FEASIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A CROSS …...CITATION: Sanjay Upadhyay, Shyama Kuriakose, Pramod...

United Nations Development ProgrammePost Box No. 3059, 55 Lodhi Estate,New Delhi, India. PIN Code—110 003Email: [email protected] ; Website: www.in.undp.org

648422

GoI-UNDP-GEF: EGREE PROJECT

FEASIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A CROSS-SECTORAL

INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISM FOR MAINSTREAMING

COASTAL AND MARINE BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION

INTO PRODUCTION SECTORS IN THE

EAST GODAVARI RIVERINE ESTUARINE ECOSYSTEM (EGREE),

ANDHRA PRADESH, INDIA.


CITATION: Sanjay Upadhyay, Shyama Kuriakose, Pramod Krishnan, Thulsi Rao andTarun Kathula. Feasibility of Establishing a Cross-Sectoral Institutional Mechanism forMainstreaming Coastal and Marine Biodiversity Conservation into Production Sectors in theEast Godavari Riverine Estuarine Ecosystem, Andhra Pradesh, India.

Edited by : Sanjay Upadhyay, Shyama Kuriakose, Pramod Krishnan, Thulsi Rao, Tarun Kathula

Address : www.egreefoundation.org.

Contact : +91-9810298530, Sanjay Upadhyay (For Technical Queries)

Email : [email protected]

Published by : GoI - UNDP - GEF - Godavari Project, A.P., India

Supported under the GEF–UNDP–GoI Project “Mainstreaming Coastal and MarineBiodiversity Conservation into Production Sectors in the East Godavari Riverine EstuarineEcosystem, Andhra Pradesh, India.”

© 2012 EGREE Project, Kakinada, A.P, and United Nations Development Programme,New Delhi, India.

The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the authors. The views as expressed donot necessarily reflect those of and cannot be attributed to the organizations involved. Theinformation contained herein has been obtained from discussions and a review of publications,secondary sources and the deliberations of the workshop and are to the best of our knowledgeaccurate. Despite all precautions taken to accurately reflect the information that was gatheredfor this report, any errors pointed out subsequently by any party cannot lead to any liabilityon the part of the authors or project partners. The contents of this report may be used byanyone providing proper acknowledgement.

Printed at Kalajyothi Process (P) Ltd., Hyderabad.

ii


FOREWORD

East Godavari Riverine Estuarine Ecosystem (EGREE) in Andhra Pradeshis the second largest mangrove forests in the east coast of India. In recognitionof its national and global biodiversity significance, a part of the EGREE isnotified as Coringa Wildlife Sanctuary. EGREE region has undergone rapideconomic changes in the last two decades as a result of emergence ofproduction activities like oil and gas exploration, industries and ports. Theregion is inhabited by rural communities who are also dependent onmangroves and other marine resources for livelihood.

It is imperative to forge partnerships among various sectors on theconservation of the region and to encourage biodiversity friendly practicesamong production sectors. One critical element in this regard would be theestablishment of a cross-sectoral institutional platform that can bring agencies,industries and communities together and work towards the above stated goal,consistent with national and state policies, and priorities.

Creation of’ ‘’EGREE FOUNDATION’ under the GoI-UNDP-GEF Project:‘Mainstreaming Coastal and Marine Biodiversity into Production Sectorsin the East Godavari Riverine Estuarine Ecosystem, Andhra Pradesh’ isan attempt towards this direction. I hope that this publication will contributein the constitution of the Foundation and shall lead to the effectiveconservation of coastal and marine biodiversity, improving local livelihoodsand sustainable development in the Godavari region.

(S.V. Kumar)Chief Wildlife Warden and State

Project Director

iii


Coastal biodiversity governance is increasingly challenging as India seeks toaccelerate economic development. There are varied baselines with diverseresource base, use patterns, multiplicity of actors and stakeholder interests.The East Godavari Riverine Estuarine Ecosystem in Andhra Pradesh is acase in point where a rich bio-diversity faces new challenges. Lower Godavaridelta has witnessed a surge in production activities in the last few decadessuch as oil and gas exploration, extractive industries, ports and industrialfisheries. This has implications on regional ecology and rural livelihoods towhich the governance framework has to respond effectively

The existing governance frameworks in the region are largely sectoral innature; characterized by individual sectors pushing their own developmentalmandates and priorities. It is important to develop a coastal and marinegovernance paradigm built on biodiversity-friendly strategic planning andmainstreaming environmental considerations into production sector practices.Ensuring cross-sectoral coordination is central to this approach.

Creation of the EGREE FOUNDATION under the GoI-UNDP-GEF Project:‘Mainstreaming Coastal and Marine Biodiversity into Production Sectorsin the East Godavari Riverine Estuarine Ecosystem, Andhra Pradesh’ isan initiative that aims at an effective governance framework to respond tothese challenges. I hope that this publication will be useful in exploringinstitutional options for constituting the Foundation to usher in a new paradigmof coastal governance.

PREFACE

Srinivasan IyerHead, Energy and Environment

Unit, UNDP, India

iv


AN

EG

RE

E P

RO

JEC

T I

NIT

IAT

IVE

v


I. Unique Context of EGREE 1

II. Need for a Foundation 2

III. Law and Policy Regime on Coasts and Oceansthat Impacts EGREE 4

1. Plethora of Laws 4

2. Laws and Policy that Conserve Marine andCoastal Areas 4

3. Laws that Protect marine species 5

4. Laws on Trade in Marine Products 5

5. Laws on Movement of Vessels and Ships 6

6. Laws on Zonation of Marine and Coastal Areas 6

7. International Legal Regime of Marine andCoastal Areas 6

8. Classification of Marine Zones 7

9. Ten Departments Involved in Decision-Making: Organization Responsibilities 7

10.Summary of Findings from the PreliminaryLegal Analysis 8

11.Possible conservation measures throughutilizing of existing legal spaces 9

12.New Developments 10

13.Global Reponses and Interests 11

IV. The dilemma of choice and our performancein oceans related policy and action 12

1. What is more important? And for Whom? 12

2. Have we done enough? Way Forward? 12

2.1 Jurisdictional confusion 12

2.2 Civic Monitoring System 13

CONTENTS

vi


2.3 Critical Coastal and Ocean Issues andImpact Assessments 13

2.4 Monitoring International Instruments and theirrelevance to Indian marine waters 13

2.5 A new Ocean Policy 13

2.6 Engagement with Other Sectors Impacting Oceans 14

2.7 Planning the Seascape and the zonation 14

2.8 Creating Opportunities for Learning fromTraditional Wisdom and Practices on Oceans 15

V. Legal backing for such a Foundation 16

1. Companies Act, 1956 and its Application 17

2. Creation of a Trust under the Indian Trust Act, 1882 18

3. EGREE Foundation as a Society 19

4. EGREE Foundation as a Cooperative Society 20

5. EGREE Foundation as a Statutory Authority underEnvironment Protection Act, 1986. 21

VI. Organizational Structure 22

VII. Jurisdiction and relation with other agenciesincluding its Representation and Role 25

1. Involvement of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Department inthe Coringa Wildlife Sanctuary (CWLS) 25

1.1 Mangroves as Wetlands and their management underthe Wetland Rules, 2010 26

2. The Role of Andhra Pradesh State Biodiversity Boardand Biodiversity Management Committees in theEGREE Foundation 27

3. Department of Environment-Pollution Control Boards: Useof Environment Protection Act, 1986 in the control ofpollution from various production sectors 28

3.1 The process of Environment Impact Assessment(EIA) in EGREE 29

4. AP Coastal Zone Management Authority (APCZMA) andIndustrial development in EGREE 30

vii


5. Department of Fisheries and Animal Husbandry: Fishing,Animal Husbandry and their regulation within EGREEthrough Foundation 33

5.1 Protection of the coastal and marine biodiversitythrough policies and legislation on fishing 35

5.2 Role of local groups in sensitizing and supportingthe villagers 37

6. Department of Ports and Shipping: Regulation of Portsand Shipping in EGREE through EGREE Foundation 38

6.1 Merchant Shipping Act in the prevention ofpollution in the seas 38

6.2 Department of Ports: Protection of marine habitatsin EGREE through Indian Ports Act 40

7. Manufacturing Units and their role in protection of EGREE 41

8. Coast Guard: Use of Coast Guard Act, 1978 in preventingmarine pollution around the Kakinada Sea Port 42

9. Prospects of Eco-Tourism in the EGREE region 44

10.Involvement of the Panchayati Raj Institutions in theFoundation 44

VIII. Responsibilities of this Foundation as a FacilitativeBody 47

IX. Flexibility for Resource Mobilization 48

X. Conclusion 49

Annexure I Essentials of EGREE Foundation: A Framework 50

Annexure II Essentials of EGREE Foundation 52

viii


AFCCS - Andhra Fishermen Central Cooperative Society

APSEIAA - Andhra Pradesh State Level Environment ImpactAssessment Authority

SEIAA - State Level Environment Impact AssessmentAuthority

SEAC - State Level Expert Appraisal Committee

APBR - Andhra Pradesh Biodiversity Rules, 2009

APCZMA - Andhra Pradesh Coastal Zone Management Authority

APDDCFL - Andhra Pradesh Dairy Development CooperativeFederation Limited

APFCOF - Andhra Pradesh State Fishermen CooperativeSocieties Federation Limited

APFD - Andhra Pradesh Forest Department

APPCB - Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board

APSBB - Andhra Pradesh State Biodiversity Board

BD Act - Biological Diversity Act, 2002

BMC - Biodiversity Management Committees

CITES - The Convention on International Trade inEndangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora

CRZ - Coastal Regulation Zone

CWLS - Coringa Wildlife Sanctuary

CZMP - Coastal Zone Management Plans

DTPC - District Tourism Promotion Committee

EDC - Eco Development Committees

EEZ - Exclusive Economic Zones

EGREE - East Godavari Riverine Estuarine Ecosystem

EIA - Environmental Impact Assessment

ELDF - Enviro-Legal Defence Firm

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ix


EPA - The Environment Protection Act, 1986

FAO - The Food and Agriculture Organization

GEF - Global Environment Facility

GOMBRT - The Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Reserve Trust

IUCN - The International Union for Conservation of Nature

JNTU - Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University

LLMC - International Convention on Limitation of Liabilityfor Maritime Claims

M&E - Monitoring and Evaluation

MARPOL - The International Convention for the Prevention ofPollution from Ships

MFF - Mangroves for the Future

MoEF - Ministry of Environment and Forests

MPEDA - Marine Products Exports Development Authority

MZA - The Maritime Zones Act

NGO - Non-Governmental Organization

OIL POL - The International Convention for the Prevention ofPollution of the Sea by Oil

PCPIRs - Petroleum, Chemicals & Petrochemicals InvestmentRegions

PESA - The Panchayat (Extension to Scheduled Areas)Act, 1996

UN - United Nations

UNCED - United Nations Conference on Environment andDevelopment

UNCLOS - United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

UNDP - United Nations Development Programme

VSS - Vana Samrakshana Samithis

x

GoI-UNDP-GEF: EGREE PROJECT xiGoI-UNDP-GEF: EGREE PROJECT


The ecological significance of theEast Godavari Riverine EstuarineEcosystem (EGREE) lies in itsuniqueness. It is a region with highbiodiversity value and includes theCoringa Wildlife Sanctuary (CWLS),along with numerous coastal andmarine features. The Godavari Delta,like many other deltaic systems, ischaracterized by rivers and channels,flood plains, natural levees, mangroveforests, tidal channels, tidal flats,lagoons, Kakinada Bay, sand spits,mainland beaches, sand dunes andpaleo-ridges. All these features keepthe land sheltered from ocean currentsand thus are highly important in theevent of any natural disaster. Inaddition, the presence of differentspecies of fauna, flora and marineliving organisms makes this region acontender for advanced levels ofprotection. Increasing humanactivities in the form of industries,fisheries, aquaculture, livelihoods/subsistence of local communities,tourism, ports, shipping, salt pans, etc.are threatening to disturb the existingfeatures in the EGREE region1. It can

1 Prof. Y. Anjaneyulu and Prof. L.V. Murali Krishna, Final technical report, Monitoring of GodavariEstuarine and Mangrove Environment of Kakinada Bay Using Remote Sensing and In Situ MeasurementMethods, p. 220.

be seen that all the characteristics thatmake EGREE unique need to beconserved without compromising, asfar as possible, the interests of thelocal communities and productionsectors. The means of achieving thisis certainly a challenge and is thesubject matter of the currentmonograph. One of the ways is toestablish a cross-sectoral institutionalmechanism for mainstreaming coastaland marine biodiversity conservationinto the production sectors in theEGREE.

