An Analysis of EIA Report of the Second

International Airport Project, Nepal

Shree Govind Shah

Abstract: Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a planning tool which enables decision makers to accept
environmentally friendly projects and reject environment damaging projects or their certain components. EIA has
been mandatory in Nepal since the enactment of Environment Protection Act in 1997. Usually in Nepal, EIA is
done for a project late in the project cycle after many important decisions on design and locations have already
been made. While in case of government sponsored projects, EIA has remained as ‘pro forma’ compliance with
government’s legal requirements. This paper analyses outputs of approved EIA of a mega infrastructure project
“Second International Airport Project” which government wants to implement despite of protests by conservationists,
and environmental and social activists. There are technocratic problems in EIA Report such as informational
weaknesses, insufficient analysis of impacts, and inadequately proposed mitigations measures. It indicates political
influence on EIA. This paper suggests making policy decision on size and nature of an international airport and its
facilities, alternative locations avoiding ecologically sensitive area, and source of funding. It proposes to conduct
a comprehensive Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) complying with national and international
environmental and social safeguards, before making any decision to fell trees.

Keywords: Ecosystem services, pro Forma, technocratic problems, buffer zone, endangered, national park,
livelihoods, replacement, compensatory plantation, biodiversity, conservation, Nepal

BACKGROUND of about 0.8 million trees in the first phase as per the

G overnment of Nepal is planning to construct

International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
standard, Second International Airport. A prefeasibility
approved EIA Report (Hakahaki, Sept 2018).

EIA is a project-planning and decision-making

study conducted in 1995 identified 8 sites and the instrument which facilitates decision makers to accept
feasibility study in 1997 selected the present site in environment friendly projects and reject environmentally
Kohalbi Municipality (GEOCE, 2018). The then Ministry damaging projects or their certain components
of Environment on 10 February 2011, approved Terms of (Robinson, 1992; IAIA, 1995; Hironaka, 2002). Effects
Reference (TOR) for Environmental Impact Assessment of EIA on projects have been very weak and have
(EIA) study as required by government legislation. played only limited role in project approval and design
Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation (MoCTA) decisions; it has remained as ‘pro forma’ compliance
is the responsible government agency, the proponent to with legal requirements (IAIA, 1995; Cashmore et al,
construct and operate the airport. 2004). Politically motivated EIAs are becoming common
in developing countries. Decisions are often skewed
The Nepalese Consulting firm GEOCE Consultants towards non-environmental values. However, there are
(P) Ltd., located in Lalitpur, Nepal prepared EIA Report examples of significantly influencing decision-making
of the Second International Airport Project (SIAP) process such as withdrawal of environmentally unsound
for the proponent MoCTA in March 2018 based on projects, faulty locations etc. or even blockage of projects
given TOR and following procedures of Environment (van de Grondane, 1994; Devlin JF and Nonita TY,
Protection Rules (1997) of Government of Nepal and 2008). In Nepal, there is no such example of a blocked
MoCTA submitted the EIA Report with recommendation project due to EIA.
for approval to the Ministry of Forests and Environment
(MoFE), the latter approved the submitted EIA Report This paper is a technical evaluation of the
for its implementation on 23 May 2018 (KP, 2018). Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Report of the
Second International Airport Project (SIAP) prepared by
Some environmental, conservation and social the Proponent MoCTA and approved for implementation
activists have been publicly expressing their worries and by MoFE; both government agencies. This is the first time
campaigning against the felling of about 2.4 million trees a technical evaluation of an approved EIA is being done
that would have a significant adverse impact on forest in Nepal. This paper examines the outputs of EIA report,
ecology, wildlife and ecosystem services, and asked analyses technocratic problems and EIA usefulness,
the government to block the project on environmental and suggests steps need to be focussed in next stage of a
ground and select another site for SIA (THT, Sept 2018, comprehensive EIA.
Hakahaki, Sept 2018, Rai June 2018 & others). However,
the Proponent MoCTA is determined to construct the Data and information provided in the approved EIA
airport and has requested the MoFE to approve felling report are analysed. Besides, published information on

HYDRO NEPAL | ISSUE NO. 24 | JANUARY 2019

57
the Second International Airport Project were gathered EIA report. It discusses the major findings, identifies
from newspapers, magazines and social media, also, technocratic problems, and suggests steps that need to
published papers in journals and documents relevant to be focussed in the next stage of EIA and ‘detailed design
EIA process and usefulness are reviewed. phase study’.
SN Components Details Comments by author

1 Construction of ICAO standard international airport

Phase 1 (2020-2030): 3.6 km long one runway & two

taxi ways
Construction of Runway Timeframe for 2nd phase is not given; To be de-
1.1 and Taxiway cided during ‘Detailed Design Phase (DDP)’
Phase 2: altogether 3.6 km long two parallel runways &
4 taxi ways
Phase 1: capacity to handle 9 million passenger/yr –
25,000/day 2nd phase passenger handling capacity appears to
Construction of passenger
1.2 be too high, 60 million/yr. Needs to be sensibly
and cargo terminals
Phase 2: capacity to handle 60 million passenger/yr – worked out during policy dession and DDP
about 167,000 /day

Construction of airport
facilities such as aircraft
1.3 Size of facilities in Phase 1 & Phase 2 is given
& GSE maintenance com-
plex, car parks etc Size of airport facilities and airport utilities in
2nd phase has been calculated on the assump-
tion of handling 60 million passengers per year
- Power Plant, Airfield lighting substations, Heating/ or 164,000/day. Government should make policy
Construction of airport cooling plant & airport fuelling facilities decision to fix a comfortable size of the SIA in 2nd
utilities phase
1.4 - Pumping station and water treatment plant

