COMMENTARY

Economic & Political Weekly EPW jUNE 21, 2014 vol xlix no 25
19
Environment and Development
Some Thoughts for the New Government
Ramaswamy R Iyer
There are some worrying signals
from the new government in New
Delhi that it could compromise
on environmental concerns in
the pursuit of more rapid growth:
clearances could be given quickly
(i e, environment protection
requirements will be loosened),
the Land Acquisition Act could
be diluted and more. It may be
more useful if we shake ourselves
free of the obsession with GDP
growth rates and try instead to
make India a caring, humane,
compassionate, equitable, just
and harmonious society.
W
ith the advent of the Narendra
Modi government, there is
much talk of a quick approval
of projects held up for environmental
clearances. The big corporates, their
champions among the economists, and
those who believe that gross domestic
product (GDP) growth and develop-
ment ought to be our over- riding goals,
are convinced that among the impedi-
ments to growth and development
green clearances are the worst.
One View of Clearances
Let me present a caricature of a particular
view: project clearances should be had for
the asking; similarly land for industry
should be had for the asking and should
be taken by the government from farm-
ers and other people and handed over to
corporate houses (whether for high or
low priority industries or for speculative
investments in real estate). Free, informed
prior consent for land acquisition, fair
compensation for land acquired, and
generous rehabilitation packages are
luxuries that we cannot afford. Social
Impact Assessment or SIA is a newfan-
gled and dangerous idea. The society
that we should aim at building is one in
which the stock market soars to ever new
heights and foreign investors want to
invest: that is the ultimate test of success.
This is in fact not too much of a caricature
of the industry view and of neo-liberal
alliance econo mic thinking. It carried
much weight with the United Progressive
Alliance (UPA) government but not,
one hopes, with the new government.
Unfortunately, there seems to be a
strong continuity between the erstwhile
UPA government and the new Bharatiya
Janata Party government on an impa-
tience with environmental concerns. The
redoubtable Sunita Narain is reported to
have said that what we need is not rheto-
ric but tough action on the environment.
Tough action is very likely, but alas, not
necessarily in the direction that we
would approve of.
Returning to project clearances, please
note that the focus is on projects. How-
ever, projects are only the embodiments
of approaches and policies. When a new
government comes into power, one
would expect it to examine the approach-
es and policies the kind of thinking
underlying the pending projects, and
consider whether it wishes to persist
with that thinking or would like to bring
new thinking to bear on the matter. In
the latter case, it may wish to abandon
some projects, redesign some and push
ahead with some. Instead, the call is to
clear pending projects quickly. This
unthinking preoccupation with projects
prevents serious thinking about policies.
Further, any requirement of a clear-
ance implies the possibility of a denial of
clearance, but no one is talking about
rejections. Let us suppose that the ex-
amination of projects and the processes
of decision-making are speeded up, and
that out of 10 projects six are promptly
Ramaswamy R Iyer (ramaswamy.iyer@gmail.
com) is with the Centre for Policy Research and
is better known for his extensive writings on
issues related to water.
COMMENTARY
jUNE 21, 2014 vol xlix no 25 EPW Economic & Political Weekly
20
rejected and four are promptly cleared.
Would the corporate world and the pro-
tagonists of development be happy?
Hardly. When they talk about quick
clearances they mean positive clearances,
not negative ones. What they want is that
the whole business of a clearance under
the Environment (Protection) Act (EPA)
and related Acts should be reduced to a
formality to be got through very quic-
kly, and that all projects should come
through unscathed.
At the Cost of the Environment?
There used to be complaints about delays
in clearance even earlier, when the
examination was conned to techno-
economic and nancial aspects, but with
the onset of what are called green clear-
ances, i e, clearances under the EPA, the
Forest Conservation Act, and other
rela ted enactments, the complaints have
become shriller. The reason is that pro ject
proponents were willing to accept the
need for a techno-economic-nancial
examination, but resent an environmental
clearance as a needless imposition. Con-
cern about the environment and ecology
is limited to a small number of people.
Most people are willing to pay lip service
to the environment because that has
become the prevailing practice, but have
no real belief in it, and would be seri-
ously upset if it interferes with what they
consider to be development. That is also
the attitude of big business, and this
point of view is quite strong in the so-
called developmental ministries in the
government. The Ministry of Environ-
ment and Forests (MoEF) is unpopular
with these ministries; it is regarded as a
negative force impeding development.
A development-environment dichotomy
is posited, with the former being accord-
ed primacy and the latter relegated to a
secondary position. The holders of the
primacy of development argument
would say yes, the protection of the en-
vironment is important, but not at the
cost of development. Let us reverse that
proposition: can we really have develop-
ment at the cost of the environment?
