Background
The Andaman and Nicobar Islands, a remote archipelago in the Bay of Bengal, are renowned for their pristine beaches, rich biodiversity and vibrant indigenous cultures. Much of the rich biodiversity has remained undiscovered in parts of the islands, and the fragile ecosystem faces significant environmental challenges.
The island of Great Nicobar, a part of the island groups that form the Andaman and Nicobar islands, hosts a large variety of this undiscovered biodiversity. In this part of the islands, the Union government has proposed its large-scale infrastructure project (The Hindu, 2024). The INR 72,0000-crore proposed Great Nicobar Project involves developing a trans-shipment port, an international airport, a township development, and a 450 MVA gas and solar-based power plant on the island. The project is expected to cover 130 sq. km. of forest land and has received environmental clearance for stage 1 for the same; in a discussion regarding the project, the government presented that more than 9.6 lakh trees could be expected to be cut for this project (The Hindu, 2024).
The objective behind this ambitious project rests both on its strategic location and its likely impact on tourism. The Great Nicobar Island is located significantly close to the western tip of the Malacca Strait, a significant route for trade purposes. The government believes that building a trans-shipment port as well as an international airport would enhance India’s maritime capabilities, giving it a crucial naval base and air base (Zubair, 2024). This can enhance India’s response to potential threats and strengthen the country’s presence in the region (Zubair, 2024). The strategic position of the project is not only for defence purposes, but the government also intends to build a coastal city that can compete with important financial exchange markets and trade experts like Singapore and Hong Kong. Yet, these promises come at the cost of a high environmental loss to the country.
The project was launched in 2021, piloted by NITI Aayog, following a report that divulged into the advantageous position of the island. The report presented the interest of the island communities as well, stating that in an interconnected world, the communities on the islands could also expect satisfactory jobs, opportunities for self-employment, sufficient income, and affordable and good quality healthcare, among other high-quality welfare services (NITI Aayog, 2019). It forwarded the idea that the development of the island could allow for the creation of these provisions for the islanders as well as strengthen trade and security for the country.
Since the report, critical steps have been taken to get the project off the ground. The government has announced the trans-shipment project with an investment potential of more than INR 10,000 crore, and private companies, including the Adani group, have presented their proposals based on recent trends and studies. The proposal for the airport has also been set in place to invite potential investors and companies. The denotification of the Galathea and the Megapode Wildlife Sanctuary (WLS) also took place in January 2021 (Kalpavriksh, 2024).
The project, which has been in its development stages for over two years, is set to be implemented over the next three decades; however, many environmentalists, indigenous rights advocates, and the opposition have raised significant questions on the project, the environment clearances granted under it, and the risks it poses to the volatile ecosystem of the Great Nicobar Island (GNI).
Environment Concerns for the Islands
The prospect of a development scheme which plans for the promotion of tourism, trade, and national security, although lucrative, comes with big environmental concerns regarding the unique biodiversity as well as geological concerns, especially with the history of the islands. The Andaman and Nicobar Islands and coastal areas are vulnerable to tsunamis generated by earthquakes originating from different sources (Malik et al., 2019).
The devastating December 2004 tsunami, which affected Bangladesh, India, Malaysia, the Maldives, Myanmar, Singapore, Sri Lanka and Thailand, caused severe damage and casualties, the effects of which continue to be felt two decades after its occurrence. The worst hit part of India were the Andaman and Nicobar Islands; the tsunami caused a permanent subsidence of about 15 feet, which has caused the inundation of the land, especially in the bazaar area of the Bamboo flats, submerged the townhouse at the Indira Point, and destroyed the eastern coast (Malik et al., 2007). The volatile nature of the islands and their vulnerability to earthquakes raises the question of the feasibility of such a large-scale project in the area, especially intending to enhance national security.
On the other hand, conservationists have raised concerns about exploiting the rich repository of biodiversity in the area (Sekhsaria, 2023). As part of its approach to preserve the ecosystem of the area, the law prohibits the collection or removal of coral, seashells, or other natural resources by tourists. However, the project location, which is a more remote part of the archipelago, would cause hindrances to the natural ecosystem in many ways. The government concluded its decision and released a statement on the Environment Impact Assessment of the project, stating that the project can be implemented with requisite environmental safeguards and appropriate conservation measures (PIB Delhi, 2024).
