UPSC MainsGENERAL-STUDIES-PAPER-III201310 Marks200 Words
Q22.

What are the consequences of Illegal mining ? Discuss the Ministry of Environment and Forests' concept of GO AND NO GO zones for coal mining sector.

How to Approach

The question requires a two-pronged answer. First, discuss the consequences of illegal mining, covering environmental, economic, and social impacts. Second, explain the Ministry of Environment and Forests’ (MoEF) ‘Go and No-Go’ zones policy for coal mining, its rationale, and its effectiveness. Structure the answer by first outlining the consequences of illegal mining, then detailing the Go/No-Go policy, and finally, briefly commenting on its limitations and current status. Use examples to illustrate the points.

Model Answer

0 min read

Introduction

Illegal mining, the extraction of minerals without proper licenses or adherence to environmental regulations, poses a significant threat to India’s natural resources and sustainable development. It’s a pervasive issue, particularly in mineral-rich states, driven by demand from industries and often facilitated by corruption. The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), recognizing the severe ecological consequences, introduced the ‘Go and No-Go’ zoning framework in 2009 for coal mining areas. This policy aimed to balance economic development with environmental protection by categorizing forest lands based on their ecological sensitivity.

Consequences of Illegal Mining

Illegal mining has far-reaching consequences across multiple dimensions:

  • Environmental Degradation: Deforestation, soil erosion, water contamination (through sedimentation and chemical runoff), loss of biodiversity, and habitat destruction are common outcomes. For example, illegal iron ore mining in Karnataka (2006-2011) led to widespread deforestation and pollution of the Tungabhadra River.
  • Economic Losses: Loss of revenue for the government due to unpaid royalties and taxes. It also creates unfair competition for legitimate mining companies.
  • Social Impacts: Displacement of local communities, disruption of livelihoods, increased human trafficking, and health problems due to pollution. The Kudremukh Iron Ore Mining Company case in Karnataka highlighted the displacement of tribal communities.
  • Security Concerns: Illegal mining often fuels conflicts and provides funding for illegal activities, including Naxalism in certain regions.

The ‘Go and No-Go’ Zones Policy

In 2009, the MoEF introduced the ‘Go and No-Go’ zoning framework for coal mining, aiming to identify areas suitable for mining while protecting ecologically sensitive zones. The policy categorized forest areas into two categories:

  • No-Go Zones: These areas were deemed ecologically too sensitive for mining. They included areas with high biodiversity, critical wildlife habitats, and significant catchment values. Approximately 66% of the 66 coal blocks were initially classified as ‘No-Go’ zones.
  • Go Zones: Areas with relatively lower ecological sensitivity were designated as ‘Go’ zones, where mining could be permitted with appropriate environmental safeguards.

Rationale behind the Policy

  • Protecting Biodiversity: To safeguard ecologically fragile ecosystems and prevent irreversible damage to biodiversity.
  • Ensuring Water Security: To protect vital watersheds and prevent water pollution.
  • Upholding Forest Rights: To protect the rights and livelihoods of forest-dwelling communities.

Implementation and Challenges

The implementation of the ‘Go and No-Go’ policy faced significant resistance from the Ministry of Coal, which argued that it would severely hamper coal production and affect power generation. Several challenges emerged:

  • Conflict between Ministries: A major point of contention was the differing priorities of the MoEF and the Ministry of Coal.
  • Lack of Clear Criteria: The criteria for classifying areas as ‘Go’ or ‘No-Go’ were often ambiguous and subject to interpretation.
  • Pressure from Industry: Powerful mining lobbies exerted pressure to relax the restrictions.

Current Status

The ‘Go and No-Go’ policy was effectively diluted in 2012, with the decision-making power shifted to a committee comprising representatives from various ministries. This committee adopted a more lenient approach, allowing mining in many areas previously classified as ‘No-Go’ zones. The policy was eventually superseded by more comprehensive environmental regulations and the introduction of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification 2020 (though this is itself controversial).

Conclusion

Illegal mining continues to be a major challenge in India, with significant environmental, economic, and social consequences. While the ‘Go and No-Go’ policy was a well-intentioned attempt to balance development with environmental protection, its implementation was hampered by inter-ministerial conflicts and pressure from vested interests. A more robust and transparent regulatory framework, coupled with effective enforcement and community participation, is crucial to address this issue and ensure sustainable mining practices. The focus should be on strengthening environmental impact assessments and ensuring strict compliance with environmental regulations.

Answer Length

This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.

Additional Resources

Key Definitions

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
A systematic process that identifies, predicts, evaluates, and mitigates the environmental effects of proposed projects or developments.
Royalty
A payment made by a mining company to the government for the right to extract minerals from public land.

Key Statistics

In 2011, the Supreme Court of India banned iron ore mining in Bellary, Hospet, and Chitradurga districts of Karnataka, estimating losses of over ₹35,000 crore due to illegal mining.

Source: Supreme Court of India Order, 2011 (Knowledge Cutoff: Sept 2021)

According to the Ministry of Mines Annual Report (2022-23), the total value of mineral production in India was ₹6.92 lakh crore.

Source: Ministry of Mines Annual Report 2022-23

Examples

Bellary Iron Ore Mining Scam

The illegal iron ore mining in Bellary, Karnataka, between 2006 and 2011, involved widespread deforestation, encroachment on forest lands, and illegal exports, causing significant environmental damage and economic losses.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the role of the District Mineral Foundation (DMF) in addressing the impacts of mining?

The DMF is a fund established by state governments to address the adverse impacts of mining on local communities. It collects contributions from mining companies based on royalty payments and uses these funds for the benefit of mining-affected people and areas.

Topics Covered

EnvironmentEconomyMiningEnvironmentForestryCoal