For nearly two decades now, Govt. of Nagaland has been struggling to identify a suitable location for the construction of a greenfield airport in Nagaland. Attempt to expand Dimapur airport could not succeed for obvious reasons. Proposition and identification of a greenfield airport site at Chiethu followed the same path after acquisition of enormous amount of land. If we take a series of snapshots overtime, we can infer that spawning of such undesirable ends has been due to poor planning. The present proposed site at Rüzaphema will not be a different story unlessit is guided by sustainable principles and implemented following various sustainable development strategies. Airport is, without any doubt, vital in meeting the basic needs of growing population and in enhancing economic growth; however, this seemingly overwhelming priority if not sighted through social and environmental prisms, can undermine its viability resulting in a lopsided outcome. Economic progress is crucial, so also are social and environmental elements. These are interconnected, indissoluble, and interwoven in creating a sustainable future.
Sustainable development models call for a convergence of these three components. Take for instance, the three-legged stool metaphor often used to explain sustainable development rest on Social equity, Environmental protection and Economic development (other models are beyond the scope of this article). For a sustainable development, all three legs are crucial; one less leg, and the stool is sure to fall over. All legs are equally important for a stool to stand reflecting the need to take into account all these components while planning, executing, and managing developmental programs. Aproject centered on one leg alone will cripple any development resulting in astronomical losses.The proposed mega project should elevate sustainability with its feet firmly planted on these foundations so as to create social benefits at large.
The notion that money has the capability to compensate for any adverse impact(s) is askew. Considering these legsas paramount and guiding principles are pertinent, and will be helpful in designing a sustainable future. It is in this context that this principle be given a political entry for a long term strategic planning. In this regard, may I suggest the Govt. to engage a neutral competent body/agency (with national and international repute) to conduct Social Impact Assessment (SIA) study in relation with Environment Impact Assessment prior to any commitment. Administrative procedures must ensure SIA is done; this is in consonance with thelegal mandates of LARR act 2013, which requires SIA to identify affected families and calculate the social impact when land is acquired.Whether LARR act is effective or exempted due to the presence of Article 371 (A), it is extremely important to forecast probable undesirable social, economic and environmental impacts of development before their occurrence, in order to devise strategies for their mitigation measures.
Decision makers must be accountable for consequences of their decisions;sitting on swivel chairs and giving whimsical commands alone will not suffice (no disrespect intended).Appraising the affected people with apparent social and environmental impacts is not all; the concerned affected individuals must also be given opportunity to participate in designing their future by entering into an agreement in the form of an MoU with the Govt. for safeguarding the security of their future. Though SIA reports will be impossible to catalogue all dimensions of social impacts per se, it will surely be a prerequisite for blueprinting such an MoU. SIA should be done prior to the implementation of the project and not the other way round. The SIA model will help reduce undesirable impacts, enhance benefits, avoid delays and obstruction, lower costs, better community and stakeholder relationships etc. Failure to conduct SIA can impair the intended social benefits, and even worse, threatened its viability. The concerns of the affected individuals, local community, land owners should not be dismissed as being merely imagined or perceived or emotional. To turn a deaf ear to the concerns raised by the land owners would mean a complete dishonor to the land owners’ right and will invite tumultuous protest affecting the smooth implementation of the project.
The concerns raised are very reasonable and therefore, outmost sincerity must be given for considerations. The people of Nagaland cannot bear to witness the much needed greenfield airport being delayed for another decade due to poor planning. Once is a mistake; twice is not. Making another mistake will otherwise reflect an ‘intentional decision’, which will be highly degrading and insulting. Make no mistake, integrateSIA into the decision making process for a better, desirable and sustainable outcome.We cannot wait to see a real sustainable greenfield airport in Nagaland.
The writer is a DST-SERB Young Scientist, and can be reached at kehie10@gmail.com Dr. Mechüselie Kehie Rüzaphema Village, Dimapur
.JPG)
