INTRODUCTION
This is an analysis of the existing literature on the environment impact assessment in mining cases.
Academic Journals
- Dutta, R., & Ghosh, S. (2021). "Weakening India's Environmental Regulations." Economic & Political Weekly, 45, 20-24.
The Dutta and Ghosh paper provides a comprehensive analysis of India's receding environmental regulatory regimes. The authors sufficiently clarify the legislative reforms that have progressively revoked environmental safeguards, especially in the context of mining. Their legal acumen adds greatly to the study, providing compelling evidence of regulatory measures being rolled back.
However, the article has a relatively narrow perspective that fails to critically analyze the economic interests driving the policy changes. The authors could have made a more compelling case by outlining reasonable alternatives that balance the environmental issues and the needs of development. The article can be made more robust by comparing the experience of other emerging economies facing similar issues.
2. Kohli, K., & Menon, M. (2019). "The Façade of Public Hearings: Reflections from Environmental Impact Assessments in India." Economic & Political Weekly, 25, 13-18.
This piece offers an unflinching critique of the performative nature of public hearings in India's EIA system. Drawn from detailed fieldwork, Kohli and Menon show forcefully how public consultations are called forth as procedural rites rather than lived democratic practice.
The primary drawback is the heavy reliance on qualitative case studies, which do not have sufficient quantitative data required to determine patterns across different regions and sectors. The authors might have strengthened their argument if they had established parameters to examine the efficacy of public engagement and explored good models of community participation that could be scaled up to be used in the Indian scenario.
3. Menon, M., & Kohli, K. (2019). "Environmental Decision-Making: Whose Agenda?" Economic & Political Weekly, 41, 1005-1008.
Menon and Kohli offer a critical analysis of power structures in environmental decision-making, showing the manner in which political and corporate interests override environmental concerns. Their critique of institutional tendencies is central to understanding regulatory failure.
The article's weaknesses are too theoretical a point of reference that sometimes fails to provide descriptive illustrations, as well as too little focus on comparative international analysis. The authors could have made their analysis more enriching by proposing pragmatic institutional reforms based on successful international best practices to counterbalance the power imbalances they describe.
4. Sinha, D., & Arora, S. (2015). "Environmental Clearance in India: Procedures, Policies, and Challenges." Indian Journal of Law & Justice, 6, 78-83.
This article is a detailed critique of the Indian environmental clearance process highly useful for refining understanding of procedural details. Sinha and Arora successfully chart the regulatory landscape and identify significant implementation-related issues.
But the article demonstrates a profound lack of restraint in its untested presumption of the theoretical sufficiency of the procedural approach. The authors seem to assume without question that the existing system would function well if it were better administered, rather than examining underlying structural defects. A more skeptical scrutiny of the design of the regulatory system itself would be an upgrade, rather than focusing predominantly on the deficits of implementation.
5. Bhullar, L. (2020). "Making EIA Accountable: The Case for Legal Standing and Judicial Review." Economic & Political Weekly, 28, 98-105.
Bhullar's article is a detailed legal examination of Indian EIA's accountability mechanism that needs firmer legal basis and judicial examination. Doctrinally, the article is most solid in examining the case law.
The piece's biggest flaw is that it fails to focus on the real-world implications of broadening judicial review in a system already beset by a heavy workload. The author could have offered more insight into the possible negative effects of more litigation, such as delays in implementing projects and uncertainty among investors. The piece would be improved by the inclusion of a discussion on other mechanisms of accountability outside the courts.
6. Warrier, S. (2022). "Conflict of Interest in Environmental Impact Assessment: A Case Study of Mining Projects." Environmental Law Review, 12, 87-91.
Warrier here presents a critical evaluation of the in-built conflict of interest in India's EIA consultant regime. The article is very effectively demonstrating how economic relations between project sponsors and EIA consultants compromise the independence of evaluations.