I. Unique Context of EGREE

1


As explained above, the ecological integrity of EGREE is under increasingpressure on account of the rapid emergence of production activities in theKakinada region2. The various threats to the biodiversity in EGREE arisefrom the manufacturing sector, fisheries, aquaculture, livelihoods/subsistenceof local communities, tourism, ports and shipping, and salt pans among others3.While the importance of these production sectors cannot be overlooked, asustainable mechanism is to be put in place that takes into consideration theconservation of coastal and marine biodiversity; the socio-economic welfareof the local communities; and the development of production sectors basedwithin the region and in accordance with principles of good governance.

Thus, a common platform that takes care of the above-mentioned cross-sectoralinterests is required. This platform may be in the form of an implementingagency or an executive body that balances development and conservation ofbiodiversity. A Foundation in the form of a Trust or a Society seems to providethe most suitable remedy since this model has been implemented in variouseco-sensitive regions, for example, the Periyar Foundation and the Gulf ofMannar Biosphere Reserve Trust, and has met with great success. It musthowever be noted that in the context of EGREE, the success of the Foundationwould largely depend on the satisfaction of cross-sectoral interests and priorities.These include the following:

a. Having a mechanism that willharmonize government policies,programmes and resources withproduction sector objectives;

b. Involving actively all sectors thatexert pressure on EGREE insustaining local communities,along with the production sectors,while sustainably utilizing coastaland marine resources;

c. Addressing issues such as bicatch,

ballast water, fishing gear andpractices, pollution and systematicdecimation of mangroves, wildlifehabitats and sand dunes;

d. Protecting critical habitats on boththe landward and seaward sides,including the habitats of turtles,migratory birds, etc. and pelagicand benthic habitats larvae andjuvenile marine animals of thedepend on mangroves;

2 Ibid.3 Ibid., pp. 236–260.

II. Need for a Foundation

2


systems in place that will elicitcommunity support in observingjoint patrolling exercises along theEGREE coastline;

h. Creating the proper environmentfor coastal eco-tourism; and

i. Conforming to internationalobligations that govern oceanswithin the responsibilities of theFoundation.

An agency that satisfies the above-mentioned aspects should have an authorityof the Government and the flexibility of a good NGO to be both effective andefficient. Towards achieving such a structure, it would be vital to understandthe various laws, policies and plans already existing and suitable to AndhraPradesh in the context of marine and coastal sectors. The Foundation musthave clear aims and objectives and a suitable composition and structure,functions, jurisdiction, representation, financial autonomy, powers, duties,planning, staffing, liability, penalties, incentives, technical and disciplinarybackup, global outreach, convergence with local authorities and state actors,grievance redressal, resolutions of disputes, etc. This should be weaved intothe rules, bye-laws and regulations that facilitate the creation of a Foundationfor EGREE, referred to in this document as the EGREE Foundation.

It is clear that such a structure would be based on a sound understanding of theexisting law and policy regime, including the institutional arrangements thatcurrently impact the region. It is therefore essential to explain the legal andpolicy environment within which such a Foundation may exist.

e. Facilitating trade throughaugmentation of ports and harbourfacilities with reduced usage ofoceans as pollution sinks;

f. Monitoring and enablingproduction sectors to treat theireffluents and have proper wastedisposal and recycle plants inplace;

g. Bringing civic monitoring

3 GoI-UNDP-GEF: EGREE PROJECT


1. Plethora of Laws

There are at least twenty-eightnational statutory laws that arerelated to marine areas and aboutseventeen international instrumentsthat India has signed on variousaspects of ocean management. Thenthere are an equal number of statelaws in the federal structure wherethere is jurisdictional classificationof the Sates and Centre vis-à-vis theocean and coastal stretches. Thereare laws that conserve the marinehabitat, those that protect marinespecies, those that use marineresources and those that facilitatetrade. There are also marine laws thatdivide the marine waters into severalzones. Then there are internationalinstruments that protect marinehabitats and species and delineatezones within marine waters. It istherefore important to understandthem in a little more detail and howthey affect EGREE.

2. Laws and Policy that ConserveMarine and Coastal Areas

In the larger law and policyframework that addresses marine andcoastal areas issues, the foremost isthe Constitution of India, whichprovides control over marineresources and also envisages the

states’ responsibility of protectingthe natural resources, including themarine living resources and habitat.The only policy frame that has beenmade at the national level on oceansis the Ocean Policy Statement, issuedin the late 1990s, which primarilyprovided for a use-orientedframework. Clearly, it now needs tobe revisited, and a comprehensiveOcean Policy needs to be formulated.The EGREE Foundation and itsexperience could provide inputs tosuch a policy.

The most important legislation oncoastal and marine waters is perhapsthe Territorial Waters, ContinentalShelf, Exclusive Economic Zone andOther Maritime Zones Act, 1976,which not only zones the seascapebut also provides for measures toprotect the marine environment.Further, the Coast Guard Act, 1986,the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 andthe Public Liability Insurance Act,1991 too provides for protectionmeasures to the marine environment.Of course the primary umbrellalegislation, the EnvironmentProtection Act, 1986, and especiallythe CRZ Notification, 2011(asamended) still form the basiclegislation from the environmentalstandpoint for the coastal and oceanstretches. Other appellate fora have

III. Law and Policy Regime onCoasts and Oceans that Impacts EGREE

4


also been created, such as theNational Green Tribunal, through theAct of 2010, which may be used toadjudicate on issues on marineenvironment. This is notwithstandingthe inherent competence issue of suchquasi-judicial bodies.

3. Laws that Protect MarineSpecies

There are specific laws that protectspecies, such as the Wild LifeProtection Act, 1972, whereinschedules list marine species asaccording to the threats faced by suchspecies. The Biological Act tooprotects the coastal biodiversity at alllevels: genetic, species andecosystem. Similarly, there areinternationally acknowledged liststhat have been prepared for the globalcommunity, such as the IUCN RedData List and the appendices of the

Convention of International Trade inEndangered Species of Fauna andFlora (CITES), to which we are aparty since 1976.

4. Laws on Trade in MarineProducts

Apart from the laws that aim atprotection of habitats or species,there are those that govern the tradein marine products and resources.The Marine Products ExportDevelopment Authority Act, 1972,The Indian Fisheries Act, 1897, TheAqua-Culture Authority Act, 2005and the Andhra Pradesh MarineFishing Regulation Act, 1994 aregood examples of these. Coupledwith such laws are also policies thatare aimed at exploiting marineresources. The Deep Sea FishingPolicy, 1991 is a case in point.

5


5. Laws on Movement of Vesselsand Ships

Along with the trade-oriented lawsthere exist laws that facilitate trade,such as the Indian Ports Act, 1908,the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963, theForeign Jurisdiction Act, 1947, theIndian Merchant Shipping Act, 1958,the Marine Insurance Act, 1963, theCoast Guard Act, 1978, and theMaritime Zones of India (Regulationof Fishing by Foreign Vessels) Act,1981, among others.

6. Laws on Zonation of Marine andCoastal Areas

Equally important are the laws thatgeographically divide the ocean orseascape for specific purposes. Thebest-known is the Territorial Waters,Continental Shelf, ExclusiveEconomic Zones and other MaritimeZone Act, 1976, which talks aboutat least four zones, namely territorialwaters, the continental shelf, theExclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)and the contiguous zone. Similarly,

the Foreign Jurisdiction Act, 1947also talks about historic waters. Thebest-known regulatory notificationfor dividing the coastal stretches isof course the Coastal RegulationZone (CRZ) Notification, 2011,which has been issued under theEnvironment Protection Act, 1986.

7. International Legal Regime ofMarine and Coastal Areas

There are at least three strands ofassessment in the international legalregime of marine and coastal areas.First there are international laws forprevention of marine pollution suchas the OILPOL Convention, theMARPOL Convention andUNCLOS III, to which India is aparty. Second, there are laws thatrelate to maritime operations andpollution prevention. These mayinclude laws on marine casualtiesand pollution prevention formitigating casualties, such asUNCLOS III, the InternationalConvention Relating to Interventionon the High Seas in Cases of OilPollution Casualties and the BaselConvention. They may also relate tosecuring compensation, such as theConvention on Civil Liability for OilPollution Damage, 1969, the FundConvention, UNCED and the RioDeclaration among others.

The third strand relates tointernational law and conservation ofmarine resources, which includesboth laws on protection of species,

6


such as CITES, Migratory SpeciesConvention, UNCLOS III,International Whaling Commissionand laws on protection of marinehabitats such as the RamsarConvention, World Cultural andNatural Heritage Convention and theConvention on Biological Diversity.

This complex maze of laws need tobe further examined and analysed forits full potential to be understood interms of both its impact and creativeuse. But the surface alone has beentouched as it is relevant when aFoundation such as EGREE is beingconceived.

8. Classification of Marine Zones

The numerous statutory lawsdescribed above also classify theseascape into various zonesdepending upon their convenienceand the wisdom at that point in timewhen they were passed. Suchclassifications add up to abouttwenty-three different kinds of legalcategories of areas within the oceanand coastal stretches according to themandate of the laws. These includeterritorial waters, the ExclusiveEconomic Zone, the CoastalRegulation Zone, the IslandProtection Zone, contiguous zone,high seas, designated area, coastalareas, port, selected waters, historicwaters, prohibited zone, tidal waters,private waters, inland waters,foreshore, high water mark,prohibited areas, special areas and

coast. It is important to understandthe implications of such zonations aseach category entails different legalconsequences in terms of activitieswithin it. The planning exercisetaken up by EGREE or even forvetting a master plan of the regionwill require a deeper understandingof the existing legal zonations in theseascape.