The study site visit report, which was carried out before granting the environment clearance, concluded poorly that many of the trees and dense vegetation still need to be identified (Sekhsaria, 2023). Another major point of concern is the Galathea Bay, which is home to unique flora and fauna and is now being covered under the prospected port area, and is also a major nesting site for the leatherback turtles. The leatherbacks are listed as Critically Endangered and are considered vulnerable with a declining population by the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red List of Threatened Species (IUCN Red List). The Galathea Bay was notified as a wildlife sanctuary in 1997 to protect its unique flora and fauna, including its evergreen forests and coralline coast shelters, the giant leatherback turtle, water monitor lizard, reticulated python, and Nicobar megapode among several others (Bajpai, 2023).
Social Impact on Tribal Communities
Beyond the visible loss of flora and fauna, the indigenous tribes of the Nicobar Island, such as the Shompen and Nicobarese, face a major threat to their existence with this project. The Shompen, who are a small group, have been classified as a ‘Primitive Vulnerable Tribal Group’ (PVTG) and have remained largely uncontacted. The tsunami in 2004 caused significant loss of life to both these communities, nearly one-third of the population and 97 per cent of the mangrove cover was lost to the tragedy (Ghosh, 2018).
The Social Impact Analysis of the project has grossly neglected the communities that are directly affected by its implementation; in fact, the whole draft of the report does not refer to the two communities even once (Shagun, 2024). The Social Impact Assessment (SIA) Team, which visited the project site at Campbell Bay Island for the international airport, provides two contradictory facts by stating that although there will be a reported loss of productive land for coconut, betel nut, mango, banana, and spice trees and other common property resources, also states that there will little impact on the communities since the land is not inhabited (AAI, 2024). The report does not take into consideration that parts of these lands, although uninhabited, are currently a part of the ancestral settlements of the Nicobarese people, who were forced to migrate due to the tsunami and have been requesting the government to relocate them to their original land.
These communities also possess traditional knowledge of the deep biodiversity of the region; however, their submissions against the project were not entered into the records. A video report by the noted anthropologist Visvajit Pandya and his team shows that the members of the Shompen community stand against the disturbances to their forested and riparian habitats, and the Great Nicobarese community reiterates their demands to return to their ancestral villages (Ray, 2024).
Even so, the Shompen Policy 2015 of the government clearly states the protection of natural habitats and provides that no ecotourism ventures should be allowed in the region where the community members frequent. It also states that concerning large-scale development proposals for the GNI, the welfare and integrity of the community should be given priority (A&N Gazette, 2015). The manner in which the public consultation for this project has been conducted leaves many questions and doubts. On paper, while the public consultations have been concluded with ‘no objections’ raised by the community members yet, reasonable doubt remains if proper channels for adequate communication have been taken.
A brief look at some infrastructural projects, such as the construction of large dams like Sardar Sarovar Dam or the Polavaram Dam project, reveals the significant displacement of tribal communities in other regions of the country. This presents the reality that even if the infrastructure project is not on designated tribal lands, the ripple effects from the projects lead to a decline in traditional livelihood projects, loss of fertility as well as disruption of cultural heritage. In the case of these isolated communities, especially the Shompen, the loss of culture and practice could mean tragic consequences for the remaining few members of the tribe.
Concerns about the Violation of Environment Process
Despite the previous endeavours of the government over the last few decades to ensure the conservation of unique biodiversity, this project has been granted environmental clearances. Concerns about the violation or lapse of the environmental process have been raised by environmentalists, conservationists, and opposition groups. Amid criticism of the project, the Kolkata bench of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) had put a stay on the implementation of the project in April 2023 for two months. The NGT, in its order, had also made observations and mandated the High Powered Committee to look into the potential destruction of 4518 corals and construction on the coastal regulation zone, which is prohibited (Kumar & Saha, 2024). However, much of the operations of the HPC have remained opaque. The constitution of the HPC has also been questioned, since it comprises no independent experts (Kumar & Saha, 2024). The case remains ongoing in the NGT; however, government spokespersons have been suggesting that the project is underway.