- Sewage treatment plant & solid and hazardous facility

Government has declared 8,046 ha as ‘Airport Area’. As Airport and facilities including Airport City would
per EIA report the total land required for Phase 1 work cover would use about 24% of the declared ‘Air-
(airport with one runway and its facilities) is 1,084 ha
Area required port Area’. Open space and buffer area is 3 times
and in total 1,300 ha for phase 2 work which include an more than built-in area. Government must decide
additional parallel runway and other facilities. Airport size of the buffer area.
city would cover 600 ha.
Modern transportation, communication, water supply, EIA report does not have any assessment of the
2 Airport City development drainage and provisions of hotel and residential facili- proposed airport city; no rationale for this city.
ties; all covering 600 ha.
EIA estimates huge requirements of construction
materials for the project: 8.36 million mt of earth fill There is lack of technical information on construc-
materials, sub-grades, aggregates, sand and boulders for tion materials requirement for various works in
the Phase 1 single runway construction. Phase 1 and Phase 2.
3 Construction materials
EIA report has suggested upstream of Pasaha Khola and There is no environmental assessment of quarry
Lal Bakaiya River as source for construction material. sites.
EIA mentions that detail requirement of construction
materials will be worked out during DDP.
The Second International Airport (SIA) is proposed to
be built in 4 stages with serving passenger volume of
4.8 million pax, 6.7 million pax, 9.2 million pax and 60 EIA is not clear about these 4 stages of construc-
4 Construction planning million pax. tion planning. In some chapters, EIA mentions 3
phases.
Details will be prepared during DDP.
EIA does not have detailed description on connecting EIA has not done environmental assessment of
roads, mechanical yards, aggregate crushing and mixing infrastructure facilities required during construc-
facility, construction materials storage yards, spoil and tion and operation phases.
5. Construction facilities waste disposal area, Construction camps etc. EIA sug-
gests careful planning of these infrastructure facilities
and details to be worked out during DDP.
EIA cited total cost US $ 6,565 million which is based
on 2010 estimates: US $ 545 million for phase 1, US Considering inflation rate of 6-7% project cost for
Project Cost $ 2,553 million for phase 2 and US $ 3,467 million for Phase 1 would be around US $ 900 million
phase 3. This is based on 2010 price.

Table 1: Project components as described in EIA Report

SALIENT FEATURES OF SIAP
This paper provides a brief background of the
technical analysis, summarises salient features of the Project Rationale
project with its rationale and environmental conditions International air connectivity to Nepal is confined
in the project area, and environmental impacts and only to the Tribhuvan International Airport (TIA) in
mitigation measures as mentioned in the approved Kathmandu Valley of Nepal. It is very congested and

HYDRO NEPAL | ISSUE NO. 24 | JANUARY 2019

58
there is no space for its expansion due to haphazard Project Area and Land Use Pattern
urbanization and topographical limitations. A good Government has declared 8,046 ha in Kohalbi
moderate tourism growth would require Airport to municipality as “Airport Area” which is heavily forested.
handle 3-4 million passengers per year while TIA handles According to EIA report, 7,587 ha (94.3%) is forestland
about 1.1-1.3 million passengers per year. Airspace under the ownership of the Ministry of Forest and
management for take-off and landing planes has become Environment followed by 296 ha flood plain, 76 ha
a serious problem. NEPECO/IRAD/BDA study in 1997 registered private land and 87 ha under other land use.
stated that TIA could not meet the rising demands of Kohalbi municipality, where this SIA project is proposed,
tourist arrival in Nepal after 2015 (GEOCE, 2018). occupies an area of 157.4 sq. km with a total population
of 44,082 in 2011 (GON, 2018).
Project Description
The Second International Airport Project (SIAP) As per Terms of Reference for EIA, the proposed SIA
proposed (a) construction of an ICAO standard Project requires 1,300 ha for airport with two parallel
international airport with required airport facilities runways and its infrastructure / utilities and 600 ha for
and utilities such as two parallel 3.6 km long runways, the airport city. The declared ‘Airport Area’ is considered
taxiways, passenger and cargo terminals, aircraft as the direct impact area.
maintenance complex and other utilities (Table 1), and
(b) airport city development with all the facilities of EIA Rational and TOR/Methodology
modern transportation, communication, water supply, As per the Environment Protection Act (EPA) 1997 and
drainage and provisions of hotel and residential facilities schedule 2 of Environment Protection Rules (EPR)
adjacent to international airport. 1997 of the government of Nepal, ‘Environmental
Impact Assessment’ is mandatory for the construction
Project Location of new airport. The consultant GEOCE followed general
The proposed SIA area is in Kohalbi Municipality methodology including public hearing as prescribed in
which was formed in 2016 in Bara District of Province EPR, 1997.
2, southern Nepal, while Nijgadh is the adjoining
Municipality. Approximately, the site is trapezoidal in Comments: SIA is a huge infrastructure development
shape, occupying 80.5 sq km area (longitude 850 4’ 24’’ project which would require investment from national
to 850 12’ 38’’ and latitude 270 6’ 38’’ to 270 10’ 39’’). A and international financial institutions. Under this
location map of the proposed SIA project is presented in context EIA should have followed environmental and
Fig 1. social safeguards policies, strategies and norms and
codes prescribed by international financial agencies
East-West Highway runs parallel to the project area such as ADB, World Bank, IFC or others. EIA study team
in the north. Government has initiated construction of lacked specialists on faunal assessment and analysis
Kathmandu-Terai Fast Track-Express Highway as a pre- of ecosystem services of the vast forest area, as well as
requirement of the SIAP operation. Government has assessment of aircraft noises and engine emissions,
awarded Korean JV to prepare ‘Detailed Project Report’ hazardous building materials and waste management,
of this expressway. Simra Airport, which provides regular and other critical issues related to the construction of
air service to Kathmandu, is located about 10 km south ICAO category International airport.
of the proposed SIA while aerial distance from SIA site to
Indian border is about 20 km in south direction. ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION IN THE
PROJECT AREA
The descriptions below are from the EIA Report, 2018

