How the Environmental Impact Assessment is different in various countries and drawing

from its comparison, how our laws can be improved?

Indian model

India has adopted a preventive mode of controlling and containing the environmental problems.
One of the reasons to adopt this model is the Bhopal gas catastrophe known to be world’s worst
industrial disaster, and judicial pronouncements thereafter. Had there been the EIA law in
force, this would not have happened. This incident taught us many lessons including that we
must have preventive laws and regulations rather than curative ones. We even did not learn
from the US experience that made EIA mandatory, for the developmental projects significantly
affecting the environment, long back in the year 1969. During the course of time, public also
became aware of these requirements and the Central Government with a notification in 1994
introduced EIA for the projects mentioned therein. The regulation was applicable if the
quantum of investment were above the threshold, i.e. 50 crores in the beginning and later on
raised it to $100 crores. The applicants of new projects/industries as well as those proposing
modernisation of the already existing industry were to submit EIA of the proposal to the
Pollution Control Board with the management plan. This EIA was to be evaluated by the Expert
Committee that would give its recommendation. In 1997, a significant amendment was made
to include “public hearing” as a part of EIA. It laid down the detailed procedure of public
hearing and the persons and organisations to participate in it. It was made compulsory to
include three senior citizens in the panel to conduct “public hearing”. The notification of 1997
also required one month’s public notice of public hearing to residents of the area in which the
proposed project will start. The public notice must be given in the language which the residents
of the area know. Both were made compulsory. These two notifications gave impetus to the
environment protection movement and Were in line with the developments in international
environmental law; for example, Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a
Transboundary Context, I991.

In USA

The mandatory requirement or producing an environmental impact statement (EIS) along with
proposals for federal or state action with a significant impact upon the environment, is one of
the most exhilarating exercises in active public involvement in USA. The EIA statement is
prepared after consultation with experts, state agencies, other specialists and the general public.
Publication of the EIS affords the public an opportunity to acquaint themselves with
environmental consequences of a proposed project. Familiarization with the process enables
them to assess the rationale behind the decision.1 It is an exercise in information
communication.2By enacting NEPA, USA had converted the EIA into a powerful instrument
of public participation in environmental decision making. The executive orders issued by the
President exhorted the agencies to develop impact procedures in such a manner as to ensure
timely public information, elicit views of interested parties and provide for public hearing.3
The guidelines issued by the Council on Environment Quality laid down the specific
requirement that draft and final statements should be made available to the public. The draft
EIA statement is to be circulated for 45 days for public comments and review, and no decision
on the proposed action may be made until at least 30 days after the final EIA statement is
published, or 90 days after the publication of the draft EIS, whichever is later. The recent trend,
therefore, is that public hearing is imperative for all environmental decisions. Environmental
questions have to be investigated and decided on the basis of public scrutiny and deliberations.
Active consultation with the general public is also adopted in coastal zone4 management in
USA.

In United Kingdom

Inquiries are common phenomena in the United Kingdom. The control of pollution Act 1974
provides for a local inquiry with a view to preventing or dealing with pollution, or noise at any
place. Waste disposal plans are prepared only after consultation with members of the Public.
Consent for the discharge of pollutants into a stream or to the sea is given only after publication
of notice of consent application and consideration of written representations. The register of
conditions is open to public, who have facilities for obtaining copies of entries. Voluntary
organizations for environmental protection and even individual with environmental
conscience, thus, get an opportunity to examine the consent application and to involve
themselves actively in the environmental assessment process. The local administration which
decides the usage of land and plans the development of the town are also using the method of

1
National Environment Policy Act, s. 102(2) (c)
2
JF Garner, Environmental Impact Statement in US & UK.
3
Executive Order 11514 as amended by Executive Order 11991. For text, see Environmental Law Reporter
(Statutes and Regulations), p. 45003.
4
Coastal Zone Management Act 1972, ss. 311, 317
EIA and the projects which are undertaken by the national government such as highways,
electricity power stations also needs to comply the rules and regulations of the EC.

