Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process for assessing the potential environmental effects of a project or development proposal while taking into account related socio-economic, cultural, and human health effects, both positive and negative. Though EIA aims to forecast environmental effects early in the project planning and design process, identify strategies for minimizing negative effects, and give predictions and options to decision-makers, it has few drawbacks. They include lack of expertise, lack of centralized database, erroneous information, lack of accreditation to EIA Consultants, etc. This article will explain to you the Drawbacks of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) which will be helpful in preparing the Environment Syllabus for the UPSC Civil Service exam.

What is an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)?

• Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a decision-support tool for those deciding whether or not to approve a development project.
• The purpose of an EIA is to determine the potential environmental, social, and health effects of a proposed development so that those who make decisions about the project's development and approval are aware of the likely consequences of their decisions before making them, and thus are more accountable.
• Its goal is to make decision-making more informed and transparent while also attempting to avoid, eliminate, or mitigate potential negative consequences by considering alternative ideas, sites, or methods.
• UNEP defines Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) as a tool to determine the environmental, social, and economic implications of a project prior to making a decision.

Importance of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

• For ecologically safe and sustainable development, EIA connects the environment and development.
• EIA is a cost-effective way to eliminate or reduce the negative effects of development initiatives.
• EIA allows decision-makers to assess the impact of development activities on the environment long before the project is executed.
• The adaptation of mitigation methods in the development plan is encouraged by EIA.
• EIA ensures that the development plan is environmentally sound and operates within the ecosystem's capacity for assimilation and regeneration.
• Project managers can identify which projects require thorough screening to avoid environmental harm through environmental impact assessments.
• By recommending secure project designs and procedures as alternatives, EIA protects the environment's biodiversity.
• Before making a decision, information is provided illustrating the effects on the environment.

Indian Policies Requiring EIA

• The Planning Commission requested that the Department of Science and Technology review the river-valley projects from an environmental perspective in 1976–1977, which marked the beginning of India's environmental impact assessment process.
• This was subsequently expanded to include those projects that needed the Public Investment Board's permission.
• These were administrative choices without any backing from the legislature.
• The Environment (Protection) Act was passed by the Indian government in 1986.
• Making environmental impact assessment a statutory requirement is one of the decisions that were made to carry out the Act's goals.

Drawbacks of Environmental Impact Assessment

Applicability

• A number of projects with major environmental effects are excluded from the notification either because they are not included in Schedule 1 or because their investments are lower than those specified in the notification.

Expert Committee and Standard Composition

• It has been discovered that the team assembled to conduct EIA investigations lacks knowledge in a number of areas, including anthropologists, environmentalists, and experts in wild animals.
• Comprehensive ecological and socioeconomic indicators for impact assessment are lacking.

Public Hearing

• Public opinions are not taken into consideration at the outset, which frequently causes disagreement during the project clearance stage.
• Several initiatives with substantial environmental and social repercussions have been left out of the required public hearing procedure.
• Publicly accessible documents are rarely made timely available.
• The data gatherers do not respect the locals' indigenous knowledge.

Quality

• The quality of the EIA reports being produced is one of the main issues with the environmental clearance process.
• The reports typically contain erroneous information and are incomplete.
• While conducting evaluations, EIA reports disregard a number of factors, and it is discovered that important information has been missed.
• Numerous EIA reports are based on data from a single season and are therefore insufficient to decide whether environmental clearance should be granted. All of this renders the practise inherently counter to its intended purpose.

Lack of Credibility

• Currently, it is the project proponent's responsibility to commission the creation of the EIA for their project.
• The EIA is actually funded by a company or individual whose main goal is to get the project approved.
• Even if the consultant offers an unbiased review that is critical of the planned project, there is little probability that the final assessment offered is objective.
• Sometimes it is discovered that a consultancy operating in the project area lacks expertise in the relevant field.
  • For instance, the biological science department of Berhampur University, which lacks competence in the study of turtles and their life cycle, was given the task of preparing the EIA report for the proposed oil exploration on the coast of Orissa by the Reliance Group.
• Because the EIA document is so large and technical, it is exceedingly challenging to understand and use in the decision-making process.
• There is a tonne of instances of fake EIA studies where the same facts were utilized for two completely different locations, erroneous data was used, etc.
• There isn't a centralized database of baseline data where such information can be cross-checked.
• Since EIA consultants are not accredited, those of them who have a history of fraud charges cannot be held accountable for inaccuracies. It is difficult to picture any consultant creating a report for the project proponents that indicates the project is not sustainable after being paid lakhs of rupees.
• In almost every situation, the consultants attempt to adapt and interpret the data in an effort to deliver their clients a report that is worth their money.

Conclusion

The drawbacks of the Environmental Impact Assessment mentioned above ought to be addressed. This could possibly enhance the scope and quality of the projects or any other proposals. However, there is no doubt that the Environmental Impact Assessment acts as the Magna Carta for decision makers related to the environment.