Priyanka Arthimalla – WISER WORLD

ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT – A MEASURE OF PARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE

Priyanka Arthimalla — Fri, 10 Jul 2020 11:20:48 +0000

There was a time when India used to have a notorious Licensing System which was infamously known as ‘License Raj‘. Anyone wanting to start up a new industry or even expand production beyond a certain level had to get a permit or a ‘license’ from the government to do so. This was meant to be an instrument for directing production into socially useful activities and thwart industries from going into areas that the government considered lacking in worth. This process was considered as hindrance to the growth of the country and the government with a resilient mind removed it and promoted the concept of ease of doing business.

With the similar objective of promoting investments through transparent and expedient approvals by implementation of an online system, further delegation, rationalization and standardization of the process as part of ease of doing business in March 2020, the environment ministry proposed a draft notification to replace the 2006 EIA. Currently, the notification is at the stage of public comments. This draft raised key concerns among the communities as it primarily provides for a reduction of time period from 30 days to 20 days for the public to submit their responses during a public hearing for any application seeking environmental clearance.

It also requires that the public hearing process be completed in 40 days compared to 45 days under the 2006 notification. In addition to this projects can receive clearance post-facto, i.e. a project operating in violation of the EPA can now apply for clearance and it also increased the discretionary power of state government to waive the process of getting clearance for strategic projects (where it can include long list of projects).

Background of Environment Impact Assessment and Public Hearing

Saving our planet, lifting people out of poverty, advancing economic growth… these are one and the same fight. We must connect the dots between climate change, water scarcity, energy shortages, global health, food security and women’s empowerment. Solutions to one problem must be solutions for all.
– Ban Ki-Moon

India issued the country’s first Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) notification in 1994, under the Environment (Protection) Act (EPA) of 1986. This was later replaced by a modified draft in 2006. In both forms, the EIA performs the important function of assessing and regulating the impact of new projects on the environment and empowers the public to participate in the process of approvals.

The Environmental Impact Assessment report, Environment Management Plan and details of public consultations have to be submitted by the project proponents to the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) for appraisal of the project. The 2006 notification made clearance of a four-step procedure with screening, scoping, public consultation, and appraisal as mandatory steps to be followed by project proponents before clearance could be granted. After these four steps have been followed, the recommendation for acceptance or rejection of EC is sent to the regulatory authority, which is the MoEF for category ‘A’ and State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) for category B projects. Public consultation is the third step in the process of environmental clearance.

The enactment of this procedure was influenced by series of environmental problems which can be exemplified through the cases such as Bichri village where many villages, agricultural land water of the wells, surface water, cattle, and human beings were badly affected because of the industrial operation in the district of the Udaipur, state of Rajasthan and Tanneries case where public hearing before setting up of the factory was considered as an important measure. In the Samarth Trust Case, the Delhi high court had considered EIAs “a part of participatory justice in which the voice is given to the voiceless and it is like a jan sunwai, where the community is the jury”.

Sustainable Development

It is often argued that the process of environment clearance is leading to piling up of files and delays in projects. Developers complain that the EIA regime dampened the spirit of liberalization, leading to red-tapism and rent-seeking. This is the present state of implementation of existing mechanisms in Kerala, the administration took 1,049 days to clear the construction of the IT park project of M/s L&T Tech Park Ltd, instead of 105 days.

Amidst this, in the case of Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs UOI it is held that companies are vital for the country’s development, but having regard to pollution, the doctrine of ‘Sustainable Development’ must be adopted by them as a balancing concept. If final clearance is granted after taking into account the environmental, social, and health concerns, then it can be said that the government is using this process as a tool to ensure sustainability which implies that the delay in clearance should be encountered while balancing it with the above concerns.

Reduced capacity to clearance and administrative inefficiency in granting clearance was often highlighted right from Sterlite to LG polymers’ case which has shown us the dampening spirit of the government towards already existing environmental laws.

Conclusion

A solution to development should also solve the problem of mounting environmental challenges. Introduction of environmental impact assessment is the hallmark of participatory governance in the country and dilution of this in any way hampers the primary aim of promoting a sustainable environment. Encountering bureaucratic inefficiency would always be a welcoming step but granting discretionary powers to the same authority would always raise concerns among the communities.