9. Ten Departments Involved inDecision-making: OrganizationalResponsibilities

It is not very well-known that thereare at least ten national ministries thathave a bearing on the oceans and thecoastal region with specific mandates.These often interplay and could be atcross purposes with each for their ownspecific mandates. Thus, for example,the Ministry of Environment andForests (MoEF) has a focus onmanagement of resources in thecoastal water and is the nodalministry, with the major responsibilityfor protecting the marineenvironment, includingimplementation of legislativemeasures. Further, the Ministry ofEarth Sciences-especially theDepartment of Ocean Developmenthas a specific mandate of scientificmonitoring of the marine environmentand management of resources in thehigh seas. Similarly, the Ministry ofAgriculture is primarily responsible forthe development of fisheries,aquaculture and fish processing. The

7


Ministry of Water Resources isresponsible for checking erosion in theseascape. Significantly, the Ministryof Defence, including the Indian CoastGuard, is primarily responsible fortaking pollution response measures,including against oil pollution. TheMinistry of Surface Transport, whichhandles ports and shipping, representsan important sector. Further, theMinistry of Petroleum and NaturalGas has a very important role in theocean and coastal resources as it isresponsible for offshore installations,coastal refineries and pipelines, whichare primarily used in an extractiveindustry. The Ministry of Tourism hasthe responsibility of carrying out andpromoting tourism activities in coastalregions. These activities can havelarge impacts on the marine resourcesand the habitat. Another importantextractive ministry is the Ministry ofMines, which is responsible formining activities in coastal regions.Similarly, the Ministry of Commerceis responsible for the import of foreigntrawlers and industrial fisheries of thedeep seas as well as other commercialventures in the sea.

There are statutory institutions thatbring in their own conflictingmandates. These include the CoastGuard, as mentioned earlier, the ChiefWildlife Warden’s Office, the MarineProducts Export DevelopmentAuthority, under the Ministry ofCommerce, the National MarineFisheries Development Board, the

Central Institute of Brackish WaterAquaculture, the Andhra PradeshPollution Control Board, the AndhraPradesh Coastal Zone ManagementAuthority and the Fishery Survey ofIndia among others. Each of these hasstatutory and non-statutory backing,and they are not always in harmonywith each other. It is clear that a largerseascape strategy through a robustinstitutional mechanism that realizesthese mandates and integrates themwithin its function is the way forward.

10. Summary of Findings fromthe Preliminary Legal Analysis

From the above preliminary analysisit is quite clear that the broader policyand legal framework for marine areaspresents a very use-orientedframework. Further, the laws thataffect the marine areas haveclassified the various zonesaccording to their own convenienceat that point of time. It is thus obviousthat there are conflicts in inter-sectoral or inter-departmentalcoordination as the mandate andvision of every department isdifferent. It is here that anoverarching institution such asEGREE would be most suitable forbringing the synergies of theseconflicting mandates to foster a win–win situation. This synergy is nomore a luxury of choice butnecessary as numerous conflicts arealready simmering on the ground.

8


The EGREE region is not anexception. Thus, for example, theoperation of the Wildlife ProtectionAct has an influence on fish catchesand fishing activities, especially inprotected habitats such as CWLS orthe national park in the EGREEregion. Port construction activitieshave huge ecological implications,and therefore mitigation measureshave to be put in place soon. Theindustries destroy fishing groundsand pollute water through thedischarge of rust and paints. Theproposed SEZ and extractiveindustries that are in operation or thatare proposed will certainly have theirown impacts. Then, there are largerquestions of fisherfolk’s rights as acommon property right. Similarly,the welfare of the fishing communityat large is also a mandate that cannotbe ignored during coastaldevelopment and coastal exploitationof resources.

11. Possible Conservation

Measures through Utilizing ofExisting Legal Spaces

While numerous legal instrumentswith different mandates seeminglyact as cross-purposes, there are alsopossibilities of creatively using theprovisions so that the mandatesactually strengthen rather thanweaken each other. This is especiallytrue for the conservation mandate ofthe EGREE region. Thus, forexample, the Maritime Zones Act(MZA) can be creatively used toconstitute designated areas andintroduce measures to protect themarine environment in the EEZ.Further, the union government couldtake necessary action and frame rulesto this effect. Similarly, the CoastGuard Act can be used to ensure thesafety of marine habitats that may beaffected due to the movement ofvessels and ships along trade routes.The government may also enlargeand clearly specify the role of theCoast Guard through special rules for

9


marine habitats that are ecologicallysensitive. In the same manner, theMerchant Shipping Act tooempowers the government to takesteps in the ‘national interest’. Thiscould be used to protect marine andcoastal habitats. Specifically, theconcept of the ‘prohibited zone’ andits linkage to the ‘designated area’under the MZA need to be furtherexplored. Although an old Act, theIndian Ports Act may also be used toensure sustainable management ofthe coast even while meeting therequirements of trade through themovement of vessels. Specifically,the regulation and use of fires andlights within any port, which mayaffect marine species, the hazards ofballast water and the discharge of oilin ports, which may be detrimentalto coastal conservation, can beregulated under this Act. Further, anymovement by foreign vessels for thepurposes of fishing that affects themarine habitats may be regulated bythe Maritime Zones of India(Regulation of Fishing by ForeignVessels) Act. The Act specificallyprovides for deterrent punishment byway of heavy fines and evenconfiscation of foreign fishingvessels engaged in any activitiesviolating it.

12. New Developments

It is equally important to keep a tabon recent developments as they havetheir implications in creating a

Foundation as described. Thesedevelopments include legal, policyand administrative developments.Thus, for example, the CRZNotification, 2011, which brings innew concepts of vulnerability andzonations and looks at islandsseparately or the process of approvalthat has been modified, has its ownbearing. Similarly, the governmenthas come out with guidelines forproviding single-window clearancesfor SEZs being set up along the coast.The Wetland Rules, issued in 2010,completely change the character ofhow wetlands will be managed in thiscountry.

In the central government too, aninter-ministerial body is beingcreated. It will be coordinated by theMoEF for coastal issues. Similarly,there is a national coordinating bodyfor the Mangroves for Futureprogramme. The National CoastalZone Management Authority hasalso been created recently. Anotherimportant statutory creation is theCommittee on Infrastructure for EIAClearances. Similarly, for wildlifematters the Standing Committee of

10


the National Board of Wildlife is aparticularly significant body. Thesenew developments will have bothstatutory and institutionalimplications in the day-to-dayfunctioning of EGREE and thuscannot be ignored.

13. Global Reponses and Interests

There is a lot of global interest in theIndian marine ecosystem. Indicativeof this interest are the current UNDPeffort on mainstreamingconservation programmes and therecently concluded study of the UNTeam for Tsunami ReconstructionSupport. The World Bank-supported

Integrated Management of CoastalZone Programme for implementingthe Swaminathan Committee Reportis another massive programme thatis currently being implemented onIndia’s coast. Recently, the FAO ofUN also carried out the CoastalFisheries Sector Review. And thereis the IUCN–UNDP, MFFprogramme, which aims to promoteinvestment in coastal ecosystemconservation. It is clear from this thatthere is enough evidence to suggestthat bringing on the conservationagenda on the marine waters of Indiais now a national priority and isglobally recognized.



1.What is More Important? Andfor Whom?

Perhaps the biggest dilemma for themarine ecosystem in India, includingthe EGREE region, is the choice ofthe kind and nature of the activitythat should be undertaken and moreimportantly its implications formarine waters. These choices are notonly governed by the mandates ofline agencies but are also a reflectionof the priorities of states or thenation, with overlapping andconflicting mandates being involvedsometimes. It is perhaps time toprioritize choices and addressquestions such as whether sustainingtraditional fishing communities orprotecting critical habitats, forexample, CWLS, is more important.Which is more important, conservingthe landward side and the seawardside, the pelagic and the benthichabitats that serve ecological needsor maintaining aesthetic standardsfor promoting tourism? Shouldcreating defense and strategicinstallations for national security bea priority over everything else?Should facilitating trade throughaugmentation of ports and harbourfacilities in a developing economyfor the billion-plus population be thenational priority? Which is moreimportant, utilizing oil and natural

gas for larger economic gains orharnessing tides and waves forenergy security? Is the use of theocean as a pollution sink by designand by default a priority? These arenot easy questions and thereforerequire a meeting of minds andjoining of hands to take judiciousdecisions. For the EGREE region,the EGREE Foundation could bebest placed for taking relateddecisions. Who decides thesepriorities and how they are decidedare therefore crucial.

2. Have We Done Enough? WayForward?

2.1 Jurisdictional Confusion

Apart from making the abovedifficult choices, it is importantto have a preliminaryunderstanding of the numerousgaps that exist in coastal andmarine management: Forexample, how do we synergizeand streamline central and statecontrol over ocean resources?There is a lot of confusionbetween the state mandate,within the territorial waters, andthe area controlled by the centralgovernment, beyond theterritorial waters. There is still noplan to synergize these efforts.

IV. The Dilemma of Choice and Our Performancein Oceans-Related Policy and Action

12


2.3 Critical Coastal and OceanIssues and ImpactAssessments

It is still not clear how are wetackling critical ocean- andcoast-related issues such as bi-catch, ballast water, fishing gearand practices, pollution and thesystematic decimation ofmangroves and sand dunes.Clearly, this needs immediateattention through an institutionalarrangement such as EGREE.

2.2 Civic Monitoring System

A civic monitoring system to lookat activities on the coast and inthe ocean is entirely lacking. Weare perhaps still relying onanecdotal evidence regardingthreats to marine areas. It is nowclear that a more rigorous andscientific civic monitoring systemhas to be put in place for assessingand reporting the impacts ofactivities on the coast and in theoceans. EGREE could play animportant role in this regard.

2.4 Monitoring InternationalInstruments and theirRelevance to Indian MarineWaters

As stated earlier in the review ofinternational law that, there needsto be a plan for monitoring andnegotiating the 18–20international instruments that India

has signed and that govern oceans.Moreover, their local impact, suchas on EGREE, needs to beassessed.

2.5 A New Ocean Policy

Feedback from Experimentssuch as EGREE India still has

13


to formulate a comprehensiveoceans policy. All we have is apolicy statement that was issuedin the mid-1990s. It is time tohave a comprehensive oceanspolicy for the country. What isimportant from the EGREEperspective is that suchexperiments can potentiallycome up with pragmatic lessonsin terms of coordination,implementation, institutionalchallenges and feedback fromthe policy making process.

2.6 Engagement with otherSectors Impacting Oceans

The typical left-hand-not-k n o w i n g - t h e - r i g h t - h a n dsyndrome is also true with thedepartments controlling themarine sector. The coordinationbetween conservationorganizations such as the ForestDepartment and the productionsectors and with otherc o n s e r v a t i o n - r e l a t e ddepartments has been minimal,to say the least. Thus it isimportant that the Forest

Department meet with theDepartment of OceanDevelopment, the FisheriesDepartment or the Coast Guardto discuss issues ofcommonality. Such engagementis not a luxury of choice anymore. It is imperative for themarine waters and their habitatsto be secured for the present andthe future.

2.7 Planning the Seascape and theZonation

The current planning mandateand the legislative mandates thathave not been followed so faralso need a fresh approach.There is still no larger macro-plan for the maritime zones ofthis region in line with the largerseascape of the nation. It is timeto see such contexts not only upto the territorial waters but alsobeyond, to the entire EEZ. Whatis perhaps most important fromthe policy standpoint is thestreamlining of about 28categorizations in the sea,supposedly managed by more

14


than 10 central and stateorganizations under more than40 laws. This is a herculean task,but EGREE has its role cut outfor the future: to grapple withthis complexity and make it asimpler maze for more effectivecoastal and ocean governance.In fact, such analysis must leadto a robust legal strategy forprotecting coasts and oceans.

