In the past few months, two important developments in the area of policy are illustrative of where India is heading in environment protection.
In July, a gazette notification was issued scrapping norms on sulphur emissions from coal plants that were issued in 2015. This effectively abandoned the decade-long attempt to get coal power plants to install flue-gas desulphurisation (FGD) systems so that the emission of noxious sulphur fumes would be controlled. Seventy-nine per cent of India’s coal plants are now exempt from installing these systems, another 11% have to go through a case-by-case review, and only 10% of the plants – those very close to the cities – would have to set up the FGD systems. This marked a closure to repeated postponements of the implementation of norms drawn up in 2015. The justification given now is that Indian coal is low in sulphur content so our attention should lie elsewhere than in installing expensive FGD systems. There was no explanation for why the norms were drawn up in the first place by the same government that has since decided to scrap them.
In August, a 3-year long process to control global plastics production ran aground again when a satisfactory international agreement was not reached. During negotiations, India joined the petroleum producing/exporting countries (naphtha distillate from petroleum is the key ingredient for manufacture of plastics), in opposing control of plastics production. The argument here was that the world would be better off focusing on recycling and waste management.
The underlying argument and rationale in both cases is a familiar one. India’s priority cannot sacrifice development for environment protection and must instead balance environment protection with development. Except that increasingly, more at home than in international fora, the emphasis is not on balance. There is less talk by the government of environmental protection and more of economic growth (which is supposed to result in economic development). Even the argument of “poverty being the biggest polluter” is no longer put forward since we are believed to have more or less eradicated poverty in India.
On the face of it, there is a contradiction in government policy and actions. There is an aggressive push towards certain renewables like solar. On the other side there is an equally aggressive push towards taking on major infrastructure projects with potentially devastating implications for the environment, easing pollution norms, conducting Environment Impact Assessment studies/hearings as a formality and a strong state disapproval of NGO movements against environmental destruction and in favour of environment protection.
But there isn’t a contradiction. We are at a moment when the winds on environment protection have changed direction. What matters most of all in the current thinking is investment in favour of economic growth. If there are directions where there are also benefits for the environment, so be it – as in the case of solar which is to contribute to power generation but is also now a good investment opportunity.
There are many examples of how India now gives priority to economic growth above everything else, but none more extreme in its potential destructive impact and mammoth in size than the Rs 80,000 crore Great Nicobar Infrastructure Development project which visualizes a transshipment terminal, an airport, eco-tourism project and even new towns, in spite of fears about the impacts not just on the flora and fauna but also on the Shompen and Nicobarese indigenous tribes living in the islands. Yet, with limited public debate and scrutiny, the project has received environmental clearance.
In all this it would seem that decades of public discussions on how to balance economic development with environmental protection have come to naught. And that the idea that environmental protection is in fact good for economic growth has been discarded. The priority now is to facilitate faster economic growth, at all cost. Arguments highlighting the need for environmental protection are seen as “anti-development” and “negativist”.
This is not just a change in India. There has been a shift in the US, the biggest economy and the biggest polluter in the world. As we now know, even the lip service to the environment that we see in India is missing in official US government policy. International discussions and negotiations will go on, as on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, but without the involvement of the US. We should be prepared for a backsliding, only hoping that it does not end in irreparable damage before it can be reversed. In India then, we must cope with a change globally and domestically.
The irony is that at a time when the citizen is increasingly aware of and experiencing the damage being done to the air, land and water around them, official action is moving in the opposite direction.
What can people’s groups aspire to in this situation? What can they do in an atmosphere hostile to environment protection and even to expression of concern for the environment as in India today? It looks bleak but precisely for that reason people’s groups must harness the widespread concern citizens feel about environmental degradation to keep the message alive.
There are some things that can be done, all at the local level.
1. Highlight and campaign on issues that affect everyday life around us: air and water pollution, flooding, waste management and recycling, urban transport. The actions can take the form of lobbying, protesting and even simple things like creating material for awareness.
2. At the national level, even in the reduced space available, the focus could be on highlighting national and state issues in the media, preparing educational material and holding public meetings to press for action.
3. There are organisations in specific fields highlighting environment issues related to their sphere of activity. This is an opportunity for established people’s groups working in the area of environment protection to join up with them. For instance, many sports bodies are signing on to climate action and sustainability, a recent example being the Paralympic Committee of India’s decision ahead of the World Para Athletics Championships held in Delhi to be held in September-October 2025. People’s organisations with experience in sustainability can share information and possible agendas for action with such organisations that are just beginning to work in the field.
The global scenario is not looking positive for climate action or for the larger protection of the environment. But the stakes are too high for us to turn despondent and turn away from action altogether.
Add new comment