Physical Environment
The proposed SIA Project area is situated in the Gangetic
alluvial plane with elevation of less than 300m and it
has flat plain topography. The climate is subtropical and
humid and rainfall pattern is monsoonal. The braided
Pasaha and Lal Bakaiya rivers originating in lower
hills bring flash floods and sediments during monsoon;
riverbank cutting is intense. There are small seasonal
streams and drainages that collect seepage water, locally
called ‘Paini’, in the project area and they join Pasaha
and Lal Bakaiya rivers in downstream area. There is good
source of groundwater in the project area which is used
for irrigation and drinking. At present, there is no air or
Fig 1: Location map of the proposed SIA project noise pollution.

HYDRO NEPAL | ISSUE NO. 24 | JANUARY 2019

59
Biological Environment under the dominancy of Sal species; Sal Forests are the
The forest in the project area is broadly classified into: most economic forests in the district. Some part of the
Sal Forest, Terai-Hardwood Forest and Khair-Sissoo project forest is classified as protected forest.
Forest. Forests are mostly dominated by Sal (Shorea
robusta) except on either side of the river banks where The project area forms a continuous green corridor
a riverine type of forest with Sissoo (Dalbergia sissoo), for wildlife; the newly extended parts of Parsa National
Khair (Acacia catechu) and other associates like Red Park (PNP) run almost along the northern border of the
Silk Cotton (Bombax ceiba), Lagerstroemia parviflora, project area. The project area provides good feeding
Yellow Teak (Adina cardifolia), Asna (Terminalia habitat for mammals and other wildlife; EIA reported 23
tomentosa) are dominating. Sal forests are the economic species of mammals, 31 avian species and 10 species of
forest resources of Bara district. reptiles in and around the project area. Among wildlife
species visiting forests in project area, Chinese pangolin
EIA describes the project area as one of the richest (Manis pentadactyla), Himalayan Goral (Naemorhedus
forest biodiversity area in Terai with considerably high goral), leopard (Panthera pardus) and tiger (Panthera
Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs), and some of the tigris) are nearly threatened and endangered mammal
NTFP species having high potential for marketing. EIA species; Lesser Florican (Sypheotides indicus) is an
identified 22 NTFP species in the project area. Forest endangered bird species (IUCN, 2008).
vegetation provides edible fruits such as Black Plum
(Eugenia jambolana), Indian Gooseberry (Phyllanthus Comments: Since the proposed project area is a
emblica), Bengal Quince (aegle marmelos), Red date part of Parsa National Park (PNP) ‘buffer zone’ and
(Ziziphus jujubae) etc., plants with medicinal uses, fibres lies in Terai Arc Landscape (TAL), EIA should have
for making ropes, leaves for making plates and others. At analysed biodiversity and wildlife aspects of PNP and its
least 60 species recorded are edible. contribution to TAL’s conservation goal. According to
Forest Rules (revised in 2001) Sal (Shorea robusta) and
About 30 ha are planted forest in Tangiya settlement Satisal (Dalbergia latifolia) are protected species and
area and about 350 ha of forests are leased to government trees are banned for transportation, export and felling
owned Herbal Processing and Production Company
Limited (HPPCL) which produces essential oils like Social Environment
Palma Rosa, Citronella, Mentha, Eucalyptus, etc. The proposed project area is in Ward no. 8 of Kohalbi
Municipality, Bara district. There are three settlements
Some forest area has been declared as ‘Collaborative established in the project area and as per EIA report,
Forest (CF)’ with silviculture system and their ‘operation there are 7,487 people living in 1,492 households and
plan’ has been prepared and approved by the District together they cultivate about 530 ha land. They are
Forest Office about 5-6 years ago with validity of 10 migrant population -illegal encroachers of forests mostly
years. These CFs provide forest products to people in from hills except living in Kathghat settlement. Migrant
their command area; the two Tamagadhi CF (2,260 settlement do not possess land ownership certificates
ha) and Sahajnath CF (2,579 ha) have just over 37,000 although they cultivate land.
beneficiary households.
Kathghat: is an old settlement of Tharu Indigenous
Forest vegetation ha Timber m3 community of Madhesh origin. There are 132 households
Forest area 7,587 and only 16 of them who do not have their land ownership
paper are included in EIA.
Mature trees (585,499) (600,140)
Shorea robusta 198,450 198,049 Tangiya Basti: government resettled few hill migrants
Other species 387,049 402,091 in 1980s and more people have arrived since then; now
Pole sized trees 1,864,820 - there are more than 1,439 households settled by clearing
forest area. They do not possess land rights.
Regeneration -sapling/ha 3,127 -
Regeneration -seedling/ha 4,772 -
Matiyani: is a newly established settlement – since
Source: Data from EIA Report (2018) analysed. 2003; the 39 families settled here belong to Dalit -
untouchable community of Madhesh origin. They do not
Table 2: Forest vegetation in the proposed SIA Project possess legal documents for land.
area
Forest in project area has a medium density forest They have developed shallow to deep tube-well
vegetation with 323 trees/ha (77 matured trees and 246 irrigation system for growing vegetables as cash crops.
pole-sized trees), 3,127 saplings/ha and 4,772 seedlings/ The average landholding is about 0.33 ha/households
ha (Table 2). There are 2,450,319 mature and pole-sized which is not enough to feed all the members in a
trees in the project area. Over 52% of the forest area is household. Farmers practice intensive cultivation and