2.8 Creating Opportunities forLearning from TraditionalWisdom and Practices inOceans

EGREE offers a greatopportunity to devisemechanisms to utilize the

conventional wisdom andtraditional customary practicesof local fisherfolk and otherstakeholders. Such mechanismswill not only help EGREE to bemore responsive to local needsbut will also strengthenthemselves through traditionalknowledge and conventionalwisdom.

It is clear that the proposedEGREE Foundation facesimmense challenges and has tooperate in a complex domain ofcoastal and ocean stakeholders.It is important to therefore choosean appropriate legal instrumentthat will give it a shape that isfunctional and, more importantly,effective for posterity.



For the creation of a Foundation that has authority as well as flexibility andacts as a supporting mechanism for the existing line departments, it isimportant to look at certain laws that can be considered most supportive ofthe objectives of this Foundation. There are also a few organizations alreadyexisting in India, the management pattern of which can be adopted or adaptedin the EGREE context.

One such organization is the Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Reserve Trust, whichwas created using the Tamil Nadu Trust Act, to ensure sustainable coastalzone development in the Gulf of Mannar, and it demonstrates the point thatmulti-stakeholder participation and establishment of supportive institutionssuch as the Trust can go a long way in supporting existing institutions inaddressing current and new challenges facing the conservation sector4.Another such initiative was taken in Periyar Tiger Reserve through the creationof the Periyar Foundation5, and this effort is an illustration of howparticipatory management of protected areas can be evolved and sustainedwith the help of local communities. The Tiger Conservation Foundation,which is now a legally backed Foundation under the recently amended WildlifeProtection Amendment Act, 2006, is another institutional model that needsto be watched in the coming years for lessons applicable to EGREE.

There are enabling legal provisions that permit any group wanting to createa nonprofit organization as a legal body. Such organizations need to registerthemselves under Acts such as the Companies Act, 1956, the Indian TrustAct,1882 the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001 and the AndhraPradesh Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act, 1995. Thoughincorporation under these statutes is not mandatory, it will give the Foundationthe status of a legal body, with the ability to sue and/or be sued as a separateand distinct ‘person’ but with no physical existence6. The conditions stipulatedby the above-mentioned laws are described below. They need to be adaptedaccording to the needs and aspirations of the Foundation.

4 www.gombrt.org5 www.periyarfoundation.org6 http://www.pria.org/publication/Legal%20 Framework%20for%20NonProfit%

V. Legal Backing for such a Foundation

16


1. Companies Act, 1956 and itsApplication

Within the Companies Act, it ispossible to incorporate theFoundation as a producer company,provided that providing education;rendering technical services,consultancy services, training,research and development; or anyother activity that may be ancillaryto these activities are among itsobjectives7.

Small producers dealing withprimary produce (arising fromagriculture, animal husbandry,horticulture, floriculture, pisciculture,viticulture, forestry, forest products,re-vegetation, bee raising andfarming or plantation)8 have hithertobeen brought together by registeringcooperatives. However, after anamendment was made to theCompanies Act in 2003, theseproducers have been given the optionof transforming the cooperativesinto more professional organizations.A producer company is special as itmaintains the member-ownershipnature of a cooperative and thestructural advantage of a company.

As producer companies strike root,they will require greater capitalsupport from the banking

institutions. Largely these companiesare not well-established and do notpossess a strong asset backing. Thusinnovative measures will have to beadopted for getting funding9. Inaddition, these companies are mostlyproduct-based, while the objectivesof EGREE Foundation are not toproduce/market the products ofstakeholders but to merely facilitatethe stakeholders. These points willhave to be considered beforeincorporating the Foundation as aproducer company. But in ourconsidered opinion, this may not bethe appropriate legal backing for aninstitution such as EGREE at thispoint in time.

A company can also be established“for promoting commerce, art,science, religion, charity or any otheruseful object”, provided the profits,if any, or other income is applied forpromoting only the objects of thecompany and no dividend is paid toits members. Such a company ispopularly known as a Section 25company10. The central governmentshould also have granted a license tosuch a company recognizing it as apublic or private company having alimited liability. Once constituted, aSection 25 company has variousadvantages11 such as the following:

7 20Institutions%20in%20India%20%20Working%20Paper%202.pdfSection 581 B, Companies Act.

8 http://www.hindu.com/biz/2003/06/30/stories/2003063000010300.htm9 http://www.kvic.org.in/update/KRDP/Producer%20Company%20Model.pdf10 Section 25(1)(a) and (b), Companies Act

17


a. Enjoyment of limited liability;

b. Relaxation of the minimum limitof the share capital;

c. Freedom to increase the numberof its directors without seekingthe approval of the centralgovernment12;

d. The quorum required for anyboard meeting is 8 members orone fourth of its total strength,whichever is less, provided it isnot less than 2 members in anycase;

e. Resolutions may be passed bycirculation instead of at meetingsregarding the power to borrowmoneys other than on debentures,the power to invest funds of thecompany and the power to secureloans;

f. Registration fees are fixed at amere Rs.50/- regardless of theauthorized share capital; and

g. Ease in transferring ownership ofshares or other interest of anymember in the company.

It is clear that such companies arewell-regulated non-profitorganizations and that the prescribedincorporation and dissolutionprocedures and other provisions help

the government to keep a check onthe working of Section 25companies13.

However, the aims and objectives ofthe Foundation do not necessarilyvisualize the Foundation as acommercial or profit-making venturebut more as a advisory or regulatorybody formed to enforce the rule oflaw, simultaneously raising policyand legal issues related toconservation within the productionsectors and within its own mandateto a higher level of decision-making.

2. Creation of a Trust Under theIndian Trust Act, 1882

A trust is defined as an obligationannexed to the ownership of propertyarising out of the confidence declaredand accepted by the owner for thebenefit of another or of another andthe owner14. Trusts are governed indifferent states by the trust acts inforce. The process to be followed inthe absence of a Trust Act is givenwithin the Indian Trust Act, 1882. Apublic charitable trust is usuallycreated when there is a propertyinvolved, especially land andbuilding. The main instrument of anypublic charitable trust is the trust

11 http://www.legalindia.in/section-25-companies-under-companies-act-195612 Vide Notification No. 2767, dated 5-8-1964.13 Vide Notification No. 2767, dated 5-8-1964.14 http://efs-consultants.com/indian-trust-formation.html

18


deed, wherein the aims and objectsand mode of management of the trustshould be enshrined15.

Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act,which is applicable throughout India,defines ‘charitable purpose’ toinclude relief of the poor, education,medical relief and any advancementof general public utility. Thus apublic charitable purpose in the caseof a trust has to benefit a large sectionof the public as distinguished fromspecified individuals16. The Gulf ofMannar Biosphere Reserve Trust(GOMBRT) is a good example of astate-owned trust whereinappropriate institutional bodies thatare multi-layered have been createdand are led by the highestadministrative authorities as trustees.With its 10 years’ history, it couldbe a good example to follow. TheGOMBRT owing to its success isnow about to be owned upcompletely by the state. However,the context of the Gulf of Mannar isdifferent, with production sectorsbeing largely absent and theecological seascape being verydifferent from that of EGREE.Second, at least at a theoretical level,a trust can be created and madefunctional with only three membersand therefore the representation ofvarious actors may be limited.Although the Gulf of Mannar Trust

has attempted to resolve thisinadequacy by having otherstakeholders as trustees, in a strictlegal sense it is still possible to divestthem of their membership and reducethe number of trustees to theminimum requirement of threestakeholders or even three memberswithin the same line agency, namelythe Forest Department. In thiscontext, Andhra Pradesh offers aslightly better legal instrument, theAndhra Pradesh Societies Act, 2001,which promotes government-ownedNGOs. Under this Act, at least sevenstakeholders are required for itsconstitution. This obviously offers amore varied option in the morecomplex eco-zone, largelydominated by the production sector,in the EGREE region.

3. EGREE Foundation as aSociety

As stated above, the Andhra PradeshSocieties Registration Act 2001 is anappropriate legal option that may beused to register a society that has asits objectives the promotion of art,fine art, charity, crafts, religion,sports, literature, culture, science,political education, philosophy,diffusion of any knowledge or anyother public purpose17. The activitiesof the members of such a society can

15 Ibid.16 Ibid.

19


17 Section 3 (1), Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act.18 Section 13, Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act.19 Section 28 read with Section 18, Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act.20 Preamble, Andhra Pradesh Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act.21 Section 3, Andhra Pradesh Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act.

be monitored through inspection ofthe register of members18, thusmaking the process transparent.There are also provisions within thisAct that facilitate the establishmentof an executive committee and agoverning body, which are crucialfor the day-to-day working of aFoundation and taking importantpolicy decisions, respectively. Eventhough the state government canfinance such a society and prescribeits terms and conditions, in all itsfunctioning, a society is anindependent body corporate afterregistration19. This is the featuremost desirable in a Foundation andwill give it flexibility and authority.

4. EGREE Foundation as aCooperative Society

The Andhra Pradesh Mutually AidedCooperative Societies Act, 1995provides yet another opportunity forthe voluntary formation ofcooperative societies as accountable,competitive and self-reliant businessenterprises20. The byelaws formedby such societies must adhere to thevarious principles enunciated withinthe Act21, such as being a democraticbody where the membership is opento all persons in the public. Acooperative society may beregistered with limited or unlimitedliability under this Act. Here againthe vision and the nature of the

20


activity envisaged for the EGREEFoundation are not necessarily in acooperative model although severalexisting cooperatives such as thetrawler boat associations could bemembers of a Foundation createdunder the Societies Act.

5. EGREE Foundation as aStatutory Authority UnderEnvironment Protection Act, 1986.

Another possibility that the centralgovernment has been using in thepast to institute a statutory body isunder the Environment ProtectionAct. Numerous authorities have beencreated, and therefore there is anabundance of lessons that may bedrawn from such experiences.Whether an authoritative body with

powers to regulate agencies andactivities is necessary at this stageor the creation of such an Authorityshould be a gradual process needsto be thought through. The extensivediscussions held so far suggest thatit should be a gradual process.

Thus we see that the EGREEFoundation may be instituted underany of the above laws after perusingthe requirements for companies,trusts, societies or authorities andstudying the models that have beenconstituted in the country. Thereseems to be a natural tilt towards asociety as it provides flexibility aswell as authority. The next mandateof this feasibility review is to analysethe type of organizational structureand key functionaries within theFoundation.



As mentioned previously, theFoundation has to have authority andflexibility. A three-tiered structurethat includes the governing body, theexecutive committee and theadvisory council may satisfy theserequirements. The governing bodymay take all the important policydecisions of the Foundation, with theChief Secretary or the AdditionalChief Secretary as its head. Thisbody may also have representationfrom production sectors and thepublic, thus giving the grassrootsstakeholders more representation indecision-making. The executivecommittee could be responsible forthe day-to-day functioning andfinancial management of theFoundation. The executivecommittee should be headed byatleast a high-ranking forest officer,who needs to be stationed at the

landscape site itself. For theefficiency of the Foundation, thereis a need to make this committee veryefficient in its operations. Thereshould also be a panel of researchersand specialists with academic andprofessional expertise who can beassigned responsibilities on the basisof requirements.These may includeeconomists, ecologists, lawyers,sociologists to name a few.

