The Making Of An Ecological Disaster In Great Nicobar

The Great Nicobar mega infrastructure project has raised serious concerns over environmental harm, displacement of native tribes, and risks in an earthquake-prone region.

About the Project

  • A multi-component development plan including a port, township, airport, and power plant.
  • Located in Great Nicobar Island, which is home to unique biodiversity and two indigenous tribes. Project cost estimated at ₹72,000 crore.

Threats to Indigenous Communities

  • Nicobarese Tribe: Their ancestral villages fall in the project zone. Already displaced during the 2004 tsunami, the project will permanently prevent their return.
  • Shompen Tribe (PVTG): The Shompen Policy mandates protection of their welfare and lands. A large portion of their reserve has been denotified. Forest destruction and population influx may endanger their way of life.

Violation of Safeguards

  • National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) not consulted, violating Article 338-A.
  • The Tribal Council’s consent was taken under pressure and later revoked.
  • Social Impact Assessment (SIA) ignored tribal concerns.
  • Forest Rights Act, 2006 provisions were bypassed.

Ecological Concerns

  • Massive Deforestation: Government estimates: cutting of 8.5 lakh trees. Independent estimates: between 32–58 lakh trees may be felled.
  • Flawed Compensatory Afforestation: Planned in Haryana, far from Nicobar’s ecosystem. A quarter of the land earmarked was auctioned for mining. Cannot replace old-growth, biodiversity-rich forests.
  • Coastal and Marine Risks: Part of the port site falls under CRZ 1A (protected turtle nesting and coral reef zone). National Green Tribunal flagged concerns, but a high-powered committee reclassified the zone.

Biodiversity and Wildlife Impact

  • Nicobar long-tailed macaque and sea turtles face severe habitat disruption.
  • Surveys on turtle nesting done in the off-season, making data unreliable.
  • Dugong population assessment used drones unsuitable for deeper waters.
  • Concerns raised by experts were disregarded.

Natural Disaster Vulnerability

  • Earthquake-prone zone with high seismic risk.
  • The 2004 tsunami caused land subsidence of 15 feet.
  • A recent 6.2 magnitude earthquake (July 2025) shows ongoing risks.
  • Building massive infrastructure here endangers people, investment, and ecology.

Way Forward:

  • Ensure transparent consultations with tribal councils and NCST.
  • Respect legal safeguards under FRA and SIA processes.
  • Rethink large-scale construction in fragile, disaster-prone zones.
  • Prioritise eco-sensitive and community-friendly development models.

Conclusion:

The Great Nicobar project, while presented as a development initiative, threatens to displace vulnerable tribes, destroy biodiversity, and expose the region to natural disaster risks. True progress must balance infrastructure with ecological and social justice.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *