The Hindu Business Line : Managing the coast

One of the ironic responsibilities of government is to protect the land from the very people who live on it. The nation’s coastline has some of the densest habitations and also some of the most ecologically fragile lands. The Coastal Regulation Zone rules of 1991 disallowed settlements and economic activity within 500 metres of the shoreline in an attempt to safeguard the ecological balance of the coastal belt. It was as effective a development stopper as its protago nists wanted, but it also turned out to be unrealistic and impractical in too many instances especially in densely populated regions such as those in Kerala. The draft Coastal Management Zone (CMZ) rules take a more flexible view on the width of the coastline that should be regulated. The boundary, or “setback line”, could vary from region to region, depending on “vulnerability” of the coast to sea-level rise, flooding and shoreline erosion. For this policy to come into effect, the entire shoreline will have to be “mapped” for vulnerability. While the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) claims that vulnerability mapping is a scientific approach, it is also imprecise and complicated compared with the prevailing rules that mechanistically use the 500 metre line to separate the development zone from the protected. It could reduce transparency in “coastal management planning”, creating an atmosphere of distrust over development projects that one can do well without.

The MoEF should ensure that the new regime strikes the right balance between improving the economic yield of the coastline and protecting the fragile environment and the people who depend on the sea for their survival. This is best achieved through efforts to elicit the views of the affected parties. If industrial projects in the recent past have attracted controversy, it is because the government did not adequately recognise local communities as stakeholders. In its present form, the policy is too opaque to evoke public participation. The “mapped” coastline will be demarcated into four “coastal management zones”, as in the present policy. While zone four comprises Andaman and Nicobar Islands and zone one “ecologically sensitive areas”, much of the economic interest is expected to centre on zones two and three, these being the well-populated areas.

It is obvious that the CMZ regime should accord pride of place to fisheries. Aquaculture, ship-breaking and tourism projects have faced local opposition on many occasions. While aquaculture stands disallowed by the Supreme Court, eco-tourism deserves encouragement. Not only does the latter present a lucrative employment opportunity for local residents, its benign impact on the environment makes it more commendable than some of the activities proposed in the CMZ draft. Unless a decentralised, participatory model of governance is in place, the CMZ authorities will have considerable discretionary power in deciding what activities are permissible, as dos and don’ts are merely “indicated” in the new notification. The policy is non-committal on allowing power plants, Defence installations and facilities for special economic zones. Such ambivalence is best avoided.

More Stories on : Editorial | Environment

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Waiving prudence

Managing the coast

Bengal and industrialisation

Recalling the era of titans

Paper manufacturing — Is it viable in India?

Why organised retail is good

Black box