The next step would be to ascertainthe functionaries of the Foundation.Without doubt, all the key players inthe production sector andconservation efforts must beinvolved. For this purpose, theFoundation should ideally involvethe relevant government agencies(Department of Forests, CoringaWildlife Sanctuary Management,Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control

VI. Organizational Structure

22


Board (APPCB), Andhra PradeshCoastal Zone Management Authority(APCZMA), State EnvironmentalImpact Assessment Authority,Marine Production ExportDevelopment Authority, CoastGuard, Department of Fisheries,Department of Agriculture,Department of Industries, PortAuthority, Department of Transport,Department of Tourism, KakinadaMunicipal Corporation);representatives of key productionsectors (Gujarat State PetroChemicals, Kakinada SeaportLimited); and communities(including Panchayati Rajinstitutions, functionaries of Eco-

Development Committees (EDCs),fishermen’s associations, animalhusbandry associations, agricultureassociations and commerce and tradeorganizations).

Research institutions such as AndhraUniversity, Andhra Pradesh StateRemote Sensing Agency, JawaharlalNehru Technological University(JNTU) and representatives of NGOssuch as M.S. Swaminathan ResearchFoundation and Pallisri will have asignificant role in promotingawareness about integrated coastalzone management, human welfare,sustainability of resources andscientific management of ecosystemsand the environment and in

23


providing the technical expertise thatgovernment agencies may lack.Representatives from theseorganizations could be includedwithin the advisory councils so thatthe Foundation has a perceptiveapproach.

Further, to create a platform formultiple stakeholders, it would bevital to understand the jurisdictionaloverlaps and mandates of other

agencies. A flavor of this overlap ispresented below to demonstrate howthey bring in the dynamism as wellas complexity to the proposedinstitution, EGREE. Thisjurisdictional understanding will inturn help in the long run informulating the appropriate rules,byelaws and regulations for theEGREE Foundation.

24


1. Involvement of the AndhraPradesh Forest Department inthe Management of CWLS

CWLS was declared and gazettedas a sanctuary in 1978 with a totalarea of 235.70 square kilometersunder the Wildlife Protection Act,1972, and it falls within the EGREEregion22. It was declared toregenerate mangroves andrehabilitate endangered species suchas the Saltwater Crocodile, OliveRidley Turtle and the Indian Otter.

The Andhra Pradesh ForestDepartment, specifically its wildlifewing, under the aegis of the officeof the Chief Wildlife Warden, isresponsible for its management. Thesanctuary provides rich habitats formarine living resources such as crabs

and fish. It is the nesting ground ofvarious migratory birds. The waterin the forest supports a variety ofanimals such as the Mudskipper, theJackal, monkeys and the FishingCat23.

There are various conservationstrategies in place for protecting theseforests such as bringing mangrovesunder the network of protectedareas; demarcation of mangroves anda mangrove sanctuary, including itscore areas, to avoid encroachments;taking up various protectionmeasures through intensified watchand ward; taking up large-scaleafforestation of banks by diggingchannels; growing seedlings innurseries and planting them on thesloping edges of water channels;forming and strengthening theexisting EDCs and VanaSamrakhsana Samitis (VSSs) forconservation of the mangrovesthrough a participatory approach byproviding welfare measures to thevillagers living around the sanctuaryto reduce their dependency on themangroves, at the same timeenhancing the livelihood of thecoastal communities; conductingeco-tourism activities within the

22 http://eastgodavari.nic.in/Coringa.html23 Ibid.

VII. Jurisdiction and Relation with OtherAgencies Including Its Representation and Role

25


sanctuary, which are helping thelocal communities in obtaininglivelihood support; educating peopleabout nature conservation andenvironmental protection through theNature Study Center located inRajamundry. Video films and booksare available to children and others.A museum has also been developed,with displays of on nature andwildlife. Due to these efforts, thereis increased awareness among thepublic24.

The problems faced in themanagement of CWLS are that theexisting staff strength, capacity andinfrastructure are inadequate foreffective management of thesanctuary. The staff is not adequatelytrained, and the funds received forthe activities within the sanctuary arequite limited. Moreover, whileCWLS anchors conservation effortsin EGREE, it cannot provide securityto the region outside the sanctuary.CWLS is also impacted bydevelopment models and growthstrategies in the wider landscape.Hence this existing managementmust be utilized within theframework of the EGREEFoundation.

1.1. Mangroves as Wetlands andtheir ManagementUnder the Wetland(Conservation and Management) Rules, 2010

The management andconservation of wetlands mustbe in accordance with theWetlands Conservation andManagement Rules, 2010,which specify the constitutionof the Central WetlandRegulatory Authority andinclusion in it of variousexperts. Various activities thatare harmful to wetlands, suchas unregulated running of

industries, construction,dumping of untreated wastesand reclamation are prohibitedunless prior permission istaken from the concernedauthorities25.

24 Ibid.25 Rule 4 (1) and (2), Wetland Rules.

26


The definition of ‘wetlands’ inthe rules includes mangroves,salt farms, etc26. Themangrove forests situatedwithin the deltaic wetlandscover an area of 32,140hectares, while salt farmscover 1000 acres of land inEGREE. This warrants theprotection of these regions aswetlands, and variousactivities described in theforegoing without the requisitepermissions should beprohibited. Presently, theRules mandate that wetlandssituated within sanctuaries,national parks and protectedor notified forest areas shouldbe regulated by the WildlifeProtection Act and the IndianForest Act (in this case theAndhra Pradesh Forest Act,1967)27. Since the APFD isalready managing themangroves within CWLS andthe reserve forests, theseRules should be looked intowhile framing any programmefor conservation of wetlandsin EGREE.

26 Rule 2 (1) (g), Wetland Rules.27 Rule 7 read with Rule 8, Wetland Rules.28 Section 2(b), BD Act.29 Section 22, BD Act read with Rule 3, APBR.30 Section 41, BD Act.

2. The Role of Andhra PradeshState Biodiversity Board andBiodiversity ManagementCommittees in the EGREEFoundation

The Biological Diversity Act, 2002(BD Act) is a significant piece oflegislation as regards conservation ofbiological diversity, sustainable useof its components and fair andequitable sharing of benefits arisingout of the use of biological resourcesand the knowledge associated withthem. This Act is relevant in thecontext of EGREE because thedefinition of biological diversity28

also includes coastal and marinebiodiversity.

The Andhra Pradesh BiodiversityRules, 2009 (APBR) specify theformation of various bodies such asa state biodiversity board29 andbiodiversity managementcommittees (BMCs)30. Accordingly,the Andhra Pradesh StateBiodiversity Board (APSBB) wascreated in 2006. APSBB, along withthe National Biodiversity Authority,is mandated to consult the BMCsbefore taking any decision relatingto the use of biological resources andthe knowledge associated with such

27


resources occurring within theterritorial jurisdiction of the BMCsand to take necessary steps tofacilitate the setting up of areas ofsignificant biodiversity values asbiodiversity heritage sites31.

Use of different kinds of traditionalknowledge as possessed by thecommunities living within the regionpertaining to sustainable utilizationof the marine and coastal ecosystemand resources could be made with thehelp of BMCs. Documentation ofthis knowledge has not beeninitiated, and this needs to be done.There are around 43 BMCs presentin AP32. There are three BMCslocated in East Godavari District33,and representation from these BMCswould be vital for the collection,documentation and usage oftraditional conservation practices bythe communities.

3. Department of Environment-Pollution Control Boards: Use ofEnvironment Protection Act, 1986in the Control of Pollution fromVarious Production Sectors

The Environment Protection Act,1986 (EPA) and subsequentamendments and Rules set out thelimits of various environmental

pollutants, including noise, andrestrictions on the location ofindustries. Pollutants from industry,aquaculture and urbanagglomerations are being dischargedinto EGREE and Kakinada Bayincreasingly. Thus it becomesnecessary to impose certain limits onsuch discharges. Limits on theeffluents from different kinds ofindustries have been stipulated by theAndhra Pradesh Pollution ControlBoard (APPCB)34, thus making it auseful tool to control the variouskinds of industrial activities withinEGREE.

Moreover, it is obligatory on the partof an industry to obtain consent forestablishment and operation from theBoard under Section 25 of the Water(Prevention & Control of Pollution)Act, 1974 as amended and underSection 21 of the Air (Prevention &Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 asamended.

APPCB, constituted in 1976 toimplement the provisions of theWater (Prevention and Control ofPollution) Act, 1974 (Water Act),was subsequently given theresponsibility of implementingvarious environmental Acts andRules, including the Water Act; theAir (Prevention and Control of

31 Section 22, BD Act read with Rule 3 and Rule 13 (xi), APBR.32 http://apbiodiversity.ap.nic.in/33 http://apbiodiversity.ap.nic.in/BMC_List.html34 http://www.appcb.ap.nic.in/Env-Standards/category.htm

28


Pollution) Act, 1981; the Water CessAct; the Environment Protection Act,1986; the Hazardous Waste(Management and Handling) Rules,1989; the Bio Medical Waste(Management and Handling) Rules,1998; the Municipal Solid Waste(Management and Handling) Rules,2000; the Plastic Manufacture, Saleand Usage Rules; the Batteries(Management and Handling) Rules;and the Manufacture, Import andStorage of Hazardous ChemicalRules and Coastal Regulation ZonesRules, 2011, within the jurisdictionof Andhra Pradesh.

The Board has representation fromvarious Andhra Pradesh statedepartments including thedepartments of municipaladministration and urbandevelopment; environment; forests;science and technology; health,medical and family welfare;industries, commerce and exportpromotion; and transport, and fromacademicians in the fields ofenvironmental studies and appliedgeo-chemistry. It is interesting tonote that even though there areenough financial resources at thediscretion of the board, sufficientmanpower or time to take care of allthe issues falling within the mandateof the board is not. Such issues and

various others can be brought to thenotice of the state government if theAPPCB is made a part of thegoverning body of the EGREEFoundation.

3.1. The Process of EnvironmentImpact Assessment (EIA) inEGREE

An EIA is a statutory exerciseto be carried out before anyproject or major activity isundertaken to ensure that it willnot in any way harm theenvironment on a short-term orlong-term basis35. A majorlegislative measure for thepurpose of environmentalclearance was taken in 1994when a specific notification wasissued under Section 3, Rule 5of the EPA, namely theEnvironment Impact AssessmentNotification, 1994. This wassuperseded by a centralgovernment notification in200636, which required thatconstruction of new projects oractivities or the expansion ormodernization of existingprojects or activities listed in theschedule to this notificationentailing capacity addition witha change in process and or

35 R ://www.freewebs.com/epgorissa/ENVIRONMENT%2 0IMPACT%20 ASSESSMENT% 20PROCESS% 20IN%20INDIA%20 AND%20 THE %20 DRAWBACKS-1.pdf

36 S.O.1533(E), 14/09/2006—Environmental Impact Assessment Notification—2006.

29


technology be undertaken onlyafter a prior environmentalclearance from the centralgovernment or a State LevelEnvironment ImpactAssessment Authority (SEIAA).