It is interesting that the ardent advo-
cates of what they call reform (which
means a full changeover to free-market
capitalism) sometimes describe green
clearances as a return to the discredited
licence-permit raj. As no one is cur-
rently in favour of licence-permit raj, the
use of that term functions as an argu-
ment-stopper. However, can any govern-
ment function without permits and
licences? A passport is a permit. A driving
licence is a licence. Boilers have to be
periodically certied for safety. Building
plans cannot be passed without a clear-
ance from the re department. Vehicle
exhaust has to conform to certain speci-
cations. In that haven of free enter-
prise, the United States, there is strong
anti-trust legislation and there are power-
ful regulatory agencies such as the
Securities and Exchange Commission
and the Federal Drugs Administration.
In that country, dams can be built by
private agencies but they need a licence;
and if the conditions prescribed are not
adhered to, the licence can be cancelled.
It follows that if we wish to protect
and conserve mountains, forests, rivers,
wildlife, the air that we breathe and
the water that we drink, and indeed
our habitat, the Planet Earth, we must
have laws and rules and these must
be enfor ced. Large interventions in
nature will necessarily have to be care-
fully examined for their impacts on
these things. Describing this kind of
examination dismissively as licence-
permit raj indicates a mind disabled by
ideological prejudice.
Disturbing Signals
Dare one hope that the negative attitude
to environmental concerns will not con-
tinue in the new government? Unfortu-
nately there are disturbing indications.
The new environment minister is repor-
ted to have said that the environment
ministry will not be obstructionist. That
is a revealing statement. It implies that
any minister who implements the EPA
faithfully and effectively is being ob-
structionist and that he or she should
moderate the implementation to avoid
being so. It is also a defensive statement
seeking to reassure everyone that he
will try not to give trouble to anyone.
Why does such a reassurance become
necessary? The reason is that the EPA
seriously tries to protect the environ-
ment and contains provisions for the
purpose, which means that if rigorously
implemented, the Act is bound to bite in
some cases. If it did not, the Act would
be worthless. It follows that the bland
statement often heard that there need be
no conict between the environment
and development is not true. An effort
needs to be made to reconcile the re-
quirements of the Act and the demands
of development, and it will not be an
easy effort.
Compromise on the Environment
It is in that context that the advocates of
development glibly talk about a balanc-
ing of environment and development.
What they mean by balancing is of
course a compromise on environmental
concerns, never a moderation of devel-
opmental activities. The development
chariot must roll on, and environmental
concerns must be sacriced.
There are reports that time limits will
be set for environmental clearances, and
that there might be a provision for an
automatic clearance if the clearance is
not forthcoming within a certain period.
These are of course media reports and
one does not know what the exact in-
structions will be. However, these indi-
cations show which way the wind is
blowing and that is indeed worrisome.
Please note that the onus is entirely on
the MoEF. They are responsible for delays;
they must abide by the time limits; if
they do not, there may be clearances by
default. What responsibilities are cast
on those who submit for clearance
projects which are simply not t for
clearance? Is there any recognition that
the projects must be well-prepared, ful-
ly documented and supported, and ripe
for a clearance in every possible way;
that the vast majority of Environmental
Impact Assessments (EIAs) are extremely
poor and shoddy and many downright
dishonest; and that EIAs need to be fully
professionalised, distanced from project
formulators, approvers and implement-
ers, and placed under the supervision of
the National Environmental Regulator
(if one is established)? That is a rheto-
rical question that needs no answer.
Under the circumstances, the only way
in which the MoEF can abide by the
time limits would be to reject promptly
COMMENTARY
Economic & Political Weekly EPW jUNE 21, 2014 vol xlix no 25
21
the vast majority of projects. Would that
be acceptable?
Dilution of Land Acquisition Act
Another source of worry is in relation to
land acquisition, displacement and reha-
bilitation. There is a tendency on the
part of many commentators, particular-
ly the champions of free-market capital-
ism (who hold a view similar to the old
American slogan that what is good for
General Motors is good for America), to
regard the Land Acquisition and Reha-
bilitation Act of 2013 as extremely bad
and a serious impediment to develop-
ment. The thought that a national policy
was needed on development-induced
displacement and the rehabilitation of
project-affected people, as also a drastic
overhaul of the colonial Land Acquisi-
tion Act, emerged in the 1980s. After
protracted debates and a series of drafts
(repeatedly diluted), a weak Act was
nally passed in 2013. Many feel that it
is defective and decient in several
respects, but such as it is, it exists and
offers some limited protection against
unfair alienation of agricultural land,
and a modest rehabilitation provision. In
the drive for the quick implementation
of developmental projects, one hopes
that the government will not be unduly
inuenced by the neo-liberal economic
view of this Act.
