Clean and safe environmental is a sine qua non for the well being of human society. The key environmental challenges facing the developing countries, including India, pertain to the nexus of environmental degradation, with poverty on the one hand and economic development on the other hand. Natural resources such as clean air, water and productive land are not only vital for human life but are also the mainstay for economic development. Almost all human activities lead to modifications, often adverse, of the eco-system. If these changes are reasonably well within the carrying capacity of the eco-system, pliability of the system is not adversely affected.
Nonetheless, burgeoning human population’s dependence on limited resources, coupled with ramshackle economic activities culminates in faster pace of depletion of the availability of various natural resources for the current as well as future use. Both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of natural resource allocation framework are important. Effective environmental governance as a subset of the larger good governance, therefore, is the basic premise for the further prosperity of modern society.
Notion of Environmental Governance
Viewed in a broad perspective, governance alludes to the structure and functioning of the government and the institutional arrangements and processes of civil society. A society entailing high degrees of resource scarcity due to of intense competition for raw materials and increasing demand for livelihood resources needs a competent and just environmental governance system. Equity, inclusiveness and attention to the conservation and regeneration of the resource base are generally viewed as essential elements of good governance.
Environmental governance calls for active participation of different stake-holders, with varying degrees of power in different levels of decision-making and working to implement decisions. While keeping in view keeping in view geographical, cultural diversity, equity and gender concerns, the laws and policies should reflect viable reconciliation of developmental and conservation needs of society.
It also devolves on a country’s political leadership as well as the bureaucracy to frame well-informed policy measures concerning sustainable development, keeping in mind the intergenerational inequities of maximizing resource appropriation. Private sector’s significant role in managing the environment cannot be ignored and ‘good environmental governance’ requires convergence between private gain and public good.
No single agency, or government alone, can be expected to take various steps without active involvement of all the sections of society. There is a need to segregate environmental issues in a manner which ensures that effective interventions occur at the appropriate level with the appropriate stakeholders. While focusing on strengthening institutions at all levels of the government, the local level which is usually the weakest link should be insulated. Good governance requires that all the policies and programmes should lead to quantifiable improvement in environmental governance. Modern information and communication technology can be harnessed to facilitate greater access to decision-making.
Concern for Environment
Some 300 international environmental agreements have been adopted since the seminal 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment. Environmental governance and law involves standard-setting, institutions, and processes which guide the interaction of government and non-governmental stakeholders in implementing international agreements and ensuring environmentally sustainable development.
Numerous efforts at the international level have been made to address the major environmental concerns, namely, the Stockholm Conference in June 1972, United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), at Rio de Janeiro, also called the Earth Summit in June 1992.
The achievements of the UNCED consisted of the Rio Declarations, which constitute the most important principles related to environment and development; Agenda 21, which gave the blueprint for development, and the Statement of Principles on Forests. Also, Framework Convention on Climate change and Convention on Biological Diversity had been formed.
The objectives of the World Summit on Sustainable Development included — Global environment – need for collective action for protection of natural resources, international trade – the benefits of trade to be harnessed while also avoiding the dangers of exploitation and pollution, sanitation and drinking water – as access to and availability of drinking water is diminishing, poverty, and AIDS. The concept of sustainable development was first introduced in this conference, which implies a model of development that does not mortgage future benefits for coming generations.
The Johannesburg Summit aimed to find practical ways for humanity to respond to challenges– to better the lives of all human beings, while protecting the environment. The summit also aimed to move away from commitment – of which we have had plenty–to action.
India‘s Environmental Challenges
There prevails rampant pollution due to production and consumption in India in which the poor suffer the most and benefits of development may not trickle down to the poor. A World Health Organization study in Thailand found that the slum dwellers next to the highway have maximum amount of lead content in their blood, which affects people most from 1-6 years. This has a measurable detrimental impact on the IQ of children.
In India, there is a bias towards the marginalized communities through the initiation of projects in the areas inhabited by adivasis, and aboriginals. The causes for such a dismal state of environment, inter alia, are disposal of effluents, disposal of run-off, excessive withdrawal of groundwater, exploitation for religious and social practices perpetual drought.