Following this, the AP SEIAAwas constituted through anotification in 200737, by theAndhra Pradesh stategovernment in consultation withthe central government. A StateLevel Expert AppraisalCommittee (SEAC) was alsoestablished that could providerecommendations to thisauthority. These bodies havemembers with expert knowledgeon various aspects ofenvironmental pollution.According to the schedule to theEIA Notification38, the projectsthat require prior environmentalclearance include oil and gastransportation and pipelinespassing through sanctuaries,coral reefs or ecologicallysensitive areas. This means thatall the SEZs and proposedIntegrated Petroleum,Chemicals and PetrochemicalInvestment Regions (PCPIRs)activities in EGREEmandatorily require EIA

clearance so that there is noserious impact on thebiodiversity of the region.Coordination with the SEIAAand SEAC is thus recommendedfor the successful functioning ofthe EGREE Foundation. If therestatutory clearances areobtained, then a robustmonitoring mechanism tooversee the compliance ofconditions on which suchprojects are cleared is equallyimportant. In 2009, the burdenof providing information aboutthe projects and their impactswas also shifted to the industriesand the companies engaged inthe activities listed in theschedule of the EIA notificationof 2006. It is clear that there aresufficient ingredients to create arobust monitoring system for theinfrastructure projects,especially those that impact theregion.

4. Andhra Pradesh Coastal ZoneManagement Authority(APCZMA) and IndustrialDevelopment in EGREE

The Coastal Regulation Zonenotification created under EPA

37 S.O.1105(E), 04/07/2007—Constitution of the State Level Environment Impact AssessmentAuthority, Andhra Pradesh.

38 S.O.1533(E), 14/09/2006—Environmental Impact Assessment Notification-2006.

30


imposes regulations on variousactivities pertaining to backwatersand estuaries. It declares, “coastalstretches of the country and the waterarea up to its territorial water limit isknown as [the] Coastal RegulationZone.” This notification prohibits aswell as regulates the setting up orexpansion of industries inecologically sensitive areas.

The CRZ Notification divides coastalareas into four coastal regulationzones, namely CRZ I39, II40, III41

and IV42. Since most of EGREE fallswithin the CRZ notification andmangrove forests are one of theecologically sensitive areas, all theimplementation activities need to withthe CRZ Notification, 2011. Areasdesignated within CRZ I includemangroves, protected areas, turtlenesting grounds, bird nesting areas,etc., 43 and these are very importantcomponents of EGREE since itconsists mainly of CWLS, themangroves and the nesting groundsof various endangered species of

animal. It is also an Important BirdArea.

Moreover, the CRZ Notification,2011 identified Coringa, EastGodavari and Krishna as ‘CriticalVulnerable Coastal Areas’ thatshould be managed with theinvolvement of the local coastalcommunities, including thefisherfolk who depend on itsresources for their livelihood,through a process of consultationwith the objective of promotingconservation and sustainable use ofcoastal resources and habitats44. Thenotification also provides for theformulation of specific Coastal ZoneManagement Plans (CZMPs) byindividual states (with the approvalof the central government),identification of the regulation zoneareas within the states’ respectiveterritories, which is to be done inaccordance with the guidelinescontained in the main notification.The notification thus arms thecentral government with adequatepowers to regulate constructionactivities in and around coastal areas

39 CRZ I areas are areas that are ecologically sensitive and the geomorphological features of whichplay a role in the maintaining the integrity of the coast.

40 CRZ II areas are “those which have already been developed upto or close to the shoreline”.41 CRZ III areas that are relatively undisturbed and those do not belong to either CRZ I or II, which

include coastal zone in the rural areas (developed and undeveloped) and also areas withinmunicipal limits or in other legally designated urban areas, which are not substantially built up.

42 CRZ IV are the water area from the Low Tide Line to twelve nautical miles on the seaward side.Also it shall includes the water area of the tidal-influenced water body from the mouth of the waterbody at the sea up to the influence of tide, which is measured as five parts per thousand during thedriest season of the year.

43 2011 CRZ Notification, Para 7.44 Ibid.

31


and to protect ecologically sensitiveareas.

Further, in March 2012, the NationalCoastal Zone ManagementAuthority was re-constituted to takemeasures “for protecting andimproving the quality of the coastalenvironment and preventing, abatingand controlling environmentalpollution in coastal areas”. One ofthe most important functions of thisauthority is to examine and accordits approval to area-specific CZMPsformulated by State Coastal ZoneManagement Authorities and UnionTerritory Coastal Zone ManagementAuthorities.

The Andhra Pradesh Coastal ZoneManagement Authority (APCZMA),which was constituted in 2009, ismandated with identifyingecologically sensitive areas in the

CRZ; formulating area-specificmanagement plans for these areas;and identifying economicallyimportant stretches of CRZ andformulating Integrated Coastal ZoneManagement Plans for the same45.This authority has representationfrom various state departments(Environment, Forest, Science andTe c h n o l o g y, R e v e n u e , O c e a nDevelopment, Meteorology andOceanography), the APPCB, theShore Area Development Authorityand the Zoology and Marine BiologyDepartment of Andhra University46.

These bodies must be involved in theformulation of area-specificmanagement plans for setting upSEZs and PCPIRs since thosePCPIRs proposed by theGovernment of India fall within theKakinada region and may haveserious impacts on the coastal and

45 http://envfor.nic.in/news/janmar05/andhra.htm46 C Ibid.

32GoI-UNDP-GEF: EGREE PROJECT


47 http://www.aponline.gov.in/apportal/departments/departments.asp?dep=02&org=20&category=about

48 Rule 16, Andhra Pradesh Marine Fishing (Regulation) Rules, 199549 Management Plan, Coringa, Andhra Pradesh Forest Department.50 www.apddcf.gov.in

marine biodiversity unless adequateenvironmentally friendly practicesare incorporated from the inceptionphase itself. It is evident that theinvolvement of the APCZMA is vitalfor the major economic activitieswithin the EGREE region.

5. Department of Fisheries andAnimal Husbandry: Fishing,Animal Husbandry and theirRegulation within EGREEthrough the Foundation

The Andhra Pradesh fisheries sectoris playing a key role in the fisheriesmap of India, contributing 10percent of the total fish and shrimpproduction in the country47. WithinEGREE, the major subsistence

activities of the local communities arefrom traditional fishing and collectionof firewood, materials for houseconstruction and fodder for livestock.These communities enjoy atraditional right to fish within thesanctuary and in the sea even thoughthe villages are outside the sanctuary,with the help of non-mechanizedfishing vessels48. Semi-wild cattleroam about in the sanctuary area asthey have done for ages immemorial,thus having become a part of the eco-system49. The village communitiesdepend on the cattle for milk, andthe state cooperative called AndhraPradesh Dairy DevelopmentCooperative Federation Limited(APDDCFL) has one of its centresin Kakinada for collection of surplusmilk from these communities and toprovide quality milk to urban andsemi-urban consumers50.

However, it has been noticed thateven though grazing is regulatedwithin the sanctuary, it is happeningdestructively because the cattle areleft loose and wild. The villagersapproach these cattle only to providefresh drinking water and to providefodder for the calves and to milkthem. Left loose, the cattle trampleregenerating mangroves, thusturning the area into bare stretches.

33


In addition, the villagers often cutbranches from the mangrove treesfor fodder. Some of the locationsclose to the villages have denudedmangrove vegetation51.

In addition, it has been noticed thatwith passing time the number ofboats used for fishing in the variousrivers, channels and creeks inside thesanctuary has increased, causingdisturbance to the flora and fauna52.Along with traditional fishing,commercial fishing is also done inEGREE, imposing a great stress onthe available marine resources dueto the usage of mechanized crafts,overharvesting of juveniles and otherunsustainable fishing practices. Asa result, over a period, the catch sizeis decreasing, threatening thelivelihood security of many people.Another reason for the reduced fishcatch is the setting up of oil and gasindustries in the vicinity of thefishing villages.

Another kind of economic activitybeing practiced in this region isaquaculture, which has beenestablished on converted mangrovelands. After the harvesting of fish,the area is usually disinfected usingchemicals that are then flushed intothe estuarine system, polluting thesame. An increase in salinity ofdrinking water can also be attributed

to an increase in the number of aquafarms. It has been observed that bigfarms are treating their water but thesmaller ones are not. The peopleinvolved in aquaculture, however,allege that their investment inmitigating environmental concernsis not accounted for in their mainbusiness because of reducedgovernment support. Labelling andcertification are required for effortsto follow good practices. Suddendemands cause dilution of theprocess. Their concerns are to beaddressed within the EGREE forumbecause the number of peoplegetting into this business isincreasing.

The state has a fully fledgedFisheries Directorate, set up in 1959and headed by a Director who is alsothe Registrar of the fishermen’scooperatives. This directorate hasextended its support tomechanization of craft; manufactureand supply of gear; processing andmarketing; inland fisheries andcoastal aquaculture; credit andcooperatives; and education andtraining and development ofintegrated fisheries53, which hashelped the local fishermen as wellas the large-scale fishing enterprises.There are also various fishingcooperatives such as the Andhra

51 Management Plan, Coringa, Andhra Pradesh Forest Department.52 Ibid.53 ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/007/ae482e/ae482e00.pdf

34


Pradesh State FishermenCooperative Societies FederationLimited (APFCOF)54 and the AndhraFishermen Central CooperativeSociety (AFCCS) Limited55. Sincethe two main fish landing centres onthe Andhra Pradesh coast are atVishakhapatnam and Kakinada, itbecomes important to raise andaddress every issue arising withrespect to the fisheries resources andthe fishing communities in theregion, and EGREE will be usefulin this regard.

5.1 Protection of the Coastal andMarine Biodiversity throughPolicies and Legislation onFishing

Various regulations are in placeto regulate fishing activity in theEGREE. These include theMarine Fishing Regulation Act,1978, the Andhra PradeshMarine Fishing (Regulation)Act, 1994 and related rules.These laws regulate/restrict/prohibit fishing in any specifiedarea, the number of fishingvessels allowed in any area,catching any specified marinespecies and the use of anyspecified gear for fishing with

the ultimate objective ofprotecting the interests oftraditional fishing communitiesand conserving various speciesof fish.56

The Indian Fisheries Act (IFA)specifically prohibits the use ofdynamite or poisons in allwaters, including inland watersand coasts.57 The MaritimeZones of India (Regulation ofFishing by Foreign Vessels) Act,1981 deals with sustainablefishing in territorial waters, theExclusive Economic Zone andthe continental shelf. This Actis important with respect toillegal trawling by foreignfishing vessels within theterritorial waters of EGREE58.The Marine Fishing Policy,2004 was introduced with theobjective of augmenting marinefish production in a sustainablemanner to ensure the socio-economic security of traditionaland coastal fishermen with dueconcern for coastal biodiversity.This policy will be beneficialfor the coastal villages abuttingEGREE if implementedproperly59.

