The Great Nicobar Island Development Project (2021): A Contentious Approach To Sustainable Development – IMPRI Impact And Policy Research Institute

Policy Update
Srishtistuti Roy

Background

Launched in 2021, the Great Nicobar Island (GNI) project is a Rs.72,000 crore mega project under the Holistic Development of Islands program, aimed towards transforming the southernmost island of the Andaman and Nicobar archipelago into a hub of trade, tourism, and strategic military presence. The project was launched after a feasibility report–commissioned by the NITI Aayog to Haryana-based AECOM India–identified the island’s advantageous equidistance from the ports of Colombo in the southwest, and Klang and Singapore in the southeast.

The GNI is also close to the Malacca Strait—the main waterway which connects the Indian Ocean to the Pacific—as well as the Sunda Strait, the Lombok Strait, and the Coco Islands—all of which are important choke-points in the Indo-Pacific region, in need of immediate bolstering due to China’s increasingly assertive military presence.

The project plan encompasses developing an international container transshipment terminal (ICTT) at the Galathea Bay, a greenfield international airport, a township, and a 450 MVA gas and solar-based power plant on the island. The ICTT is envisioned to transform the island into a key participant in the regional as well as global maritime economy of cargo transshipment. It is also aligned with the Maritime India Vision 2030 and is one of the key projects under the Amrit Kaal Vision 2047. 

Map 1: Location of Four Interlinked Projects. Source: Pre-feasibility Report, AECOM India. March, 2021.

While the initiative has been welcomed by many, including national security strategists and the settlers on the island, it has gained much negative traction among wildlife conservationists, environmental rights groups, some tribal councils of the island, and the Opposition in the parliament. The GNI is home to the particularly vulnerable tribal group (PVTG), the Shompens, who have lived in a tribal reserve in minimal contact with outsiders for centuries pursuing their semi-nomadic hunter-gatherer way of life.

It has also been inhabited by the small population of the coast-dwelling Nicobarese tribal people who had been relocated to Campbell Bay and other parts of the island from their ancestral lands after the 2004 tsunami. The GNI project is set to pose a massive threat to the survival of the Shompens and desecrate the sanctity of the Nicobarese peoples’ ancestral lands.

Additionally, the Galathea Bay is one of the primary nesting sites in the world of the endangered Leatherback Turtles and the Nicobar Megapode, both of which are listed under Schedule I of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. The island is also endowed with uniquely rich biodiversity, and houses various endemic species of animals, tropical virgin forests,  and over twenty thousand coral colonies. In 1989, over 85% of the Great Nicobar was declared a biosphere reserve and in 2013, it was included in the UNESCO’s Man and Biosphere Program for harboring a wide spectrum of ecosystems. The GNI project will undoubtedly induce the loss of this biodiversity which will be incommensurable.

                                                                Map 2: Map Prepared by Manish Chandi with A&N Forest Dept. GIS Cell, 2018. Source: Maktoob Media

After denotifying the Galathea Bay as a protected area in 2021 and acquiring the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change’s (MoEFCC) stage-I forest clearance in 2022, the project is presently set to procure 16,610 hectares (15%) of land including forests, which will lead to the cutting of approximately 9.6 lakh trees. This will not only negatively impact the carbon sequestration capacity of the region but will also adversely impact India’s carbon emission goals for 2030.

Until recently, the project and its environmental clearance had been facing legal scrutiny at the National Green Tribunal for alleged noncompliance with the Forest Rights Act, 2006 and inadequacies in the social and environmental impact assessments. Thus, despite the ambitious goals of the GNI development project, it has been embroiled in contentions due to the irreversible socio-environmental impacts that it will set in motion. 

Functioning

The GNI project is proposed to be implemented in three phases during a thirty year period. A host of stakeholders and protocols are involved in the implementation of the project.