HYDRO NEPAL | ISSUE NO. 24 | JANUARY 2019

60
grow cash crops; vegetables are grown in about 60% of 1,300 ha and Airport City would cover 600 ha. However,
the cropped area, followed by maize 15% and the rest government has demarcated and declared 8,046 ha as
25% other crops. ‘Airport Area’ assuming the future development of SIA
as the international hub for air traffic in South Asia and
They have built 1,494 residential structures, 49 of a possible ‘defence airport’ of the country. EIA has been
these buildings are categorized as Pakka – constructed prepared for the clearance of the entire 8,046 ha.
using brick and cement, while the rest are Kachcha -
using wood and thatched/ zinc roof. There are four public Comments: There is no sound reason for declaring
primary schools and two private schools in the project 8,046 ha as airport area when infrastructure facilities and
settlements, average literacy is 73.5%. There is a health utilities for airport would require only 1,300 ha. Again,
centre in Kathghat and Tangiya basti settlements. Tube- development of airport city at the cost of biodiversity rich
wells provide drinking water in all three settlements. forest is questionable.
There is no electricity supply line from the national grid
but almost all households (90%) use solar for lighting. Beneficial Project Impacts
About 70% use LP gas for cooking followed by 28% using Beneficial project impacts as per EIA Report are
fuelwood. Nijgadh town located 5-6 km from the project summarised here:
area is the nearest market centre. • Employment generation to local people during
project construction and operation phase;
There is a Sahajnath Shiv temple in the project area • Increase in local economy
of regional significance. There are 7 smaller irrigation • Technical skills and knowhow to local community
schemes sourced in the southern part of the project area • Induce development in project municipality –
which provide irrigation to 2,688 ha in more than 15 Kohalbi Municipality and surrounding areas
settlements. • Improvement in the national and international
connectivity through air and motorable road
Comments: EIA has not included all the households • Creation of new area of diverse business and
and their land who are permanently living in the project industrial opportunities in the project area and its
area for decades such as Tharu indigenous community vicinity
in Kathghat settlement. It lacks livelihood analysis of • Opening of market for the locally produced
people living in the proposed project area as well as agriculture products
outside the project area who depend on the project area • Opening of opportunity for diversification/
for forest products and water source for irrigation. intensifications of agricultural activities for better
economic returns to farmer communities
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND PROPOSED • Appreciation in the land values in the project vicinity
MITIGATION MEASURES • Enhancement of social service facilities such as
Project impacts and suggested mitigation measures education, health water supply, electrification
summarised below are from the EIA Report, 2018 • Impact on tourism

Project Activities Causing Impacts Potential Adverse Impacts and Proposed

(a) Construction and operation of an ICAO standard Mitigations
international airport in three phases,
Construction Phase Activity: a) Physical Environment
(i) Construction related activities e.g. land preparation
for construction, aggregate crushing and mixing Adverse Impacts
facility, construction materials storage yards, spoil i) Land use changes and implication to the ecological
and waste disposal area, construction camps, mining balance of the area
for construction materials etc. • Removal of forest vegetation in the entire project
(ii) Construction of ‘Access and Peripheral’ road (30 km area could cause ecological imbalance as well as
x 20 m width) to project sites adversely affect surface and groundwater in the
southern part of the project area.
Operation Phase activity: ii) Changes in drainage ‘Paini’ networks and implications
i) Solid wastes, waste water – sewage, and other wastes to local runoff and erosion
generated in airport • Construction activities could disturb natural
ii) Landing and taking-off of large airplanes in the drainage networks and their natural flow
adjacent area of Parsa National Park iii) Change in air pollution level due to construction
activities
b) Development of Airport City adjacent to the airport iv) Change in the pollution level of surface water
Terms of Reference for EIA states that the proposed • Dumping of construction wastes, haphazard disposal
SIA with two parallel runways would be developed in of liquid wastes from labour and other camp sites