The post ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT – A MEASURE OF PARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE appeared first on WISER WORLD.

COVID-19 Test Trace and Isolate – Flattening the Curve

Priyanka Arthimalla — Wed, 01 Jul 2020 07:54:53 +0000

India spends less than 2 per cent of its GDP on healthcare, crises like that of the COVID-19 pandemic poses great challenges to our healthcare system. Poor doctor to population ratio and low accessibility of medical facilities are some of the biggest problems faced by the Indian healthcare system.

The first case of novel-coronavirus was reported in the state of Kerala on January 30, 2020 and as of June 31, 2020 the total number of positive cases stands at 5,86,056 including 2,20,728 active cases, 3,47,851 discharged/recovered and 17,411 deaths have been confirmed across India (Source). To effectively prevent the spread of COVID-19, well-organized testing programs, and extensive efforts to isolate infected people, contact tracing and quarantining people they have come in contact with is the need of the hour. Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) on June 31 informed that till then 88,26,585 samples have been tested of which 2,17,931 samples were tested in the last 24 hours.

Right from the outbreak of the COVID-19 several preventive strategies are adopted by the central government in consultation with states. After the lockdown is lifted there lies a huge burden on the states to work on containment of the virus. Recently through social media, COVID-19 comparison ratios are becoming widely popular where certain states and their administration are being widely criticized for their testing rates and inefficiency.

Flatten the Curve – State’s Difficulties.

It is relatively easy to design for the perfect cases, when everything goes right, or when all the information required is available in a proper format
Donald Norman

Adequate testing and proper information are the only means through which public health intervention by the state can be done both diagnostically and therapeutically to flatten the curve. But the figures released cannot be perceived in isolation, they should be tallied with the population (test per million) of the state or test positivity rate in the state which captures the size of epidemic and scale of testing in number.

Delhi has one of the highest testing rates per million but in terms of test positivity rate, it is relatively performing low. Also, the test positivity rates show wide variations in Delhi at 23 per cent positivity rate and Telangana at 18 per cent whereas West Bengal is at 3.5 per cent. Test positivity rates show the prevalence of infection and approach adopted where the epidemic is growing and tests are lagging.

This presents a huge problem with respect to expanding the amount of testing base in the country because even though the testing rates are increasing in the country as a whole, positivity rates are constant at 7.4 to 8.1 per cent. So this presents a picture that there is no proper circulation of data which can show the exact incidence of the disease through which we can estimate whether we are testing enough. Overburdening of Government hospitals and reduced testing needs to be encountered as part of expanding the testing base in the country.

Testing Deregulation as a Way: Private players

With the rise in the risks of community spread of the virus, the Telangana government is often being criticized for its approach of not engaging private labs in testing even after demands pertaining to that was made by ICMR and Telangana High Court.

Engaging private players in the fight can always be treated as a viable option because of efficiency. Also, these players are controlled by an incentive-based environment where performance is always rated. Germany’s success in testing for the virus proves the mechanism engaging the present approach. Germany has been testing more than one hundred thousand people per week since late February. By April 20, it had tested more than twenty-five persons per thousand. Compare this to India, where the testing rate is less than one person per thousand. One reason for Germany’s success is a relatively freer market for medical testing compared to India. Private companies in Germany were able to mass-produce the test kits early on, as they were less burdened by a central regulatory body like the Indian Council of Medical Research.

In the name of quality maintenance, there is a heavy licensing mechanism for private labs inserted by Indian Council of Medical Research but it has forgone the key idea that then government organizations private players predict the probabilities of demand in the community concerning testing as they need to make living out of it. It is just the way they predict stock prices.

Conclusion

The primary question that arises most often in the community is “How many tests are enough tests?” and “When will we reach normalcy?”. The only answer for that would be that all states should ideally keep a watch at the indicators such as positivity rate and condition of spread in an epidemic that needs immediate attention. Thus till vaccine comes into the picture we can flatten the curve only by considering the epidemiological indicators and rampant testing through the inclusion of private players.

The post COVID-19 Test Trace and Isolate – Flattening the Curve appeared first on WISER WORLD.