• The Andaman and Nicobar Islands Integrated Development Corporation (ANIIDCO) has been assigned as the nodal agency for coordinating the project, including infrastructure, land acquisition and relocation, and addressing the concerns of the local communities. 
• The Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways (MoPSW) has been tasked with overseeing the transhipment port project and it has assigned the Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port in Kolkata as the nodal agency for coordinating various public-private partnerships for its construction which is expected to be complete by 2028. Parallelly, the Airports Authority of India has been designated as the nodal agency for the greenfield airport project.  
• Further, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the project was carried out by the Hyderabad-based Vimta Labs, and the Environmental Clearance (EC) for the first phase of the project was granted by the MoEFCC only after the EIA’s findings along with an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) had been shared with all stakeholders involved at a public hearing in January 2022. In response to Congress General Secretary, Jairam Prakash’s statement, Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav clarified in August 2024 that the Chairman of the Tribal Council (Great Nicobar & Little Nicobar Island), Barnabas Manju had been present at the hearing on behalf of the tribal communities of the island and had raised no objections. 
• Additionally, a public hearing for the Draft Social Impact Assessment (SIA) report for the proposed international airport on the Great Nicobar island was held in Campbell Bay in June 2024. Presently, an expert group–including two external social experts–is evaluating the study. 
• Responding to a review petition filed by environmentalist Ashish Kothari at the National Green Tribunal, the ANIIDCO filed an affidavit in August 2024 citing findings of the National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management (NCSCM) which concluded that the project no longer fell in a no-go fragile coastal zone. No construction was previously permitted in the Galathea Bay since it fell under the category of a Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) 1A due to its ecological sensitivity. However, recent findings of the NCSCM have now identified that the transshipment port will be constructed in a CRZ 1B area of the Galathea Bay, where no evidence of turtle nesting has been found. Consequently, the GNI development project can proceed without causing  any ecological disturbance. 
• To make up for the loss of forest cover due to the diversion of 130.75 sq/km of tropical forest on the island, the Minister of State in the MoEFCC Ashwini Choubey has said that compensatory afforestation in arid, degraded landscapes near urban areas would be of greater ecological value. Therefore, compensatory afforestation has been proposed in Haryana in the ratio of 1:10. The Minister further clarified that out of the total area proposed for diversion, 65.99 sq/km has been earmarked for green development where no tree felling is envisaged.
• To compensate for the loss of biodiversity, three new sanctuaries for the Leatherback turtles, displaced corals and Megapodes have been planned at Little Nicobar Island, Meroe Island and Menchal Island respectively, with restricted access.
• Additionally, since the thermal power plant is closest to the Shompens’ habitation, a provision of geofencing (barbed wires) and setting up surveillance towers has been proposed for their protection and safety. Further, in August 2024 Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav announced that 76.98 sq km of land shall be re-notified as tribal reserve to compensate for the 73.07 sq km of tribal land being utilized for the project.
• The EC letter also mandates the formation of three Monitoring Committees to oversee the implementation of the EMP: (i) a committee to oversee pollution related matters (ii) a committee to oversee biodiversity-related matters, and (iii) a committee to address the welfare and concerns of the Shompen and the Nicobarese communities.

Impact

The GNI development project is envisioned to have multipronged impacts. 

• Economic Growth: The project is expected to significantly boost the previously isolated local economy by creating jobs, attracting investments, and enhancing connectivity. The development of the transhipment port is anticipated to reduce India’s dependency on foreign ports. 
• Geopolitical Strength: The project marks the end of India’s prolonged neglect of the strategic importance of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. It is expected to facilitate permanent deployment of troops and improved surveillance infrastructure which will be crucial in securing peace and security in the Indo-Pacific region.
• Threat to the Shompens: In February 2024, genocide experts from around the world urged President Murmu to abandon the project, warning that it could lead to the extinction of the Shompens. They highlighted the significant risk that the uncontacted Shompens could contract diseases from outsiders, a danger that will escalate once construction begins. Social ecologist Manish Chandi has also criticized the provision of geofencing, emphasizing its brutish nature. He also stressed that the forests belong to the Shompens, who have expressly requested that their lands be excluded from development plans. 
• Loss of Biodiversity: Despite the forest clearance, the loss of biodiversity and the overall environmental damage that the project will induce cannot be understated. The extensive loss of carbon sinks due to land diversion, the absence of a clear plan for coral reef transplantation, the risk of oil/chemical spills due to the region’s seismic vulnerability, and the loss of habitat for over 1,700 species of birds and animals are all pressing concerns. If not effectively addressed now, these issues could lead to irreversible consequences in the long run.

