, demonstrating their critical role in mitigating climate
change while supporting biodiversity and fisheries. • •• ·
2. Interactions:
► Refers to the relationships between organisms (biotic) and their phY,sical!
environment (abiotic), including predator-prey dynamics, pollination, and nutrient
exchange.
kample: A 2024 study in the Western Ghats examined interactions between pollinators
like bees and flowering plants, revealing how changes in rainfall patterns affected these_
interactions and, subsequently, food production and biodiversity. •
I
I
• All rights reserved, No part of this material may be reproduced in any form or by any means, without permission in wrltini• ~
 f.fW~ :~-,··
• . .
·), .,

•• 9'f/'AA~';i(:i.iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii-===::::---------------------------~~W~rJ/lm~.:....-pn
__t

•odiversity met~cs are tools to assess and quantify the state, pressure, response, and
81 . f biodiversity.
fitS 0
~ rootprlnt .
l,(eas~res the b1~pact of human activities on biodiversity, including habitat loss
t and species dechne.
JlllllPle: ~n ~024, a biodiversity footprint analysis of urban expansion in B~ngalur u
showed a s1gn1ficant loss of wetland ecosystems, affecting species like the Indian Spot-
billed ouck.
s,eeld Jliddleu Indices
+QU&DtifJ the number of species in a particular area.
111mple: A 2023 biodiversity survey in the Aravalli Hills recorded 250 plant species,
showcasing its species richness.
lell SpeCies Alnlllclance (MSA)
t Measures the average abundance of species in a given area compared to their pris-
tine state.
&nmple: MSA analysis in 2024 showed a 30% decline in forest bird populatio ns in
Assam due to deforestation and infrastructure development.
Bioditeaaitf Impact Metric (BIM)
+ Assesses the impact of specific projects or actions on biodiversity.
Bumple: The 2023 environmental impact assessme nt for the Mumbai Coastal Road
Project used BIM to estimate habitat loss for mangroves and associated fauna.
WteraitJ Intactne ss Index (BIi)
+ Measures the proportion of natural biodiversity remaining in a region.
lnmple:'In 2024, Bil in the Amazon Basin dropped to 80%, reflecting the impact of
lo~g and agriculture on natural ecosystems •
. . . . . BINiYen ity Assessment Tool (IBAT)
+ Aglobal database that identifies biodiversity risks and helps in decision-making.
lremple: In 2024, IBATwas used to evaluate potential impacts of a mining project in
the Western Ghats, ensuring critical habitats were excluded from operations.
I lletey
♦ Atool that assesses biodiversity performance in business and policy sectors.
+ ~pie: In 2023, a renewable energy firm in Tamil Nadu adopted LIFE Key to track
its ~iodiversity-friendly initiatives around wind farms.

~-~ ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- --

~vt4. Ne,-. .,f ""- 11t1tterlal may be reproduced in nny form or by any menns, without permission In writing. e
 - ~t~.,t:,~::~
"-d
-~~

l=--~-~-~. -~-:::.:·-~ ~!.------- -------~1·

~iA~K_t&Mv· 'FmiirtJ'lrn,
.
I/
Biodiversity Units
❖ A standardized unit used to measure biodiversity value and offsets.
Example: During the Delhi NCR Green Infrastructure Project (20 24), biodiversity~. i
were used to calculate the ecological compensation for tree removal. ni•,

Simpson's Diversity Index

❖ Measures the probability that two randomly selected individuals belong to differ.
ent species.
Example: A 2023 study in the Sundarbans found a Simpson's Diversity Index of o.
indicating high species diversity in the mangrove forests.
Shannon•Wiener Index (H')
❖ Quantifies biodiversity, considering both species richness and evenness.

Example: An H' value of 3.5 was recorded in a coral reef ecosystem near the Andarna.
Islands in 2024, indicating a highly diverse system.
Margalef's Richness Index
❖ Measures species richness relative to the number of individuals in a sample.
Example: In 2023, Margalers Index showed higher species richness -in organica!IJ
farmed fields compared to conventional farms in Punjab.
Pielou's Evenness Index
❖ Measures how evenly individuals are distributed among species.
Example: A Pielou's Index of 0.85 was calculated for bird populations in Keralai
Vembanad Lake in 2024, indicating a balanced ecosystem.

❖ Indicators of biodiversity are measurable variables that represent_the·state, pressur~

or benefits of biodiversity within ecosystems. • .. ·.:.. :. I
❖ They are broader and more ecosystem.focused than biomarkers, which prim
indicate biological or molecular changes in organisms. •••
1. Ecosystem Indicators
~ Measure the health and functionality of ecosystems, including habitat quality, spe'.I
cies presence, and ecosystem processes.
Bxample1: Habitat Quality: In 2024, mangrove cover in the Sundarbans was used1•
an ecosystem indicator of coastal resilience and biodiversity richness. The presence •
Avicennia species reflects a thriving mangrove ecosystem.

• ·o~
.• II ri?ilh n:~cnrd. No part of thi11 matcriul may be reproduced In any form or by any means, without permission in \\fill e'

I,
 -v· '[n11frmmfJnt
Presence: The return of O . . d • 's
spec1e8 iver (2024) serves as . a~getic dolphins (Platanista gangetica) in 1n ta
G,ngs. f11owing conservat ion ~ indicator of improved water quality and ecosystem
i,eBlth 10 euorts.
tel11 Processes : Pollination
seo•Y' ·
prsde~h in
2023 were studie f •
r~te~ by bees in agricultural areas o 8 ~mac
hal
d as an indicator of ecosystem services supportin g food
5eeurilY·
~ 1aclicaton
t- genetic diversity within db
isse55 b'l' .. etween species focusing on popu1atton
·
f beslth, adapta i ity, and resiliencean
. '
....,1.,:
► Population Health : In 2024, genetic markers of Rana temporaria (common frog)
in the Weste~ Ghats were used as genetic indicators to track inbreedin g levels
caused by habitat fragmenta tion.
► Adaptability: ?enet~c diversity studies of Vigna radiata (mung bean) in India
revealed adaptive traits for drought resistance, aiding crop improvement in 2023.
► Resilience: In 2024, genetic analysis of coral species in the Andaman Islands was
used to measure their resilience to bleaching events indicating the capacity to
adapt to climate change. '

alth. s.
monitonn g to organism sease
iodiversity. tes.
ecies presence zyrne eves, gene expressions.
ality.
eturn o angettc o - str~ss protein eve s in cor s
phins (2024).

"-1 Biodiversity Indicators:

UJing Planet Index (LPI}
The ~iving Planet Index (LPI) is an indicator that meas~res t~e state_ of global biodiversity
l~kingpopulation trends of vertebrate species worldwide. It 1s compiled by the Zoologica l
ci;tf of London (ZSL) and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and is recognized under the
for biodiversity monitorin g.
♦ I.PI is used to assess progress toward international biodiversity targets, including the
Aichi Biodiversity Targets and UN Sustainable Developm ent Goals (SDG 15: Life
o1 Land).

~-- ---- ---- ---- ---= --~ ---:

ed. N .
in
o part of this
::--
'99\ . b
material may e reproduced in any form or by any means, without permission writing.
' - ' ♦
V