54 http://www.apfisheries.com/afcof.html55 ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/007/ae482e/ae482e00.pdf56 Section 4, Andhra Pradesh Marine Fishing (Regulation) Act, 1994.57 Section 4, Indian Fisheries Act.58 Section 3, Maritime Zones of India (Regulation of Fishing by Foreign Vessels) Act.59 http://www.dahd.nic.in/fishpolicy.htm

35


Furthermore, the Wildlife(Protection) Act, 1972 is alegislation which is meant forthe protection of wild plants andanimals and includes variousspecies of marine and coastallife such as fishes, corals, seaturtles and sea cucumber withinits Schedule I and III. Theproblem with this legislation isthat there is no focus on harmcaused to species due todevelopmental activities andfishing activities. Theecosystem is protected morewhen it is within the boundariesof a protected area. The speciesoutside PAs and its criticalhabitat is ordinarily notprotected unless the speciesitself is harmed. In fact,fisheries related mortality of seaturtles is very high along thecoast of Kakinada, which isprobably due to the higherdensity of turtles in the region60.

There are numerous legalregimes with relevance tomarine and coastal regions, butthere is no coordinated effort inimplementing the regulationsimposed by these laws. Thefishermen’s associations,APCZMA and the Coast Guardcan take a role in joint patrolling

of the specified areas aroundthe EGREE coastal area toensure that the provisions of allthese statutory laws areeffectively implemented. TheAPSBB, which includes theDirector of Integrated CoastalMarine Area Management61,has been bestowed with thepower to advise the stategovernment to specify areas ofimportance as ‘heritage sites’and provide measures for themanagement of such heritagesites. Significantly, thisprovision empowers the Boardto specify critical habitats suchas nesting sites62 of marineturtles or other marine speciesas heritage sites so that they canbe conserved againstcommercial fishing interests.

With regard to aquaculture, theMarine Products ExportDevelopment Authority(MPEDA), created under theMPEDA Act, 1972, initiatedorganic or chemical-free aquafarm activities in the region, butthese have not attained muchpopularity so far since almost theentire export of marine productsis handled throughVishakhapatnam, with thequantity from Kakinada being

60 http://www.seaturtlesofindia.org/downloads/Upadhyay&Upadhyay_2002.pdf61 http://apbiodiversity.ap.nic.in/pdf/GO_RT_No-417.pdf62 Section 18(3) (b) of the Act.

36


negligible63. Since the mainthrust of this Act is economicgains from the export of marineproducts, the concerns ofconservation are not givenadequate importance. This isapparent from the compositionof the Authority because it hasrepresentatives from amongship owners, processing plants,dealers and persons engaged inresearch connected with theindustry and not related toconservation of marineresources. However, the Actdoes provide space forrepresentation by personsconcerned with the environmentby vesting discretion with thegovernment to additionallyengage such other persons who,in the opinion of the government,ought to be represented64. Therole of this Authority needs tobe further enhanced so as togarner profits for the local

fishing communities based inEGREE.

5.2 Role of Local Groups inSensitizing and Supportingthe Villagers

Among the 44 mangrove-abutting villages in the EGREE,almost all show a highdependency on mangroves forcattle grazing and fishing needs,and the current managementdoes not have adequatestrategies to reduce thisdependency65. The APFDissued comprehensiveguidelines for adopting jointforest management as a strategyfor rehabilitation of degradedforests in 1993, through village-level committees called VanaSamrakshana Samithis (VSS)66.Later, EDCs were constitutedfor the purpose of protectionand development of protectedareas67. The local people aroundCWLS need to be educatedabout the importance of themangroves. To educate the localpeople, 20 EDCs were formed.Nature camps and awarenessprogrammes are beingconducted. Training progra-mmes are conducted for the

63 ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/007/ae482e/ae482e00.pdf64 http://www.seaturtlesofindia.org/downloads/Upadhyay&Upadhyay_2002.pdf65 Project Document, UNDP, p. 17.66 http://forest.ap.nic.in/JFM%20CFM/G.O.No.218_3110.htm67 http://forest.ap.nic.in/JFM%20CFM/Go167.htm

37


presidents and members of theEDCs and for the local people68.

Through these local committees,the voices of the communitiesare heard. The communitiesmust also be given adequatefinancial and infrastructuresupport for maintaining theircattle and fishing activities sothat they do not get marginalizedin comparison with themainstream production sectors.Wherever rehabilitation andsettlement of communities isrequired for developmentalactivities, these local groupsneed to be consulted within theFoundation for creating abalance between theconservation of the EGREEregion, developmental activitiesand the livelihoods of thevillagers.

6.Department of Ports andShipping: Regulation of Ports andShipping in EGREE throughEGREE Foundation

Ports are an important focus ofeconomic activity in EGREE, withthe Kakinada Intermediate Portbeing located in East GodavariDistrict. Since Andhra Pradesh is thesecond highest cargo handling statein India, there is a lot of stress onthis port. Direct impacts include

habitat conversion for theconstruction of ports and associatedindustrial estates, which affects thehealth and development of EGREE.Maritime traffic is also known to havedirect impacts on marine biodiversity,through spillages from offshore oilexploration. Oil from ship landingsand fishing boats moored at theharbour may result in pollution andbio-accumulation of heavy metalsand synthetic compounds. In the caseof CWLS, the biodiversity risksassociated with oil spills is highbecause they are close to the port.The laws relating to shipping includethe Indian Merchant Shipping Act,1958 and the Indian Ports Act, 1908,and these include provisions thatmandate the protection of marinehabitats and prevention of pollutionin the coastal areas as well as thesea.

6.1 Merchant Shipping Act in thePrevention of Pollution in theSeas

The Merchant Shipping Act,1958, amended in 2002, 2003and 2007, establishes the positionof the Director General ofShipping and the NationalShipping Board for the purposeof advising the centralgovernment on matters relatingto Indian shipping, including the

68 Management Plan, Coringa, Andhra Pradesh Forest Department.

38


69 S Section 356 A (1) (b), Indian Merchant Shipping Act.70 Explanation to Section 356 E, Indian Merchant Shipping Act.71 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kakinada72 The Merchant Shipping (Safety Convention Certificates) Rules, 1968.73 Section 356C (1), Indian Merchant Shipping Act.74 Section 356C (2), Indian Merchant Shipping Act.75 Section 356C (3), Indian Merchant Shipping Act.76 Part XI, Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil, Indian Merchant Shipping Act .77 Part X B, Civil Liability For Oil Pollution Damage, Indian Merchant Shipping Act.

development of ports. Amongother things, this applies toincidents that may cause gravedanger to the Indian coastlineand to threats of pollution fromnegligent release of oil, ballastwater, noxious substances andother harmful substances69.‘Harmful substance’ in thiscontext means anything thatcould create hazards to livingresources and marine life70.This Act has gained prominencein light of the fact that severaloil companies are based inKakinada as this port is a transitpoint for oil and gasshipments71.

The Rules under this Actrequires ships, both cargocarriers and others, to conformto the Safety Convention andsecure ‘Safety ConventionCertificates’72. No Indian shipmay set out to sea withoutcarrying an international oilpollution prevention certificate73,pollution prevention certificate74

and sewage pollution preventioncertificate75 issued by the

central government. Under therule-making powers of this Act,the central government mayspecify areas that shall bedeemed to be ‘prohibited zones’for the purpose of prevention ofpollution of the sea by oildischarges and spillage fromoffshore oil explorations76.Provisions for establishing theliability of ship owners in thecase of damage and theformation of an international oilpollution compensation fundunder the InternationalConvention on theEstablishment of anInternational Fund forCompensation of Oil PollutionDamage, 1992 have also beenincluded through an amendmentby the central government ofthis Act in performing itsobligations under theInternational Convention onLimitation of Liability forMaritime Claims (LLMC),197677.

39


The Mercantile MarineDepartment at Chennaiadministers the variousprovisions and rules under thislaw in Andhra Pradesh, includingthe minor ports. One of thesubordinate offices of thisdepartment is based atVishakhapatnam78. Inclusion ofthe mandate of this departmentwithin the mandate of theFoundation would help greatly inregulating the adverseenvironmental impacts ofshipping and port activities onEGREE.

6.2 Department of Ports:Protection of Marine Habitatsin EGREE through IndianPorts Act

Another law with regard to theports and protection of marinehabitats is the Indian Ports Act,1908. Under this Act, thegovernment may enact rules toregulate the use of piers, jetties,landing places, etc., to regulatevessels whilst taking in ordischarging ballast or cargo andto regulate the use of fires andlights within any port, amongother things. The main authorityunder the Act is the Conservatorof Ports, who is empowered to

impose fines and take othermeasures to ensure compliancewith provisions under the Act.The Maritime Agenda 2010–2020, launched in 2011, mentionsthe enactment of a new IndianPorts Act replacing Indian PortsAct, 1908 and the Major PortTrusts Act, 196379. Increasingtonnage and coastal shipping aretwo points found within theagenda80.

As the stress increases on theport facilities in AndhraPradesh, Kakinada Port will befurther developed, thusincreasing the chances ofdegradation of the coastal andmarine biodiversity. Theexpansion of Kakinada Sea PortLimited is in different stages ofcompletion. APCZMA, whichis in charge of formulating AreaSpecific Management Plans forthe CRZ, can help in this regardby formulating plans that provide

78 http://mmdchennai.in/duties&functions.html79 http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=6904480 Ibid.

40


81 Project Document, UNDP, p. 11.82 Project Document, UNDP, p. 18.83 Section 13, Special Economic Zone Act.84 http://www.cabible.com/forum/showthread.php/4171-Special-Economic-Zone-SEZ-

Notifications-Year-2008/page985 Section 14, Special Economic Zone Act.

environmentally friendlyproduction practices andsafeguards built into theseexpanding port facilities.

7. Manufacturing Units and theirRole in Protection of EGREE

There are many medium and largescale industries such as oil refineries,ceramic factories, and fertilizer andpharmaceutical factories and anumber of small-scale industriesincluding those making shell productsand other products from the sea.Most of these industries derivebenefits directly or indirectly fromthe estuary. The potential threats tobiodiversity from these industrialactivities include industrial dischargesand spillage of oil. Offshore oilexploration and production andshipping may result in pollution andbio-accumulation of heavy metalsand synthetic compounds.

Kakinada is part of a proposed SEZand PCPIR81, and it is important thatactivities for such projects do notfurther degrade this region. Somemeasures have been taken by a few

industries as a part of their corporatesocial responsibility activities, such aschoosing a longer route for a pipelineto avoid destruction of mangroveareas82. In addition, the SpecialEconomic Zone Act, 2005 stipulatesthe constitution of an approvalcommittee83, which has been donein the case of the multi-product SEZdeveloped by Kakinada SEZ PrivateLimited84. This committee, whichconsists of representatives from theDepartment of Commerce in AndhraPradesh, have the responsibility ofapproving the units to be set up withinsuch a zone and monitoring whetherthe developer has complied with allthe conditions or not85. Kakinadatown is administered by theKakinada Municipal Corporation,consisting of elected representativesand a Commissioner. It is importantthat this Commissioner, along with theapproval committee for SEZs,APPCB and APCZMA be ideallyincluded in the day-to-day functioningof the Foundation.

41


8. Coast Guard: Use of CoastGuard Act, 1978 in PreventingMarine Pollution around theKakinada Sea Port

The Coast Guard Act, 1978 (CG Act)is an Act that provides for theconstitution and regulation of anarmed force of the Union forensuring the security of the maritimezones of India with a view to theprotection of maritime and othernational interests in such zones andfor matters connected therewith86.