The Environmental Protection Act 1990 is an illustration of a positive policy of democratic

polity in recognising the right of the people to have information in environmental decision-
making. In different areas of environmental control enforcing authorities have to maintain a
register. Information included in the register varies from notices, applications and directions to
authorization, consent, license, decision and punishment. However, information prejudicial to
the interests of national security or to commercial confidentiality is excluded from being
entered in the register. In the case of control over genetically modified organisms5, damage to
the environment is also a consideration for this exclusion.

In other countries

In countries where environmental protection measures have been established, the concept of
publication is applied in the impact assessment process, as well as in licensing and planning
procedures6. The Nature Protection Law of France is an example. In case public hearing was
not given in an impact study, the fact that such a study was made, is to be notified. The laws in
Germany relating to atomic energy and emission control impose on the licensing agency an
obligation to announce a proposed project in the Official Gazette, and also in the local
newspapers. A short description of the project relating to a nuclear Power plant along with the
safety report is to be published for the sake of public scrutiny for two months. There are similar
provisions in atomic energy legislations of USA and Switzerland, which require license for
installation of atomic energy plant. The laws in Germany and Switzerland also provide for
public information and participation in regional planning procedures enabling recognized
associations and conservation organizations to give their inputs in the preparation of
programmes and plans.

Although they were not involved in litigation against government projects, citizen
organizations in the former USSR did play a key role in securing more effective environmental
protection. An American expert who visited the former USSR to study its environmental
processes, observed that the activities of environmental groups included comments on draft

5
lbid, s. 123.
6
Lothar Gundling, ‘Public Participation in Environmental Decision Making’
legislation, inspections to assist environmental law enforcement, spreading awareness,
endeavours in beautification, influencing facility sitting, and promoting the establishment of
parks and preservation of wildlife. With immunities and legal protection, nature protection
societies have made surprise inspection of polluting factories, taken samples of air and water
and had them analysed in government laboratories. There are certain interesting instances. A
local society refused to approve a brewery under consideration; and a citizen group of
Kazakhstan objected to the continuance of fish factory that affected bird life near a lake. The
government supported the environmental groups in all these instances. The Russian technique
appears more people friendly than the models of public participation followed in other
countries.
The EIA is the very necessary part to establish a healthy relation with the environment as it
helps in control of the pollution, waste management etc. It is important for getting the idea of
current scenario in the society and has various rules and regulations in different countries. It
helps in reviewing the development work whatsoever is going on in the country and if it is
harmful or dangerous for the environment or not. And if any adverse effect is found then the
EIA helps in minimizing it. Many countries has the provision for NGO’s to handle such
assessments which is being carried out for the passing of the project and interesting fact is that
they can participate in any stage, at the discretion of the committee. The basic documents which
are produced in the assessment are project description and EIA statement. But in some
countries a register is maintained in which all the issues are recorded and public decision is
also mentioned. Copy of the register is available for the general public at a nominal cost. The
basic difference in EIA of different countries is that free and fair opinion is not given by the
common public as use of force, coercion and threat takes place which results in lack of
participation and thus some harmful projects are passed. The government should take bold step
and regulate the laws to handle this situation. In the developing countries the boundary of EIA
is within the territorial land but in the developed countries it is extended to the coastline and
mountains with emphasis of constructing dams and performing mining activities. In countries
where development is required has to put more observance on the projects which is going to
take place in the recent time and because of this the companies/ builders are acquiring the land
before itself rather than waiting for the passing of the project by the competent authority but in
the developed countries it is necessary to get the EIA report before the beginning of the project.
Thus it should be made mandatory to not invest time, money and worker into the project before
the approval. If the proper approval is not taken then the matter will be tried in court and then
again it will be sent to reviewing authority & after which the court should decide the future of
the project after getting the report.
It ends by arguing that review and other efforts to address the problems of environmental
regulation thus need to go beyond addressing the procedural lacunae. A discussion on what
kinds of outcomes we would like to see from environmental regulations is important along with
interactions that deliver dignity, equality and respect to all citizens. The government’s proposal
to change environmental regulations will achieve great difference as many illegal projects are
going on which is harming the environment at a greater level.