N Janbemo Humtsoe
The journey of oil exploration and production in Nagaland has been messed up with long, complex and often painful experience that to date the issue seems intractable both in terms of its resolution and future direction. The inability of the state government to frame comprehensive oil policy during the initial stage and the unethical practice of the ONGC has put people and politics and the oil industry at loggerheads creating an aura of mistrust, paralysis and blame, set against a worsening situation for the communities concerned. The grim reality is that decades of negotiations, initiatives and protests have ultimately failed to deliver a solution that meets the expectations and responsibilities of all concern.
While the discovery of commercial quantities of oil at Changpang- Tssori area of Wokha district has been received with great expectations due to the anticipated economic fortunes likely to be generated from oil exploration, past experience of deceit and fraudulence has raised numerous questions as to how the accruing revenues will be appropriated between the state and the stakeholders and whether the revenues from oil are to be well governed through a transparent and accountable system that ensures equity in sharing, and whether the companies will honour their commitment on rehabilitation measures, CSRs and other environmental safety issues.
The government of Nagaland heeding to the voice of its people, has appointed an expert team to frame suitable modalities for extraction of oil in Nagaland. The draft modalities were tabled to the people of Nagaland on 13th July 2012 by the much proclaimed Grant Thornton Advisory Private Limited, yet, with a disclaimer that the draft document should not be shown, given to, copied by or discussed in whole or in part with any other person without its permission making the draft document a de facto state secret.
While the guidelines, areas of concern and detail inputs given to the techno-economic consultant by the state government for framing the modalities is not known, overall, the draft document does not look like a well researched paper matching the reputation of the consultancy firm. Saving the three economic model for revenue/profit sharing, the draft modalities contains nothing new or interesting for the people of Nagaland. Other features in the modalities outlined only myopic policies on land, employment, corporate social responsibilities and infrastructure development etc.
The failure to put in place and maintain effective, transparent and vibrant oil governance systems has had dreadful effects in many oil-producing developing countries notably; Nigeria, Gabon, Angola, Indonesia, Sudan and Chad are examples of oil producing countries that had and are experiencing oil related problems. How much money the state, the society or the land owners will profit is such a tempting conjecture but there are issues beyond monetary benefits that are equally important and thus merit our attention.
The draft modalities failed to see things beyond the revenue sharing options. Firstly, Information sharing is perhaps overzealously restricted to government and allied agencies. Secondly, there are not enough solid plans to oversee mid-stream and down-stream oil activities such as refineries, sales and by products industries. Thirdly, licensing strategy like first come first basis or competitive bidding etc. were yet to be highlighted. Fourthly, monitoring and supervision mechanism for exploration and production programmes are ignored. Fifthly, temporary, partial or full abandonment plans were not discussed despite the sweet reminder at the Changpang oil fields. And lastly, too little- too weak is mentioned about social and community development through employment generation and other CSRs schemes.
Though several corners in our society has echoed urgency for resumption of oil exploration in our state, as clarified by the cabinet subcommittee, the modalities would be applicable for the entire state of Nagaland and once it is approved all exploration activities shall be governed by that modalities. Hence any hasty decision without properly considering the pros and cons may cost us dearly in the long run. After all, human wellbeing does not only revolve around economic welfare but also of security, safety and sustainability.
Hence, some of the key issues that should be incorporated in our public debate are: the need for a regulatory environment that fosters transparency concerning all revenues and in negotiation and award of contracts; the importance of balancing oil production with conservation and wider environmental wellbeing; enforcing high standards of corporate responsibility and compliance on the part of investing companies; ensuring that the anticipation of wealth from oil exploration does not intensify land insecurity, agricultural practices, sectarian competition and other conflicts.
It is also important for the government to ensure that investing companies respects the rights of the indigenous people concerning free, prior and informed consent. There is a tendency that the companies divulge information pertaining only of the benefits accruing from any major investments and withhold information relating to the likely negative effects. The indigenous people should be protected from such unethical corporate tricks.
Moreover, in case of any default, the concerned firm(s) should be made wholly accountable as per the polluters pay principle enshrined in Principle 16 of the Rio Declaration 1992, wherein it states that "national authorities should endeavor to promote the internalization of environmental costs and the use of economic instruments, taking into account the approach that the polluter should, in principle, bear the cost of pollution with due regard to public interest and without distorting international trade and investment.”
Some of the most adverse impacts of oil production and mining include soil pollution, surface and ground water contamination and air pollution. Mining activities that have exacerbated pollution include, oil spills, gas leaks, gas flares, fire and subsidence etc. Mining and exploration induce economic, social, and cultural changes through alteration in land use patterns, local population levels, socio-economic and cultural systems. They also result into increases of aqueous and gaseous waste streams which may affect plant and animal communities due to changes in their environment through variations in water, air and soil/sediment quality and through disturbance by noise, extraneous light and changes in vegetation cover. These negative impacts need to be mitigated and addressed to ensure ecological harmony. Hence proper environmental impact assessment should be carried out to mitigate possible environmental fallout from such projects.
Land ownership and holding patterns in Nagaland have been unique and often developmental activities has been halted or disturbed because of these special rights. Even when the land is sold, the native still see themselves as the landlords. Because of the special attachment to the land, the natives do not let go of the land completely. Hence, clear cut land acquisition policy, land rent and other employment opportunities or benefits to be accorded to the land owners should be properly defined and specified in the first place to avoid future misunderstandings and conflicts.
Lastly, successful implementation of any projects depends upon good governance and management: transparency, responsiveness, accountability, monitoring and evaluation, access to information, knowledge, awareness, sustainability, and conflict management etc. are the pillars for peaceful growth and progress. Governance does not only refer to the role played by the government, but of the companies, local developmental bodies, civil societies, trade and labour unions etc. For only under the atmosphere of good governance and sound management we would be able to reap the true benefits of development.
Green Foundation Wokha
janbemolotha@gmail.com