The maritime zones that areprotected by the Coast Guardinclude the territorial waters, thecontiguous zone, the continentalshelf, the EEZ and any othermaritime zone of India87. Activities

in the Kakinada Intermediate Portmainly involve landing of ships andfishing boats in the harbour or port,which cause oil spills in the water.They are likely to affect thebiodiversity of the region, themangroves being in the closeproximity of the harbour. This impacthas not been studied; however, itwould be wise to use the Coast Guardto mitigate any pollution caused in theterritorial waters around EGREE. Inaddition, the Coast Guard station of

every region has an Oil Spill DisasterContingency Plan in place, whichshould be given due regard by otherline agencies responsible for marinehabitat protection. One of the

86 h Preamble, CG Act.87 Section 2 (m), CG Act.

42


functions of the Coast Guardinvolves taking such measures as arenecessary to preserve and protectthe maritime environment and toprevent and control marine pollutionand enforcing the provisions of suchenactments as are for the time beingin force in the maritime zones88.

The officer to be appointed by thecentral government as the Director-General of the Coast Guard89 isassisted in following the mandate ofthis Act by Inspectors-General,Deputy Inspectors-General,Commandants and such otherofficers as may be appointed by thecentral government90.

Even though the Ministry ofDefence at the centre is the nodal

agency for rule-making powerswithin this Act, it may by way of ageneral or specific order in theOfficial Gazette, direct with theconcurrence of the state governmentconcerned that any of the powers orduties that may be exercised ordischarged under a state act by apolice officer may be exercised ordischarged by a member of the CoastGuard who, in the opinion of thecentral government, holds acorresponding or higher rank91. Thedesignated official could have a rolein patrolling the EGREE coastal zonealong with the local public, which hasa stake in the marine resources withwhich the EGREE region abounds.

88 Section 14 (c ) and (e), CG Act.89 Section 5, CG Act.90 Ibid.

43


91 Section 121 (2), CG Act.92 http://www.aptourism.in/investments-site/TOURISM_POLICY_2010.pdf93 Ibid.

9. Prospects of Eco-Tourism inthe EGREE Region

Though EGREE is not very well-known for tourism, it has some goodplaces in and around to visit, such asbeaches, mangrove forests and theGodavari Delta. Currently somerudimentary facilities have beencreated within CWLS, but they arenot enough. If tourism is responsiblymanaged, then it could prove to be agood source of livelihood for thecommunities. In fact the AndhraPradesh Tourism Policy, 2010 has aspecial thrust on conserving theenvironment with the support of thecommunities by getting them toparticipate in the various eco-tourismprogrammes planned by the agenciesformed for this purpose92. It is

stipulated that in every district, aDistrict Tourism PromotionCommittee (DTPC) is envisaged thatwill include representation from theForest Department, amongstothers93. This committee is veryimportant and must be givenrepresentation within the EGREEFoundation to satisfy the dualpurposes of conserving thebiodiversity of EGREE and providinglivelihood support for thecommunities.

10. Involvement of thePanchayati Raj Institutions in theFoundation

The state of Andhra Pradesh has itsPanchayati Raj Act and

44


corresponding rules, which givepower to the mandate of thePanchayats (Extension to theScheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (PESA)in the case of scheduled areas. Itrecognizes the right of villagecommunities to govern themselvesthrough their own systems of self-government and also acknowledgestheir traditional rights over naturalresources. In accordance withPESA, the gram sabha has beengiven various powers to manage theadministration within the villages in

94 Section 242 C (1), APPRA.

a manner that suits them traditionally.According to the Andhra PradeshPanchayat Act, 1998 (APPRA),“Every Gram Sabha is considered tobe competent to safeguard andpreserve the traditions and customsof the people, their cultural identity,community resources.”94 APPRAand rules provide sufficient powersto the gram sabha for approval ofplans. However before preparationof development plans, it is importantthat a need assessment of the village

45


also be done, in which the gramsabha can be instrumental95.Representatives from such gramsabhas located in EGREE will becrucial in the decision-makingfunctions of the Foundation.

On the other hand, the functions ofthe zilla parishad include distributingfunds allotted to the district by thestate government, coordinating plansprepared for various mandals in thedistrict, performing functionsrelating to any development

95 Rule 4, AP PESA Rules, 2011.96 http://www.aponline.gov.in/apportal/departments departments.asp? dep=27& org =178 & category =about97 Ibid.

programme and advising thegovernment on all matters relating todevelopmental activities in thedistrict96. The administration of thezilla parishads will be under thecontrol of the Chief ExecutiveOfficer97. The executive functionsof this officer should be utilized forthe day-to-day functioning of theEGREE Foundation because it couldact as the link between the state andcentral governments and the villagecommunities.

46


It is proposed that the Foundation should not be an implementing agency that willcompete with other government agencies or line departments in the implementationprocess and thus duplicate efforts. Rather, it has to be a supporting, advisoryinstitution that is expected to take up a variety of roles. Thus a few responsibilitiesare envisaged for this Foundation, which would include inter alia the following:

• Overseeing the compliance andmainstreaming environmentalconcerns amongst variousproduction sectors as well asstrengthening the role of theimplementing agencies throughtechnical and advisory back-ups,as a nodal advisory body for theEGREE region.

• Indentifying and understanding theunderlying traditional socio-economic and ecological dynamicsin the landscape between thecommunities and the environment.

• Working towards supporting,advocating and strengthening theoverall policy initiatives to enablevarious agencies working in the areafor enhanced and meaningfulcoordination and collaboration inthe enforcement of coastal zoneregulations and biodiversityconservation

• Monitoring various attributes in theprotected areas, such as human–nature conflict, poverty eradicationand people’s welfare

• Ensuring the continuation andsustainability of various eco-

development activities by the EDCsand VSSs

• Bidding and preparation of specificproject proposals suitable forEGREE

• Conducting capacity building andskill enhancement for villagers andstaff members of EGREE

• Assisting communities to deal withoffenders with reference tobiodiversity resources and theenvironment

• Mobilizing and helping thecommunities with joint patrolling,coastal surveys, intelligencegathering, underwater monitoring,fish landing site monitoring andfield data compilation

• Ensuring that the developmentalactivities happening within theEGREE are not in conflict with theconservation measures and interestsof the local communities

• Mobilizing resources formanagement of EGREE

• Implementation of various specificprogrammes such as rehabilitationand settlement process ofcommunities

VIII. Responsibilities of this Foundation as aFacilitative Body

47


It is imperative that the Foundation have financial mobility to be able to functionas a successful and independent agency. The assistance received from the stateand central governments alone will not be adequate to meet the costs and activitiesof the Foundation. It must generate funds on its own through various innovativemeasures so that in time it will become self-sustainable. It can solicit resources atlocal, regional, national and international levels in tune with the existing rules andprocedures followed in India. In addition, the following are a few measuressuggested to achieve this level of self sustenance:

IX. Flexibility for Resource Mobilization

• Collection of environmental userfees from production sectors basedall over EGREE that directly andindirectly depend on this uniqueecosystem, including portdevelopment and other marineactivities;

• Bidding in national andinternational level projects specificto EGREE with fundingorganizations for grants for research,training and consultancies;

• Fines and penalties for illegalactivities

recognized within various forest andmarine laws;

• Leveraging from financialallocations of the ForestDepartment, Wildlife Department,Department of Ocean DevelopmentPanchayati Raj and RuralDevelopment;

• Fees and receipts for entry intoprotected areas such as sanctuariesand national parks; and

• Other levies through panchayats,etc.

A part of the resources generated by the Foundation can be earmarked and keptaside as a ‘trust fund’, which is a very popular tool of conservation financing inmany parts of the world.



From the foregoing discussion, it can be seen how a flexible management can beenvisaged for the EGREE Foundation that considers the interests of all thestakeholders without compromising any. The facilitative role played by thisFoundation can be further enhanced through innovation and the mind-set of itsfunctionaries. A balance between all interests will be necessary to manage EGREE.The core idea of such an institution is to ensure that the strengths of all the aboveapproaches are weaved into the new structure so that past lessons are incorporatedfor a robust institutional arrangement that lasts for effective marine and coastalbiodiversity concerns in the East Godavari Region, where enhancement of bothbiodiversity conservation measures and livelihoods is ensured and secured. Moreimportantly, it has the potential of serving as an example, perhaps for the first time,in how mainstreaming biodiversity concerns in production sectors can be achieved,especially for a coastal ecosystem and seascape such as EGREE.

X. Conclusion



• Aim and objectives• Mainstreaming conservation in the production sectors

• Composition and structure• Acquiring membership• Right of membership• Duties and responsibilities of members• Consequences of non-performance of duties• Termination of membership• Withdrawal from membership

• Nature and extent of liability• Liability of office bearers• Transfer of assets and liabilities

• Structure• Governing Board• Advisory Board• Executive Functionaries• Frequency of meetings of boards and quorum• Term of office and conditions for removal

• Powers and duties of executive

• Powers and duties of board

• Powers and duties of advisory board

• Functions• Responsibilities or functions of this Foundation as a facilitative body

• Jurisdiction and relation with other agencies

• Representation of line agencies• Involvement of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Department in the management

of Coringa Wildlife Sanctuary• The role of APSBB and biodiversity management

committees in EGREE Foundation• The Andhra Pradesh Coastal Zone Management Authority

(APCZMA) and industrial development in EGREE

Annexure IEssentials of EGREE Foundation: A Framework

50


• Use of Environment Protection Act, 1986 in the control ofpollution from various production sectors

• Fishing, animal husbandry and their regulation withinEGREE through Foundation

• Regulation of ports and shipping in EGREE throughFoundation

• Manufacturing units and their role in protection of EGREE• Use of Coast Guard Act, 1978 in preventing marine

pollution around Kakinada Sea Port• Prospects of eco-tourism in the EGREE region• Involvement of the Panchayati Raj Institutions in the

Foundation• Financial autonomy• Mobilization of funds• Reserve funds• Utilization of funds for specific purposes• Flexibility in terms of resource mobilization• Planning• Sectoral planning and master plan

• Staffing

• Penalties

• Incentives

• Technical and disciplinary back-up

• Global outreach

• Convergence with local authorities and state actors

• Grievance redressal, resolutions of disputes• Dispute resolution among members• Disputes with outside agencies• Disputes relating to management

• Procedure to amend bye-laws

• Dissolution of society

• Manner of disposal of funds on liquidation

51


A Framework

Annexure IIEssentials of EGREE Foundation



Sh. Pramod KrishnanProgramme AnalystUNDP India55 Lodhi Estate, New DelhiIndia. PIN Code - 110 003Email: [email protected]

Sh. Tarun KathulaProject OfficerGoI-UNDP-GEF Godavari ProjectMinistry of Environment and ForestsCGO Complex, New DelhiIndia. Pin Code - 110 003Email: [email protected]

For Information Please Contact

Dr. K. Thulsi RaoState Project CoordinatorArayna Bhawan, SaifabadHyderabad, IndiaPin Code: 500004Email: [email protected]

EGREE Project Landscape LevelUnitD.No:70-3-41, Vaidya Nagar-1,Road No. 2, Ramanayyapeta,Kakinada, East Godavari District,Andhara Pradesh, IndiaPin Code: 533005Telefax: +91- 884-2366017

53

FEASIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A CROSS …...CITATION: Sanjay Upadhyay, Shyama Kuriakose, Pramod...

Documents

Transcript of FEASIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A CROSS …...CITATION: Sanjay Upadhyay, Shyama Kuriakose, Pramod...