Wastewater continues to be discharge into natural water bodies. Wastewater management in Mumbai is appalling, especially the solid waste treatment, despite the fact that the state of Kerala has a lower annual budget than the annual budget of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation conventionally engineered wastewater treatment plants are not acceptable to communities large capital investments high maintenance costs.
Environmental Governance in India
Notion of environmental governance is not new in India. Legislative efforts to control pollution dates backs to mid-nineteenth century when pollution was considered as nuisance and act of pollution as negligence. Shore Nuisance Act, 1853; Bengal Smoke Nuisance Act, 1905, Motor Vehicle Act, 1939 were some of the measures introduced in India during the pre-independence period.
In the aftermath of the Stockholm Declaration of 1972, the Government of India enacted 1972 Water (prevention and control of pollution) Act, 1974 – sets up institutions to control water pollution – Central pollution control board & State pollution control boards – mainly for industrial pollution, development and use of command and control regulatory mechanism for pollution regulation.
In 1976, Indian Constitution was amended with regard to Directive principles of State policy and Fundamental Duties – imposed an obligation on the part of the state (Article 48A) and the citizens (Article 51A(g)) to endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country.
The Water Cess Act, 1977 – requires industries to pay cess for water consumption – not so much to reduce water consumption and hence pollution, but to fund the boards Air (prevention and control of pollution) Act, 1981.
Other legislative measures like Bhopal gas leak disaster, 1984 Ministry of Environment and forest, 1985 Environment protection act, 1986 – overarching legislation –empower the central government to take all measures to control pollution and protect the environment. The EIA notification, 1994, requiring major developmental projects undertaken, amended in 1997, to include public hearing and again amended in 2006 to ‘streamline’ the process.
It is a happy augury that Supreme Court and high courts have played active role in enforcement of constitutional and legislative provisions related to environment. Article 21 of constitution – ensuring fundamental right and personal liberty, has been expanded to include right to pollution free environment.
Another laudable step taken by the Apex judiciary is the introduction of public interest litigations – relaxing the strict rules of proof and locus standi. Supreme Court judgments – based on international convention and customary international law, have evolved concepts like Polluter Pays Principle, Precautionary Principle, Inter-generational Equity Principle, Absolute Liability Principle, Public Trust Doctrine and Reversal of Burden of Proof.
Undoubtedly, India has legislation on every possible Environment issues – about 200 separate pieces, but they are not harmonized and cohesive. There is also some problem of science. The biggest problem is diligent implementation of these laws in letter and spirit. Paradoxically, there prevails a piecemeal approach to environmental laws. Some regulations were enacted in isolation –one at a time, and regulations were enacted for different environment media at different time for same industry. Broadly speaking, impact on one media cannot be isolated from another and the resultant outcome is that regulate pollution for one media and discharge it in another – conversion of water pollutant into solid waste – conversion of solid waste into air emissions.
Another glaring drawback is that Environmental Regulations not backed by other supportive policies like natural resource pricing, technology development for small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Ironically, one arm of government works against another – for instance Ministry of Environment and Forests vs. Ministry of industry, Financial Institutions and Ministry of Finance etc. Besides, different intent is expressed by different States in their scramble to elicit investments. This frequently results in the violation of environment regulatory provisions.
Lacunae also lie in implementing environmental regulatory measures. We seem to have adapted a regulatory mechanism which is extremely costly. There also exists a major resource gap in availability and requirements for conventional command and control mechanism. Environment Protection Act in the United States (USEPA) has 50 times more budget than all combined budget for pollution control in India. Still, USEPA is unable to address all issues. It is strengthening alternate regulatory mechanism. Undoubtedly, we in India can never afford the resources required, but it is equally noteworthy that with only command and control mechanism, we are prone to remain under-regulated.
Cost of pollution control in India is more than penalty of non-compliance in existing law. The delay in arriving at judicial settlement is another faulty factor that thwarts the spirit of pollution prevention. During 1974-1988, 1600 prosecution by state boards were filed under water act, only 300 could be decided. Compliance standards are concentration-based and not load-based. Besides, the cost of diluting the effluent is cheaper than treating the effluent. So the polluter goes for the cheap means and rampant corruption keeps the legal measures at bay.
Such a sordid state of affairs calls for rethinking by the government and opens up avenues for civil society to step in to salvage the situation from further going to dogs.
By Dr. Arvind Kumar President India Water Foundation