The main shortcoming of the article lies in its lack of adequate attention to structural conflicts, not adequately discussing possible solutions. The writer could have improved the analysis by examining different consultant selection and compensation models applied in other areas of alternatives. Furthermore, the addition of a quantitative analysis that connects consultant funding sources with evaluation results would make the conclusions of the article more transparent, allowing for a better presentation of patterns of bias.
7. Jain, P., & Dutta, R. (2018). "Cumulative Impact Assessment: A Missing Link in Environmental Assessment Process in India." Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 14, 138-142.
This article points out an important lacuna in India's environmental impact assessment policy: the lack of cumulative impact assessment. The authors cogently reason that assessing projects in isolation will not consider the aggregate environmental impacts, particularly in areas with extensive mining activities.
Weaknesses of the article include the fact that there is not enough methodological advice on how to implement cumulative appraisal in India and not enough thought about the institutional capacity needed. The authors might have made more specific recommendations for incorporating cumulative impact analysis into the current regulatory framework, including practical considerations such as availability of data and analytical capacity.
Books and Other Literature
- Chandrasekhar, C.P., & Ghosh, J. (2018). "Mining in India: Social and Environmental Costs." Pages 54-56.
This book offers a comprehensive analysis of the economic as well as environmental expenses of extraction practices in India. The authors combine economic analysis with environmental needs perfectly, thus offering a complete analysis of the actual expenses of engaging in extraction practices.
Its limitation is partly outdated empirical evidence within a rapidly changing regulatory framework and a failure to emphasize regional heterogeneity in mining impacts across states. Further in-depth case studies of effective recipes for sustainable mining projects would be a contribution to the book. The critical approach of the authors also sometimes results in the failure to provide sufficient emphasis on sound economic justification for resources development.
2. Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India. (2010). "Environmental Impact Assessment Guidance Manual For Mining of Minerals."
This official guidebook of practice establishes methodological guidelines for conducting EIAs on mining projects. It is helpful for its comprehensive coverage of technical requirements and procedural guidelines for practitioners.
The guidebook is highly limited, most notably by its prescriptive nature, whereby process compliance is prioritized over the development of substantial environmental effects. It reflects a lack of stringent analysis compared to the built-in limitations of project-by-project evaluation and lacks adequate recommendations regarding the management of cumulative effects, biodiversity concerns, and climatic conditions. As a formal government publication, it does not of course address the institutional conflict of interest and power disparities inherent in the regulatory process.
3. Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide. (2010). "Guidebook For Evaluating Mining Project EIAs."
This guidebook offers an international approach to assessing mining EIAs, with comparative data and technical advice of universal applicability. It is strong in its ability to convey scientific complexities in simple language understandable to non-specialist readers, i.e., civil society groups tracking mining projects. Shortcomings of the guidebook are that it lags behind in addressing the atypical regulatory environment and Indian socioeconomic realities. While the guidebook provides helpful general adages, it fails to address India's unique enforcement, governance, and institutional capacity issues in a serious manner. The book's global orientation occasionally presents recommendations requiring drastic adaptation to be effective in country-specific contexts.
References
- Chakraborty, R. N., & Mukherjee, S. (2017). Environmental impact assessment in India: A comparative analysis of mining and industrial projects. Journal of Environmental Management, 203(2), 615-628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.04.067
- Anjaneyulu, Y. (2013). A critical analysis of environmental impact assessment process in India. International Journal of Environmental Sciences, 3(4), 1382-1406. https://doi.org/10.6088/ijes.2013030400041
- Sengupta, R. (2016). Environmental clearance and the mining sector in India: Challenges and opportunities for sustainable development. In S. K. Singh & A. K. Dhawan (Eds.), Environmental law and policy in India (pp. 287-315). Oxford University Press.
- Rajaram, T., & Das, A. (2010). Screening for EIA in India: Enhancing effectiveness through ecological carrying capacity approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(1), 140-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.08.024
- Petts, J., & Leach, B. (2000). Evaluating Methods for Public Participation: Literature Review (R&D Technical Report E135). Environment Agency, Bristol.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