HYDRO NEPAL | ISSUE NO. 24 | JANUARY 2019

61
 and leakage of petroleum products could pollute • The first phase airport development with 3.6 km long
natural drains and surface water and affect water single runway including peripheral and approach
quality in downstream area roads (86 ha) would require 1,084 ha area. Forest
v) Changes in noise pollution level due to construction area to be cleared is 990 ha, having 328,904 trees.
activities The loss of forest product from these trees would
vi) EIA has identified following adverse impacts during be gross 1.68 million cubic foot timber and 4,703
project operation Chatta fuelwood valued at NPR 8.5 billion (US $
• Upstream erosion enhancement, flash floods and 77.3 million) at market price (Table 3).
associated change in river course, and sedimentation
could have implications to airport area ii) Loss of forest vegetation in the 2nd phase airport
• Changes in surface and groundwater hydrology development
• Emission from aircraft engines, ground support • Total area required for the full-fledged SIA in
equipment, auxiliary power units, ground access 2nd phase with capacity of serving 60 million
vehicles would significantly increase air pollution in passengers/year including airport city is 1,900 ha.
the project area. Aircraft engine emissions are major EIA has estimated 1,641 ha forest land to be clear-
greenhouse gases which have great implications for felled. There will be permanent loss of 448.084
climate change. trees having gross 8.12 million cubic foot timber and
• Landing and take-off of aircrafts, and engine run- 8,050 Chatta fuelwood. Its valuation at market price
ups after aircraft maintenance produce maximum in 2018 was estimated to be NPR 14.9 billion (US $
noise level of up to 90-110 dB(A) on the surrounding 135.4 million).
environment. Its impacts would be noticeable within
2 km from the airport boundary. iii) Loss of forest vegetation in the whole ‘direct impact
area’
Mitigation Measures • Demarcated airport area is 8,045 ha, of which
EIA has proposed the following mitigation measures to forest area occupies 7,582ha. EIA estimated 2.45
reduce impacts on physical environment: million standing trees(586,001 matured trees and
1,864,827 pole sized trees) having 36.9 million cubic
• Conventional good practices for management of foot timber and 39,062 Chhatta fuelwood, currently
natural drainage system, disposal of construction valued at NPR 69.2 billion (US $ 629 million)
and other wastes, operation of crusher and batching
plants, leakage of oil/grease and other hazardous SIA full-
f l e d g e d SIA area
Project
materials, landscaping in the project area, and Description SIA Phase 1
Phase I & 2
control ofair, water and noise pollution during
Total area (ha) 1,084 1,900 8,045
construction phase.
• Upstream erosion enhancement measures through Forest area (ha) 990 1,601 7,582
river training, maintaining drainage channels in the Other area (ha) 94 299 463
project area, managing surface hydrology through Forest vegetation 328,904 trees 448,084 trees 2 , 4 trees
50,827
minimum loss of forest cover and construction
of wells/ditches north of the project area for - matured trees 74,859 128,670 586,001
groundwater recharge - pole-sized trees 254,050 319414 1,864,827
• EIA hasrecommended to adopt ICAO ‘policies
Forest product
and practices’ related to environmental protection
including air and noise pollution, and safety. - gross timber (cft) 1.68 million 8.12 million 36.9 million
- Fuelwood (Chhat- 4,703 8,050 39,062
Comments: Southern part of the project area is ta)
partially the source of irrigation system that irrigates Valuation at market
farming lands in the downstream areas. Changes in price
surface and groundwater hydrology in the project NPR 8.5 billion 14.9 billion 69.2 billion
area would affect water source and irrigation system. US $ 77.3 million 135.4 million 629 million
Increased noise level could impact on wildlife adjacent
to the project area and in Parsa National Park. EIA lacks Source: EIA Report (2018) – data given are summarized.
environmental assessment of quarry sites. One Chatta is one truckload of fuelwood.

b) Biological Environment Table 3: Loss of Forest vegetation due to implementation

Three scenarios of project impacts are assessed in the of SIAP
EIA Report.
i) Forest vegetation loss in the 1stphase airport Besides, two Forest Range Offices and one Ilaka Forest
development Office operating in the Project area will be displaced.

HYDRO NEPAL | ISSUE NO. 24 | JANUARY 2019

62
iv) Loss of forest resources and its implication on
SIA full-
livelihood of local community SIA Project
Description SIA Phase 1 fledged area
• People living close to the project area in Kohalbi Phase I & 2
municipality will lose opportunity to collect various Saplings planted1/ 8.222 mil- 11.713 mil- 61.27 million
lion lion
forest products such as fuelwood, indigenous
medicinal herbs, wild fruits and seasonal wild Area requires (ha) 5,139 7,320 36,294
2/
vegetables, leaves, organic matter for compost,
Plantation cost 1.876 billion 2.673 billion 13.98 billion
fodder and grazing for their ruminants. This may (NPR) 3/
put pressure on other national forests and resources.
1/ Considering 1:25 compensatory plantation; 2/
v) Loss of Collaborative Forest (CF) area 1,600 saplings/ha; 3/NPR 365,000/ha – includes
• People legally using CF for forest products will have plantation cost, watchman, replacement of dead trees
to look for alternatives. Major parts of the two CFs and weeding management up to 5 years
are in the proposed project area.
Table 4: Area and cost of compensatory plantation
• Associated impacts on forest resources identified in
EIA are as follows:
• Impacts of workforce, associated economic migrants iii) Other Measures
and airport city on forest resources during project • EIA has proposed protective, awareness and
construction and operation phase regulatory measures to reduce impacts of workforce
• Loss of primary habitat in 80 sq. km of primary and other visitors on local forest resources. These
forest; higher chances of wildlife to be killed in the measures could discourage and control illegal entry
project area to forest area or trapping/hunting wildlife or causing
• Impact of higher noise level on wildlife in the project fire hazard in forest
area and adjoining forest area during construction • ‘No horn’ zone to be regulated on access road to
and operation phase airport for reducing noise level and disturbance to
• Forest fire hazard during construction phase wildlife
• A high possibility of bird hazard during operation • Adoption of ICAO guidelines and good practices to
phase. reduce Bird hazard

