Every country needs to create jobs, produce essential raw materials like iron and steel, mine minerals and petrochemicals. It is not just about economic growth numbers but about fulfilling our infrastructure, employment, transport, electricity and construction needs. How should this be carried out? Common sense dictates that this process benefit the highest number of people, it be sustainable, it should not destroy our environment, health and long term availability of resources. However, the blame for low economic growth over the last few years is being placed on environment activists and regulations to protect the environment. This forgets the fact huge areas under forests have been cleared for industrial projects (a) over the last 10 years and these industries have also caused harm to local communities by destroying their livelihoods, polluting the environment and causing huge revenue (b) and resource loss to the state as a lot of the minerals are exported without proper records and revenue collection.
In spite of large scale damage- economic, environment and social- caused by mines and possibility of damage from new ones, hydel projects and thermal power plants, economists and industrialists (some in government too) are harping on about reducing or doing away with even the bare minimum protection provided to our environment and people. All they care about is the economic growth figure- either to boost their profits, prospects in elections or to gain support of industrialists.
Even a large scale mine that causes severe environment and health damage or a hydroelectric dam that displaces people will boost GDP since the increased expenditure on health by the people, attempts to relocate, clean up the environment damage and pollution will count towards economic activity. However, the cost of damages caused to the environment, people's lives are borne by the people which is not reflected in the economic growth rates. A legislation to replace the colonial era land acquisition law that was highly exploitative and patently unjust was passed recently. But this too was criticised as anti-industry although it was much needed to prevent displacement, exploitation and unjust treatment of land owners, especially tribals who have been suffering for years under the previous draconian legislation.
But we only hear about investments and economic growth lagging (c) due to environment hawks and courts putting in place a blanket ban on mining sand or iron ore. Nobody identifies the real cause of the problem- mismanagement and discretion caused by corruption in government over the process environment clearances. But if the finger is pointed to this, then vested interests- industrialists, government and economists tied to corporates- won't be able to enjoy a free ride. They had used a broken system to their fullest advantage- they want to keep the system broken so that they can benefit from its weaknesses.
It is this system and its implementation that needs to be fixed. It is this broken system that forced judicial intervention and so called judicial over-activism into the domain of the executive. But judiciary is being derided since it stepped in to fill a void deliberately left or sometimes even created by the executive. It is the same system that encouraged left-wing extremism and popular protests against large scale industries and factories.
We obviously cannot have a system where every case goes to court, every investment project is held up for years or decades for want of environment clearance (the mere uncertainty and dilly-dallying creates disincentives for investment and reduces economic growth), reduces employment opportunities and sets back our infrastructure. What we need to do is to follow the existing laws- Environment Protection Act, Pollution Control Board rules, Forest Conservation Act etc- clearly, implement them properly and transparently and complete the decision making process in a time-bound manner and also establish a mechanism to ensure that there is continued adherence to environment protection norms. This would mean proper regulatory institutions that are not politically manipulated but act in public interest, independent of the government. Here too a middle ground is required, one that balances needs of industry and economy with sustainability, environment protection and rights of the people dependent on the land.
In spite of large scale damage- economic, environment and social- caused by mines and possibility of damage from new ones, hydel projects and thermal power plants, economists and industrialists (some in government too) are harping on about reducing or doing away with even the bare minimum protection provided to our environment and people. All they care about is the economic growth figure- either to boost their profits, prospects in elections or to gain support of industrialists.
Even a large scale mine that causes severe environment and health damage or a hydroelectric dam that displaces people will boost GDP since the increased expenditure on health by the people, attempts to relocate, clean up the environment damage and pollution will count towards economic activity. However, the cost of damages caused to the environment, people's lives are borne by the people which is not reflected in the economic growth rates. A legislation to replace the colonial era land acquisition law that was highly exploitative and patently unjust was passed recently. But this too was criticised as anti-industry although it was much needed to prevent displacement, exploitation and unjust treatment of land owners, especially tribals who have been suffering for years under the previous draconian legislation.
But we only hear about investments and economic growth lagging (c) due to environment hawks and courts putting in place a blanket ban on mining sand or iron ore. Nobody identifies the real cause of the problem- mismanagement and discretion caused by corruption in government over the process environment clearances. But if the finger is pointed to this, then vested interests- industrialists, government and economists tied to corporates- won't be able to enjoy a free ride. They had used a broken system to their fullest advantage- they want to keep the system broken so that they can benefit from its weaknesses.
It is this system and its implementation that needs to be fixed. It is this broken system that forced judicial intervention and so called judicial over-activism into the domain of the executive. But judiciary is being derided since it stepped in to fill a void deliberately left or sometimes even created by the executive. It is the same system that encouraged left-wing extremism and popular protests against large scale industries and factories.
We obviously cannot have a system where every case goes to court, every investment project is held up for years or decades for want of environment clearance (the mere uncertainty and dilly-dallying creates disincentives for investment and reduces economic growth), reduces employment opportunities and sets back our infrastructure. What we need to do is to follow the existing laws- Environment Protection Act, Pollution Control Board rules, Forest Conservation Act etc- clearly, implement them properly and transparently and complete the decision making process in a time-bound manner and also establish a mechanism to ensure that there is continued adherence to environment protection norms. This would mean proper regulatory institutions that are not politically manipulated but act in public interest, independent of the government. Here too a middle ground is required, one that balances needs of industry and economy with sustainability, environment protection and rights of the people dependent on the land.
No comments:
Post a Comment