Concerns Rise Over Proposed Changes to Green Clearance Bodies

The Centre's proposal to establish standing bodies for expedited green clearances in states and Union territories raises concerns about member selection criteria. Critics warn the move may weaken project scrutiny, with potential environmental impacts overlooked by bureaucrats focusing on 'ease of doing business'. Experts stress the importance of specialized ecological oversight.

The introduction of standing bodies by the Centre to streamline the green clearance process in states and Union territories is stirring debate among experts. Concerns focus on the criteria for appointing members to these new bodies, potentially compromising the scrutiny of environmental projects.

According to a draft notification from March 5, the proposed Standing Authority on Environment Impact Assessment (SAEIA) and Standing Committee on Environment Impact Appraisal (SCEIA) would replace existing state institutions if they become inactive. Critics argue these new bodies, comprised of government-appointed 'ex officio members,' may lack the domain expertise necessary for thorough environmental evaluation.

While efficiency in granting clearances is a priority, experts emphasize the need to avoid overlooking vital ecological factors. Potential conflicts of interest and the bypassing of specialized knowledge are highlighted as key risks. The legal framework and criteria should consider the ecological stakes, ensuring that environmental integrity is preserved.

(With inputs from agencies.)