Going beyond project clearances, it
has also been argued by some commen-
tators that institutions of accountability
such as the Comptroller and Auditor
General (CAG) and institutions against
corruption such as the Central Vigilance
Commission (CVC) are responsible for
the economic slowdown. The inference
is clear. It would be wonderful if there
were no CAG, no CVC, and no EPA, but if
that ideal situation is not possible, we
should at least render these agencies, laws
and procedures as weak and innocuous as
possible. Corruption, fraud and nancial
irregularities are no doubt reg rettable,
but reporting on them in detail in public
documents such as the CVCs or CAGs re-
ports makes them visible internationally
and affects investor condence. A bit
of corruption, fraud or irregularity is a
price we may have to pay for a better
inow of foreign direct investment (FDI).
These things will exist, but must be hidden
from public view. That represents the
thinking of several commentators, though
they may not say so explicitly. That view
found much resonance in the UPA govern-
ment. One must hope that it does not nd
an echo in the new government through
some of its advisers. Prime Minister Modi
is probably too shrewd a person to be un-
duly inuenced by that kind of thinking.
Reports to the effect that the new gov-
ernment proposes to restore the Ganga
to a pristine condition are encouraging,
but one must hope that it will not be a
cosmetic exercise like the revival of
the Sabarmati in Gujarat. The Sabarmati
has not been revived; it is as dead as
ever. All that has happened is that in a 10
km stretch of the 370 km-long river, Nar-
mada waters have been put in, treating
the Sabarmati bed as a conduit or a pipe-
line for those waters. An articial river
of 10 km has thus been created for the
city of Ahmedabad. The only lesson to
be learnt from that experience is that it
should be avoided.
River Interlinking Project
More disturbing is the fact during his
election campaign, the present prime
minister talked about the interlinking of
rivers (ILR) project. That is a very con-
troversial project which has many sup-
porters but also many critics. The fact
that the prime minister is predisposed in
favour of the project is hardly reassur-
ing, but one fervently hopes that he will
study the weighty objections that many
critics have raised before taking a deci-
sion on the project. The ILR project is an
ill-conceived project and will be an un-
mitigated disaster. However, that sub-
ject cannot be discussed in this article.
The readers attention is drawn to two
articles by this writer on the subject in
EPW (River Linking Project: A Disquiet-
ing Judgment, 7 April 2012; and Link-
ing of Rivers: Judicial Activism or Error?,
16 November 2002).
Perhaps one is being unduly alarmist.
One hopes that the Modi government
will be as earnest about environmental
and ecological concerns as about what
goes by the name of development. One
hopes further that there will be an ago-
nising reappraisal of what constitutes
true development. A word needs to be
said about this.
As already mentioned, the prevailing
idea of development is a booming stock
market, an inward rush of foreign in-
vestment, and a GDP growth of 8% to
10%. However, 8% or 10% growth would
imply a huge draft on natural resources,
a high potential for pollution requiring
remedial measures, and an immense
generation of waste needing disposal. Is
it possible to pursue 8% or 10% growth
without damaging the environment and
Planet Earth? However, let us leave such
radical thinking aside for the time be-
ing, though we may be forced to face
that logic in due course. In practical
terms, what can be done?
Need for Focus on Specics
May one suggest that we refrain from
adopting targets for growth, and focus
instead on specics such as food ination,
farmers suicides, poverty, jobs, illiteracy,
disease, infant mortality, safe and relia-
ble water supply, appropriate sanitation
arrangements, safety of women in the
streets and workplaces, and so on, and
above all corruption, leaving growth to
look after itself. This is a subject that will
need to be discussed at length. One can
only offer without proof the statement that
such a piecemeal approach is possible
without adopting ideologies of the right
or the left. In particular, it is necessary
to shake ourselves free of the obsession
with GDP growth rates. It is also neces-
sary to stop being bemused by visions of
India as a super-power, and try to make
India a caring, humane, compassionate,
equitable, just and harmonious society.
One shares the widespread hope that a
single-party majority and a decisive prime
minister will mark a new beginning. The
prime ministers statement from his new
website says: Let us together dream of a
strong, developed and inclusive India.
That phrase needs to be expanded to in-
clude ecological sustainability and har-
mony not only between groups/states/
countries, but also bet ween generations,
and between humanity and Nature. In
the hope that the new government is
engaged in serious thinking about these
matters, these reections are offered to
it for whatever they are worth.