Lax easing: change system, share benefits

In the absence of stringent laws and strong institutions, mining remains one of the most unregulated of activities in the country despite its huge social and environmental fallouts. It may

be true that it takes a lot of time to get a mine lease sanctioned after doing the rounds of a number of byzantine government departments, but once permission is granted there is almost no

capacity within the government to regulate mining. Mining is one of the very few sectors in which laws relating to environmental and social fallouts have not been codified in detail. The

environmental law that has been tailored for mining, under the Mineral Conservation and Development Rules, 1988, is a two-page collection of empty statements which leaves ample scope for

mine-owners and regulators to do nothing. A sample: "_Wherever possible_ the waste rock, overburden, etc. shall be backfilled into the mine excavations with a view to restoring the land

to its original use _as far as possible."_ Multiplicity Then there is institutional confusion. The Indian Bureau of Mines (ibm) and state pollution control boards (spcbs) are

responsible for monitoring environmental fallouts. ibm also clears mine plans and mine closure plans, but the moef clears environment impact assessments (eias). With overlapping

jurisdictions, ibm and spcbs do not have enough manpower to monitor large-scale mines, leave alone small, medium and illegal ones. In Orissa, of the 300-odd officially operating mines, the

spcb has only 172 under its regulatory net. The situation is no different in Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh. spcbs have stopped taking legal action against violators, because procedures are

time-consuming, they don't have legal capacity and violators usually walk. To stop large-scale violations, credible deterrence, rather than legalistic nitpicking, is essential.

ibm's inspection reports show that on an average it visits 80-90 per cent of officially operating mines annually, finding about 50 per cent of them violating the law. It prosecutes

about 10 per cent of violators. Less than 1 per cent of the violators have operations suspended. Mine closure is another problem area. It was only in 2003 that closure plans were made

integral to the clearance process in India. But what we see in closure plans are pits disguised as water bodies and waste dumps as plantations. Internationally, mine closure is recognised as

a major component of mining and 'starting with closure in mind' is established practice. It is estimated that the environmental and social costs of closing and rehabilitating old

and abandoned mines in the developed world are likely to be in trillions of dollars, far beyond the capability of mining companies. Governments will have to foot the bill. This has prompted

regulators to ask companies for comprehensive financial assurances. Indian policymakers have not learnt the lessons. Financial assurance under the law is Rs 15,000-20,000 per hectare. This

is not enough for proper earthwork, forget environmental, social and economic rehabilitation. What rehab? The track record on land acquisition, displacement and rehabilitation is even worse,

if that is possible. People displaced from their land decades ago have not been compensated yet. Some have faced multiple displacement. Though there are no reliable official statistics, but

estimates for 1950-91 show that of all development projects mining has displaced the second highest number of people--25.5 lakhs, of whom 55 per cent are members of Schedule Tribes. Not

even 25 per cent of those displaced have been resettled, forget rehabilitation. So, while the miners prosper the people whose land yields the riches remain poor. In such a scenario, social

unrest and conflict is natural--as mining areas of Orissa, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Karnataka and Goa have demonstrated. There is a general feeling, borne out by numbers, that displacement

and environment degradation by mining aggravates poverty. States like Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Orissa, which have a high level of dependence on mineral resources, have lower per capita

incomes, higher levels of poverty, lower growth rates and higher levels of mortality, malnutrition and morbidity. In other countries, too, a high level of mineral dependence is often

associated with retarded economic performance and poor development outcomes. This phenomenon has been given a name--"resource curse". This has led to new thinking about ways in

which mineral wealth can be converted into sustainable development benefits for local communities. Most new approaches are built around a framework in which compensation, benefit-sharing,

community development and mine closure are central. The assumption is simple: the wealth generated from mining is not for companies and the government alone, places and people affected by

mining must share its benefits. If India wants mining to create prosperity, we must follow this path.