Emerging Issues

After braving through the legal challenge at the National Green Tribunal, there remains other challenges that the GNI project will need to address effectively.

• Geopolitical Implications: The strategic objectives of the project and the militarisation of the island may escalate tensions between China and the QUAD & the ASEAN countries. Instead of achieving a balance of power in the Indo-Pacific region, the status quo might be disrupted altogether and prompt an unprecedented arms race. India will have to traverse cautiously through the complex and ever-evolving power dynamics of the Indo-Pacific, in a way which will not only bolster its own security but will also increase regional cooperation and stability. 
• Sustainability: The socio-environmental concerns surrounding the project prompts a critical question: at a time when India is leading conversations around people-led development and the 2030 Agenda, how sustainable will the GNI development project be in the long run? Surely, development that is envisaged at the cost of endangering indigenous peoples’ rights and destroying a unique ecology, seems to be foregrounded in strategic and economic interests rather than sustainability. 
• Resource Management: To prevent the overburdening of the island’s finite resource pool, resource management strategies for freshwater, groundwater, public distribution systems, and energy, as well as waste management plans, must be developed. This will be essential to mitigate the strain that will inevitably result from the influx of new residents and businesses. 
• Communication Lapses: The public hearing of the SIA has left many concerns unanswered. The SIA revealed that the project will acquire private lands for the international airport as well as forest lands for the three sanctuaries which will lead to the relocation of many families, predominantly from the Nicobarese tribe and the non-tribal settlers. Since 2004, the Nicobarese tribe have consistently petitioned for resettlement on their ancestral (pre-tsunami) lands but the current relocation plans do not address this long standing demand. Additionally, Barnabas Manju had alleged concealment of information on part of the project authorities regarding the acquisition of their ancestral lands to rush the clearance process, following which the Tribal Council had withdrawn their No Objection Certificate in November 2022. Such lack of transparency, if true, is undesirable for a project that will have long lasting impacts on the island’s inhabitants. On the other hand, the settler population have demanded fair compensation, resettlement on new land, and job security for at least one member of the farming community. Since the SIA has failed to address these demands so far, future evaluations should adhere more rigorously to the mandate of the Right to Fair Compensation, Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 
• Social Displacement of Indigenous People: The Nicobarese and the Shompens depend deeply on the island’s natural environment for their livelihoods and cultural practices. The inflow of migrant workers, settlers, and businesses could lead to the displacement of these communities and the erosion of their cultures. Managing the social impact on these communities while ensuring their participation in decision-making processes will be crucial for avoiding future socio-legal challenges that may arise from claims that the project undermines the rights of indigenous people.
• Disproportionate Benefits of Development: While the GNI project is envisioned to generate economic growth and employment, there is a risk that benefits will disproportionately favor larger corporations and external investors over local businesses and residents. There could even be uneven economic development between different parts of the island. Ensuring inclusive economic growth that prioritizes local communities will be a significant challenge to overcome which can only be tackled through policy interventions. Special Economic Zones (SEZs) and incentives should be designed to include local stakeholders in tourism, trade, and small-scale industries, so that they share in the economic benefits rather than being left out of the development process.
• Climate Vulnerability: The Nicobar Islands are highly vulnerable to natural disasters such as tsunamis, cyclones, and earthquakes due to their geographic location. The 2004 earthquake and tsunami devastated the region, highlighting the island’s susceptibility to extreme weather events. Further, the loss of biodiversity and forest cover, along with heavy industrial urbanization is expected to increase the island’s climate vulnerability. Thus, future infrastructure must be climate-resilient to withstand extreme weather events and rising sea levels caused by climate change. The project’s success will depend on adopting disaster-resilient designs and developing comprehensive disaster management (rather, prevention) plans to safeguard not only the inhabitants and the investments being made, but also the future generations. 