Mitigation Measures Comment: EIA does not include valuation of

EIA has proposed the following mitigation measures to ecosystem services the forest area provides to the
ameliorate project impacts on biological environment. community (7,487 people) living in the project area and
i) Compensatory plantation for the loss of forest its adjacent area as well as just over 37,000 households
vegetation living in downstream area who get direct benefit through
• EIA has suggested to make forest clearance only collaborative forests and irrigation schemes.
for the first phase airport infrastructures with one
runway which would require to clear fell 990 ha of Mitigation measures do not suggest any specific area
forest land (Table 3). About 8.2 million saplings will for large scale compensatory plantation. Compensatory
be planted in 5,139 ha of land to compensate loss of plantation program has been very weak in Nepal;
328, 904 standing trees. plantations are either delayed or not complied with
• EIA has estimated to plant additional 4.491 million (Shah, 2004). A largescale compensatory plantation of
saplings covering 2,181 ha by the end of 2nd phase this scale has not been done in Nepal. Even if plantation
(Table 4). at this scale is done, it will not restore all kinds of
ecosystem services provided by the current forest. All the
ii) Replacement of lost forestland species could not be practically planted, and moreover
• The forestland belongs to the Ministry of Forestry it takes many decades to build the species diversity and
and Environment (MoFE) and the proponent is the fully functioning forest ecosystem.
Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation.
As per the Forest Act, 1993 the proponent must c) Socioeconomic and Cultural Environment
pay cash compensation for the loss of forestland to i) Displacement of people and Relocation of Settlement
MoFE as well as compensatory plantation for the • All households living in Tangiya basti, Matiyani
loss of vegetation. EIA has suggested replacement of and Kathghat settlements in the project area will
the lost land or cash compensation amounting to Rs be displaced. EIA estimates displacement of 7,487
4.6 billion as well compensatory plantation of 61.27 people living in 1,492 households.
million saplings covering 36,294 ha for the loss of • These households will lose all their cultivated land
2.45 million trees in 7,582 ha of forest land; with (503 ha). They all are new settlers and do not possess
total cost of Rs. 13.98 billion (Table 4). landownership certificates.
• • The three settlements Tangiya basti, Matiyani and

HYDRO NEPAL | ISSUE NO. 24 | JANUARY 2019

63
 Kathghat will be totally abandoned. Nepal urgently needs a second International
ii) Impact on water availability in indirect impact area airport (SIA) which can handle increasing numbers of
• The 7 irrigation schemes irrigating 2,688 ha in 15 international passengers. Its need was realised in early
settlements would be adversely affected; this would 1990s and it has already been in planning for the last
affect farm production 24 years; prefeasibility study was done in 1995. The
iii) Construction related social impacts total cost estimated for full-fledged SIA with 60 million
• This includes public health and sanitation of work passengers per year capacity and airport city was US $
force, occupational health and safety, epidemic, 6,565 million in 2010; government decided to build SIA
social disturbances etc in 2007 but had no funds.
iv) Impact on Sahajnath temple located close to the
proposed runway. Access to temple would be cut-off. Project Planning
Feasibility studies are not ample: This proposed SIAP is
Mitigation Measures still under conceptual planning and the EIA conducted as
i) Resettlement Plan per national legislations could be regarded as ‘preliminary
• EIA has proposed a Resettlement plan for the project environmental and social investigation’. EIA conducted
affected households which includes modality for the as per Government of Nepal’s rules and policy has
compensation for the loss of private and community outlined serious environmental and social implications
properties and service infrastructures. As per the but lacked in-depth study on wildlife, ecosystem services,
existing law, government can pay compensation only effects of aircraft noise on wildlife including birds, and
to private landowners with land ownership papers. livelihoods of people living in SIA, host municipality
Cash compensation for the loss of residential or and in “Indirect Impact Area” i.e. adjacent areas. EIA
other buildings, built-in structures, standing crops, has not studied impacts of the proposed Airport City;
transportation and hardship and displacement no rationale is given for development of this city. People
costs, rehabilitation grants, business loss has been living in project area, project municipalities and adjacent
suggested. Project affected people preferred ‘land areas are freely gaining benefits from the project area
for land’ compensation. and forest ecosystems. Jet aircraft noise could have
ii) Relocation of Sahajnath temple for easy access to behavioural effects, habitat shift and change in feeding
devotees has been proposed. habit in wildlife and birds (Kempf and Huppop, 2014;
iii) EIA has proposed construction of office buildings of Pepper et al., 2003).
Tamagadi and Sahajnath Collaborative Forests.
Project Site: The proposed area lies in Terai Arc
Comments: EIA has not taken account of Landscape (TAL) which is extended from Parsa National
permanent settlers in Kathghat settlement who possess Park to Suklaphanta National Park. The TAL program
landownership certificates. EIA lacks livelihoods analysis which aimed at landscape-scale conservation of tigers,
of households living in the proposed project area and rhinos and elephants was initiated in 2001 by the
outside project area who depend on project forests for Government of Nepal with the collaboration of WWF
their livelihoods – forest products and water source for Nepal (WWF, 2018). It focusses on restoring the wildlife
irrigation. corridors. Again, the project area is a neighboring
landscape and buffer zone of Parsa National Park,
ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS frequently visited by elephants and other mammals.
An alternative analysis conducted for the EIA has There are numerous human wildlife incidents reported
suggested development of airport city at the south of in this location. Any impact study in the project area
the proposed project area by land pooling arrangement. should also include Parsa National Park and or for long-
There is no analysis done on the alternate site for SIA. term Terai Arc landscape.