A major point of concern is the lack of transparency in the manner in which the public hearing was conducted. The magnitude of the project includes not just the development of several infrastructure projects, but also environment and forest clearances; however, much of the public hearing only mentions concerns shared on land acquisition, although it does take into account the semi-nomadic livelihood practices of the tribal population that depend largely on the common public land including forests. The land acquisition also does not take into account the appeal by the Nicobarese community to relocate to the Chingenh and Pulo Bhabhi areas, which are proposed sites for the port and airport (Office of Tribal Council, 2022). Between 2020 and 2024, a project of this magnitude seems rushed and understudied. With regards to conservation practices, Galathea Bay, which is now under the region for the port development, has been host to diverse habitats including that of the leatherback turtles, which are extremely sensitive to even light pollutants. After the denotification of the WLS, the National Board for Wildlife’s standing committee directed the Andaman and Nicobar Administration to prepare a management plan for the conservation of the turtle species (Raj, 2023). However, many environmentalists are unsure whether the leatherbacks and other sea turtles will nest and adapt to the new and changing environment. In its natural course, the leatherbacks are known to have a unique adaptability to diverse environments; however, with anthropogenic factors influencing these environments, the questions remain. In addressing the issue of forest cover loss, the government frequently assures compensatory afforestation, as it does with many other infrastructure projects. However, in the case of this particular project, where the area is home to unique, yet-to-be-discovered biodiversity and rare plant species, the full ecological impact remains immeasurable.
Given the irreplaceable nature of these ecosystems, how can the promise of afforestation sincerely compensate for the profound loss of such invaluable natural heritage?
Recommendations
Despite these concerns, the government has doubled down on its plan and responded that due deliberations and processes have been followed in granting the statutory environmental, forest, and coastal clearances (Ghanekar, 2024). The future of the islands and the islanders hangs in the balance as the government and other stakeholders aim to take a middle road in balancing the holistic development and conservation of biodiversity and natural habitat. It is imperative to make the whole process more transparent.
1. Estimation of Loss: The government should comprise an independent and autonomous high-powered committee composed of experts with knowledge and background of the island’s unique topography and history to make a clear estimation of the loss that will be encountered during the development of the project in a transparent manner. The opacity of the environmental process not only threatens the islands but also creates a procedural issue for future ambitious infrastructure projects.
2. Project Feasibility Assessment: The government should also conduct a feasibility study for the proposed project due to the region being a risk-prone seismic zone, which experiences about 44 earthquakes every year. The highest human activity in the region could make it vulnerable to sinking.
- Consultation with Tribal Groups: The government has, till now, consulted the tribal communities on the project based on the land acquisition for the project. Even in its social impact assessment, the government asserts that the private land being acquired will be minimal. However, tribal groups possess traditional knowledge of the plant and animal species of the islands, which is paramount in ensuring a proper conservation effort based on ground realities for habitat restoration and nest protection. The implementation of the project must be done in a timely manner to ensure that a proper study over a significant period of time can be conducted to monitor the movement of vulnerable animals such as the leatherback turtle.
Conclusion
In these changing geo-political situations, especially with the turmoil in South Asia, India must take measures to maintain security and expand trade. However, the cost at which this promise of development comes needs to be reconsidered. This project is not the only trans-shipment port for India. In 2023, the Vizhinjam International Seaport was inaugurated in Kerala with the aim to put the country on the global maritime map (Mishra, 2023). Before the next phases of the project, the government must carefully evaluate whether the strategic benefits of the project outweigh the potential loss to the region’s biodiversity and tribal population.
In conclusion, the Great Nicobar Project presents a complex intersection of economic development, environment conservation, and the rights of indigenous communities. While the government’s reassurances highlight minimal disturbances to the tribal communities, the potential degradation and lack of genuine consultation raise significant concerns. As the custodian of the rights of people, the governance mechanism should warrant extreme caution in proceeding with a project of this magnitude, and especially one that poses a serious threat to a vulnerable community like the Shompen.
The ecological sensitivity of specific regions and fragile habitats, such as the Galatha, necessitates a more thorough impact assessment. Additionally, the demand for recognition of indigenous rights amidst the mega-project emphasises the need for inclusive governance models that prioritise environmental justice, especially with urgent climate needs. By engaging in a more transparent and participatory planning process, the Great Nicobar Project could serve as a model for responsible development, balancing growth with environmental and social equity.