Way Forward

Stringent environmental safeguards must be adhered to non-negotiably to ensure the implementation of the GNI project without further challenges. By protecting critical habitats, enhancing afforestation measures, and ensuring sustainable development practices, the GNI development project can become an exemplar for future development initiatives that bridge the gap between strategic gains and sustainability. 

It is crucial to enhance dialogue with the indigenous communities to secure their participation and informed consent in decision-making processes. Equitable compensation packages, alternative livelihoods, and cultural preservation initiatives should be prioritized to effectively mitigate the social impact of the project. 

Additionally, increased transparency and accountability is required on part of the authorities. All documents on consultations, clearances, stakeholders involved, and updates of the project must be made available on the public domain to help build trust and reduce opposition. Parallelly, regional cooperation can be enhanced by engaging in collaborative initiatives for environmental conservation and knowledge-sharing for sustainable practices. 

Furthermore, the balance of power aspirations of the Union Government must be augmented by a balance between development and conservation. This could involve scaling down certain aspects of the project or exploring alternative locations for some of the proposed infrastructures. 

References

1. Sekhsaria, P. (2024). The Great Nicobar Betrayal. Frontline Publication, Chennai.
2. Sekhsaria, P. (2024). How a wildlife sanctuary in Great Nicobar was made to vanish. The Indian Express, New Delhi.
3. Ghanekar, N. (2024). ‘Great Nicobar Project given nod after meticulous diligence, tribal rights will be protected’: Bhupender Yadav. The Indian Express, New Delhi.
4. Ghanekar, N. (2024). Nicobar port plan: Flagged in no-go zone earlier, now in permitted area. The Indian Express, New Delhi.
5. Ghanekar, N. (2024). Strategic imperative and environment concern in Great Nicobar project. The Indian Express, New Delhi.
6. Sirur, S. (2024). National Coastal Body says Great Nicobar no longer in prohibited zone, making way for port. Mongabay India, Andaman & Nicobar Islands.
7. Nair, L.K. (2024). Great Nicobar Mega Project: Settlers’ demands, Indigenous Rights, Environmental Risks. Maktoob Media, Kerala. 
8. Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC). (2024). Environmental impact assessment of the Great Nicobar Island Project. Press Information Bureau (PIB), Delhi. 
9. Airports Authority of India. (2024). Draft Report on SIA Study for Greenfield International Airport. 
10. Survival International. (2024). Genocide experts call on India’s government to scrap the Great Nicobar mega-project.
11. MoEFCC. (2023). ‘Trees felled for Great Nicobar Project,’ Rajya Sabha Unstarred Question No. 1648. Indian Environment Portal. 
12. Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways (MoPSW). (2023). EoI to be invited for the International Transhipment Port at Great Nicobar Island. PIB, Delhi. 
13. Sirur, S. (2022). Govt. vision for Great Nicobar includes airport & township, some experts think it’s ‘nonsense.’ The Print, New Delhi.
14. MoEFCC. (2022). ‘Environmental Impact of the Great Nicobar Island Development Project.’ Rajya Sabha Unstarred Question No. 988. Digital Sansad.
15. MoEFCC, Impact Assessment Division. (2022). Grant of Environmental Clearance (EC). ANIIDCO.
16. Pankaj, S. (2021). A Monumental Folly. NITI Aayog’s Development Plans for Great Nicobar Island (An evolving archive of reports, information and documents). Kalpavriksh Environment Action Group, Maharashtra.

About the Contributor: Srishtistuti Roy is a researcher at IMPRI, New Delhi. She is an alumna of Jadavpur University, Department of International Relations. She has recently completed her postgrad in Gender Studies from the University of North Bengal and hopes to pursue a doctorate soon. Her research interests include South Asian political economy, gender & sustainable development, contemporary social movements, and cultural studies.  

Acknowledgement: The author expresses her humble gratitude to Dr. Arjun Kumar, Aasthaba Jadeja, and Dhruv Tapadia for their valuable insights. 

Read more at IMPRI:

The New Age of Crypto: India’s 2024 Regulatory Framework Unveiled 

New Sanitation and Health Scheme 2024 under the Samagra Shiksha Programme