DISCUSSION AND ACTION REQUIRED Government has declared 80.46 sq km area of which
94.2% is forest area, on the assumption that the future
Need for SIA development of the ‘second international airport (SIA)’
Tribhuvan International Airport (TIA) in Kathmandu will be an international hub for air traffic in South Asia
is highly congested and there is no space for its expansion and a possible ‘defence airport’ of the country (GEOCE,
due to haphazard urbanization and topographical 2018). Size of airport facilities and airport utilities has
limitations. Government is building ‘Regional Airports’ been calculated on the assumption of handling 60 million
in Pokhara in a valley, and Bhairahawa in Madhesh plain passengers per year or 164,000/day. Aviation experts
area at the Indian border with loans from International are sceptical and argue that the whole ‘international
agencies; Pokhara has topographical limitations for hub’ concept is outdated and misplaced by proponent
landing and take-off of large aircrafts. Currently TIA Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Aviation (Rai OA,
handles about 1.1-1.3 million passengers per year which 2018). Moreover, the concept of ‘defence airport’ in
is much less than required at present. Nepal is questionable. The proposed airport site is at an

HYDRO NEPAL | ISSUE NO. 24 | JANUARY 2019

64
aerial distance of 20 km from Indian border. ‘Environmental and Social Sustainability’ requirements
and full-fledged ESIAs are required for loans (IFC, 2012;
The present analysis indicate that the government IFC, 2007; ADB, 2009).
must rethink its policy on SIA and discuss with
concerned stakeholders including aviation experts, EIA Report approval for implementation: Local
conservationists, and economic development planners. Consultant GEOCE prepared EIA Report based on
Strategic environmental and social assessment of policy TOR approved by then Ministry of Environment in
and plan should be conducted prior to a comprehensive 2011 and submitted to the Proponent MoCTA in March
EIA of the project. 2018. Despite technocratic problem in EIA report viz.
informational weakness, insufficient analysis of impacts
Biological and Livelihoods: The loss of 80.5 sq and inadequately proposed mitigation measures,
km buffer zone of Parsa National Park and Terai Arc Ministry of Forest and Environment approved the EIA
Landscape – corridor to wildlife movement would have Report in the last week of may 2018, just about 2 months
disastrous effects on wildlife. EIA indicated clearing from the date of report received. In general, approval of
of 1,641 ha forest vegetation for full-fledged airport EIA report for implementation takes at least 6 monts
construction and eventually clearing all forest area 75.8 9 months from the date of receipt (author’s personal
sq km for airport operation. This will be a great loss of experience). This indicates strong political influence on
wildlife habitat, biodiversity-rich Terai-hardwood forest EIA as both proponent and the EIA approval agencies
ecosystem and collaborative forests which have been belong to government. Government commenced land
providing various ecosystem services including forest acquisition in August 2016 for SIA construction, 2 years
products and water for irrigation to a large population before EIA approval which shows that government is
living in adjacent areas and south of SIA proposed keen to implement this SIA project for some unknown
site. This would adversely affect livelihoods of people or hidden reason. It indicates that it is using EIA
including over 7,480 people who would be displaced. as an exercise in ‘pro forma compliance’ with legal
There is no rationale for clearing all the forest area which requirements. Proponent has already made arrangement
is against the national environmental policy of Nepal with Nepal army to clear fell trees long before guarantee
(GON, 1993). of fund for SIA construction. It supports the convention
that politically motivated EIAs of infrastructure projects
Replacement of lost forests: EIA has suggested are becoming common in developing countries where
compensatory planting in 36,294 ha as replacement of environmentalism is at infancy.
lost forest. This is highly ambitious plan, unachievable
in Nepal’s context. Moreover, EIA has not worked out Action Required
sites and modality of plantation. It would take decades to Action required - for sound decision making for airport
regenerate similar habitat of equivalent ecological value development and economic growth in tourism and
in different location. related development sectors.

Planning for Airport City: SIA project includes Delay in the construction of a ‘Second International
development of an Airport City spread in 6 sq km area Airport’ would be disastrous on tourism growth and
adjacent to airport. There is no rationale for developing development as well as the overall economic growth of
a city very close to airport at the cost of biodiversity rich the country. International connectivity must be enhanced
forest area. It is also not advisable to limit the size of a soon. Government must make vital wise-decisions on:
city. Nijgadh town in Nijgadh municipality is located i) size of airport facilities – is 60 million passengers per
about 5-6 km from SIA site in Kohalbi municipality and year required? - needs intensive stakeholder consultation
government is preparing Smart City Master Plans for with aviation expetrs, conservations, environmental
four urban towns including Nijgadh (Jha KK, 2018). planner, economists and local community.
Nijgadh municipality has an area of 157 sq km and its ii) ‘Airport City’ covering 600 ha – is it required when
population as per 2011 is 35,403. government is spending huge money for Smart City
planning in Nijgadh Municipality, about 5-6 km from
Costs estimate and international standards: The the proposed site?
detailed feasibility study in 2010 estimated US $ iii) preparation of Detailed Project Report within a year
545 million as cost for the 1st phase and US $ 6, 565 with detailed cost estimates
million as the total cost in three phases. Assuming 6-7% mission for financial resources – requesting International
inflation rate, project cost in 2019 would be around Financing/Lending agencies; even the 1st phase SIA
US $ 900 million for phase 1 and US $ 10 -11 billion as construction would cost around US $ 1.0 billion at
total project cost. It is a huge sum of money for Nepal. the current price, and
Government must look for international financial and no any forest clearance until financial resources are
multilateral development agencies (for example, the assured and a comprehensive ESIA is prepared
World Bank group, ADB). These agencies have stringent and approved both by a lending agency and the

