Nicobar Port Plan From No-Go Zone to Permitted Area | 03 Aug 2024

Source: IE

Why in News?

The Great Nicobar ‘Holistic Development’ Project, spearheaded by the NITI Aayog (National Institution for Transforming India) has stirred considerable debate.
Initially flagged for potentially falling within a no-go zone, the project has now been deemed permissible by a high-powered committee (HPC) appointed by the National
Green Tribunal (NGT).

What is the Great Nicobar ‘Holistic Development’ Project?

• Project Overview: Launched in 2021, the Great Nicobar Island (GNI) project is a mega infrastructure initiative aimed at transforming the southern end of the Andaman and Nicobar islands.
• Components:
  • Trans-shipment Port: An International Container Trans-shipment Terminal (ICTT) expected to bolster regional and global maritime economy.
  • Greenfield International Airport: Facilitating global connectivity.
  • Township Development: New urban development that may include a Special Economic Zone.
  • Power Plant: A 450 MVA gas and solar-based power plant.
• Strategic Location: Positioned near the Malacca Strait, a key maritime route connecting the Indian Ocean to the Pacific Ocean.
  • The project aims to facilitate the deployment of additional military forces, larger warships, aircraft, missile batteries, and troops.
  • Close to the Malacca Strait, the upgrade is crucial for India’s strategic interests, particularly against the backdrop of increasing Chinese presence and influence in the region.
• Project Impact on Environment:
  • Deforestation: The project will involve the felling of approximately 8.5 lakh trees in the rich rainforests of Great Nicobar.
  • Wildlife Displacement: The de-notification of the Galathea Bay Wildlife Sanctuary and the declaration of a “zero extent” eco-sensitive zone for Galathea National Park threaten critical habitats.
  • Ecological Destruction: Home to unique and threatened tropical evergreen forest ecosystems, the construction may cause irreversible damage to the island’s biodiversity, including endemic species like the Nicobar Megapode and leatherback turtles.
  • Biodiversity Protection: The project contradicts India's commitments under the Convention for Biological Diversity to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030 and protect areas of high ecological importance.
• Concerns of the Local Tribes: The Shompen and Nicobarese tribes, primary inhabitants of the island, face significant displacement and cultural disruption.
  • Despite claims of protecting tribal interests, local communities have not received adequate responses to their concerns and requests for relocation.
  • Local communities withdrew their consent for the project in November 2022, which is necessary for its implementation as the land is part of the tribal reserve.
• Technical and Legal Issues:
  • Seismic Risks: Great Nicobar rests on a major fault line and is prone to earthquakes and tsunamis. There has been no comprehensive risk assessment conducted for these
    natural hazards.
  • Inadequate Reports: The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report lacks compliance with several Terms of Reference and fails to address critical environmental and
    social impacts.
  • Legal Challenges: Many approvals and exemptions granted under various laws protecting forests, tribal rights, and coastal ecosystems could face legal challenges in
    courts and tribunals.

Why was the Project Previously Flagged in a No-Go Zone?

• Initial Information: The Andaman & Nicobar Coastal Management Authority stated that the port, airport, and township spanned 7 sq km in the Island Coastal Regulation Zone-IA (ICRZ-IA), where port activities are prohibited.
• Environmental Concerns: The ICRZ-IA areas ecologically sensitive zones including mangroves, corals, coral reefs, sand dunes, mudflats, marine parks, wildlife habitats, salt marshes, turtle and bird nesting grounds
  • Permitted Activities in ICRZ-IA: Eco-tourism activities like mangrove walks and natural trails, Roads and roads-on-stilts for defence and strategic projects, with necessary permits.

What led to the Reclassification to a Permitted Area?

• The High-Powered Committee (HPC) appointed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) concluded that no part of the project falls in the ICRZ-IA area based on a "ground-
  truthing exercise" by the National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management (NCSCM).
  • The NCSCM concluded that no part of the project fell under the ICRZ-IA area, confirming it was within the permissible Island Coastal Regulation Zone-IB (ICRZ-IB) area.
• HPC’s Conclusions and Recommendations:
  • Coral Colonies: The HPC agreed with the Zoological Survey of India's recommendation to translocate 16,150 out of 20,668 coral colonies. Continuous observation of
    sedimentation for the remaining 4,518 colonies was recommended.
  • Baseline Data Collection: The HPC determined that one-season baseline data collection (excluding the monsoon season) was adequate for assessing the environmental
    impact of the project, as per the EIA notification, 2006.
  • Environmental Compliance: The HPC’s findings were submitted to the NGT bench by the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Integrated Development Corporation (ANIIDCO).
    • ANIIDCO assured that no activity is proposed within the ICRZ-IA area, in line with specific and general conditions of the environmental clearance.
    • ANIIDCO did not disclose the minutes of HPC’s meetings, citing the project's defence and strategic nature.

What are the Stakeholders’ Responses to the Project?

• NGT’s Role: A special bench of the NGT formed the HPC to revisit the project’s environmental clearance, addressing concerns raised by environmentalists.
• Activist’s Plea: Environmental activists filed a plea seeking the exclusion of the project’s activities from ICRZ-IA and disclosure of HPC’s recommendations and
  meeting minutes.
• Government Response: The Andaman & Nicobar administration has yet to respond to queries regarding changes in the project’s siting and differing information about its
  extent in ICRZ areas.
• Political and Public Outcry: Political leaders questioned the change in land categorization and demanded transparency regarding the new information that led to this
  change.
  • There are demands for a thorough impartial review of the proposed projects, including by concerned Parliamentary committees.

Way Forward

• A comprehensive and transparent EIA should be conducted by an independent body to assess the project's full environmental and social implications.
• Effective measures to minimize the project's environmental impact, such as habitat restoration, carbon offsetting, and wildlife conservation, should be implemented.
• A participatory approach involving the Shompen and Nicobarese tribes is essential. Fair and equitable resettlement plans should be developed.
  • Regular public consultations and disclosure of project information are crucial to building trust.
• Explore alternative development models that prioritize sustainability and minimize environmental impact.
  • Establish a robust monitoring system to track the project's environmental and social impacts.

Read more: Reimagining Andaman and Nicobar Islands