HYDRO NEPAL | ISSUE NO. 24 | JANUARY 2019

65
 government of Nepal. GON (19971). Environmental Protection Rules, 1997.
There are international environmental guidelines Ministry of Population and Environment (English
and standard for airport infrastructure development Translation). Pages 12-71.
and its sustainable operation (ICAO, 2009, IFC, 2007). GON (2001) Forest Rules, 1995 with its revision in 2001,
A comprehensive ESIA will describe environmental and Government of Nepal
social resources, identify project impacts and cumulative GON (2018) Kolhabi Municipality, December 2018,
impacts, recommend appropriate mitigation measures Nepal. http://www.kolhabimun.gov.np/en
for each identified positive and adverse impacts, and Hakakhaki (Sept 2018) Forest Ministry’s position on
outline their implementation strategy, both in ‘Direct Nijgadh Int’l Airport a welcome step. Hakahaki, 12
Impact Area’ and ‘Indirect Impact Area’. It would analyse September 2018, Kathmandu, Nepal. http://www.
alternatives for airport infrastructure components and hakahakionline.com/en/4926/forest-ministrys-
their sites and help decision-makers to make their final position-on-nijgadh-intl-airport-a-welcome-step/
approval for project implementation. Hironaka, Ann (2002). The globalization of
environmental protection: the case of environmental
__ impact assessment. International Journal of
Comparative Sociology (de Sitter), 43(1), 65–78.
Shree Govind Shah, PhD, Ecologist, Environmental IAIA (1995) Impact Assessment. Vol 13 No. 1, Spring 1995.
Planning and Policy Analyst, has just over 30 years of International Association for Impact Assessment
work experience in the field of environmental planning ICAO (2009) Airport planning, design, operation and
and assessment, natural resource management, safety. ICAO Annex 14 Volume I - Aerodrome Design
ESIA and environmental and social safeguards of and Operations, 5th Edition. International Civil
infrastructure projects (hydropower, irrigation, roads, Aviation Organisation (ICAO). https://aci.aero/
ocean cruise terminal, transmission line etc) and Media/aci/file/ACI_Priorities/Safety/ACI_Policies_
development projects (agriculture, livestock, forestry, and_Recommended_Practices_seventh_edition_5.
tourism etc) and forest and wildlife biodiversity pdf
assessment in Nepal, Bhutan, Victnam, Combdia, IFC (2007) Environment, Health and Safety Guidelines
Uganda and Indonesia. Visiting Professor at Faculty for AIRPORTS. International Finance Cooperation
of Environmental and Biological Sciences, Kathmandu (IFC), World Bank Group, 30 April 2007
University, Nepal in 1999-2003. Visiting scholar at
Faculty of Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana IFC (2012) Performance Standards on Environmental
University, U.S.A., 1996. and Social Sustainability. International Finance
Corresponding address: [email protected] Cooperation (IFC), World Bank Group, 1 January
2012
Referances IUCN (2008) IUCN Red list of threatened species WWW.
ADB (2009) Safeguard Policy Statement. Asian iucnredlist.org.
Development Bank, June 2009. Jha, K Kishore (2018) Regional Context of Smart City
Cashmore, M, R Gwilliam, R Morgan, D Cobb and A Development – the case of Province 2, September
Bond 2004. The interminable issue of effectiveness: 2018, Kathmandu, Nepal.
substantive purposes, outcomes and research KP (2018) EIA Report of Nijgadh Int’l Airport Approved.
challenges in the advancement of environmental KathmanduPost, 24 May 2018
impact assessment theory. Impact Assessment and http://kathmandupost.ekantipur.com/news/2018-05-
Project Appraisal, 22(4), December, 295–310. 24/eia-report-of-nijgadh-intl-airport-approved.html
Devlin John F and Nonita T Yap and Bob Weir (2005) Norbert Kempf and Ommo Huppop (2014) The
Public participation in environmental assessment Effects of Airport Noise on Wildlife: A Review
case studies on EA legislation and practice. Canadian and Comment. https://www.researchgate.net/
Journal of Development Studies. 26 (3) September publication/248038212_The_effects_of_aircraft_
2005, 487-500. noise_on_wildlife_A_review_and_comment
GEOCE(2018) Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Pepper CB1, Nascarella MA, Kendall RJ. (2003) A review
of Second International Airport Project. GEOCE of the effects of aircraft noise on wildlife and humans,
Consultants Pvt (Ltd), March 2018, Kathmandu, current control mechanisms, and the need for further
Nepal study. Environ Manage. 2003 Oct;32(4):418-32.
GON (1993) Nepal Environmental Policy and Action https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14986892
Plan: Integrating environment and development. Rai, Om Astha (2018) Does Nepal need a 4th International
Environment Protection Council, Government of Airport? Nepal Times, 1 June 2018, Kathmandu,
Nepal. August 1993, Kathmandu Nepal. Nepal. https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/does-
GON (1997). Environmental Protection Act, 1997. nepal-need-a-4th-international-airport/
Ministry of Population and Environment (English Robinson, N A (1992) International trends in
Translation). Pages 11. environmental impact assessment. Boston College

HYDRO NEPAL | ISSUE NO. 24 | JANUARY 2019

66
 Environmental Affairs Law Review, 19(3), Spring,
591–622.
Shah, SG (2004) Environmental Performance of
Kaligandaki ‘A’ hydroelectric Project, ADB,
Kathmandu, December 2004.
THT (Sept 2018) 763,480 trees to be cut for Nijgadh
airport. The Himalayan Times, 16 September 2018,
Kathmandu, Nepal. https://thehimalayantimes.
com/business/763480-trees-to-be-cut-for-nijgadh-
airport/
van de Grondane (1994) “Use and Effectiveness of
Environmental Impact Assessment in Decision
Making”. Report of a pilot study by BCR Consultants,
Rotterdam, the Netherlands, 25 May 1994.
WB (2016) Environmental and Social Policies. World
Bank, August 2016
WWF (2017) Terai Landscape (TAL). WWF, Kathmandu,
Nepal 2017. http://www.wwfnepal.org/about_wwf/
where_we_work/tal/

HYDRO NEPAL | ISSUE NO. 24 | JANUARY 2019

67