By H H Mohrmen
The Meghalaya Democratic Alliance Government’s goal of achieving a $10 billion economy is enticing and welcomed by the citizens of the state. Everyone would like to see the state’s economy grow by leaps and bounds, and people are waiting with bated breath for Meghalaya to become a developed state. But ultimately, is it just about achieving the goal? Efforts have to be made, resources have to be used, and these will come with consequences that the state will have to bear. The question is about the approach, the overall impact of the efforts to reach this gigantic goal, and the consequences it will have on the state and its people.
The State’s Achievements on the 17 SDGs
Countries around the world have arrived at a set of goals that countries should achieve for development to be sustainable. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are indicators that the countries of the world have agreed upon as a framework for responsible development. The important question to ask is: what is the state’s current score on the various SDGs?
The 17 SDGs include: No Poverty, Zero Hunger, Good Health and Well-being, Quality Education, Gender Equality, Clean Water and Sanitation, Affordable and Clean Energy, Decent Work and Economic Growth, Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure, Sustainable Cities and Communities, Reduced Inequality, Responsible Consumption and Production, Climate Action, Life Below Water, Life on Land, Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, and Partnership for the Goals. Of the 17 SDGs, if we include Reduced Inequality, which can also be affected by unsustainable activities, we can say that at least nine goals are directly related to environmental protection.
No doubt the only goal in which the state may fare well is the Gender Equality index because the people of the state follow the matrilineal lineage system, and by default there is respect for the fairer sex. Your guess on the state’s achievement on the SDGs is as good as mine.
Many rivers flowing from coal mining areas are polluted by Acid Mine Drainage (AMD), and in some cases aquatic life has disappeared completely. This situation is clearly in violation of laws meant to protect water bodies and biodiversity. We also have no effective policy on waste disposal, and there are hardly any serious efforts to protect forests and water resources. Towns and cities continue to grow organically with little urban planning, except perhaps in the case of New Shillong.
Mining remains the major activity which drags the state down in the SDG rankings, and there appears to be little effort to improve the state’s performance in these critical areas.
Traditional Coal Mining in the State
The state-sponsored narrative now being promoted is that coal mining is a traditional livelihood activity of the people. It is claimed that coal mining has been practised for more than 200 years. The Chief Minister was even heard asking a podcaster who interviewed him, “Do you know how old coal mining is in the state?” to which he himself answered as being more than a hundred years old.
Contrary to this claim, historical records only mention of plans to supply limestone, but not coal during the colonial period. British officers recorded limestone extraction and even planned railway lines to transport limestone from the foothills. If coal mining had truly been a long-standing tradition, we would expect to find references to it in folk stories or other cultural expressions of the people. Such references are absent.
The Khasi and Jaiñtia people were well known in the past for iron production, which shows that iron smelting was once an important activity in the hills. However, historical accounts suggest that iron smelting relied on charcoal rather than coal. Therefore, the claim that coal mining was an ancient tradition does not hold water.
The practice of rat-hole mining cannot be described as a traditional livelihood. Historical evidence suggests that the extraction of coal for domestic use began during the colonial period when the British introduced the practice. The British themselves used coal for heating during their stay in the hills.
After coal was nationalised in India, the late G.G. Swell advanced the argument that coal mining in the state should be treated as a cottage industry. He wrote to K.C. Pant requesting that the government allow the state to continue the prevailing system of mining on the grounds that it was a cottage industry.
It is also important to remember that coal mining in the state was never carried out exclusively by indigenous people. Labourers came from outside the state and even from neighbouring countries. When coal from Meghalaya was sold in both national and international markets can we continue to claim that it is a cottage industry?
Some people claim that the box-cutting method of coal mining is scientific and less harmful to the environment. However, I had already addressed this argument in my article published in the Shillong Times on July 7, 2014, titled “A Hole by Any Name Still Smells a Rat.”
The larger legal issue is whether the provisions of the Sixth Schedule can override Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the right to life. The courts have been clear on this matter: constitutional rights cannot be undermined.
Mining Today and the Worth of Human Life
Sometimes one hears the Chief Minister speaking about the Sustainable Development Goals, yet at the same time the government encourages sand and stone quarrying and often looks the other way when allegations of illegal coal mining are raised.
How can the state hope to achieve the SDGs while permitting widespread mining activities that harm the environment? It is clear that the state is far from meeting these global development goals.
Article 21 of the Constitution gives the highest importance to the right to life. Sadly, this principle has often been ignored in the context of mining. The rights of miners and labourers have been neglected, and even the value of a miner’s life is often disregarded by those engaged in illegal mining activities. The Supreme Court of India has repeatedly held that the state cannot justify the violation of fundamental rights on the grounds of economic limitations. Yet the dignity and safety of miners have rarely been given the importance they deserve.
The Cause of the NGT Ban
Many people have forgotten that the National Green Tribunal imposed a ban on rat-hole mining in 2014 following petitions filed by the All Dimasa Students’ Union of Assam. The organisation alleged that polluted water from the River Kupli, which flows from the Jaiñtia Hills into the Dima Hasao district of Assam, had severely affected the people who depended on the river for their livelihood.
Mining has caused extensive damage to air, water and forests in the mining areas in the state. A report published in 1997 by the Meghalaya State Pollution Control Board revealed that the pH level in some rivers and streams had fallen to as low as 2.4, indicating extremely high acidity caused by mining activities. Acidic run-offs from coal storage areas were also found to have contaminated groundwater. These findings highlight the serious environmental consequences of unregulated mining.
Growth and Pollution
Gita Gopinath, Deputy Managing Director of the IMF, recently raised concerns about India’s growth story by linking it to environmental degradation. Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, she described pollution as a “hidden tax” on citizens and warned that it poses a far more serious threat to economic growth than trade tariffs.
According to studies she cited, pollution costs India nearly nine percent of its GDP each year through healthcare expenses and lost productivity. World Bank data also indicate that about 1.7 million people die annually in India due to pollution-related causes, accounting for around 18 percent of all deaths in the country.
Another major concern is investor confidence. Poor air quality and deteriorating environmental conditions can discourage international investors from establishing operations in a country. Environmental quality is increasingly becoming a factor in global economic competitiveness.
$10 Billion Economy and Sustainability
The same question can be asked of Chief Minister Conrad K. Sangma and the MDA government. Are we so blinded by the ambition of achieving a $10 billion economy that we ignore the environmental consequences? The million-dollar question is this: can we build a $10 billion economy by destroying our forests and natural resources? Is it worth having such an economy while leaving our rivers polluted?
What is the point of achieving high economic growth if the state is left with barren hills, degraded forests and polluted rivers? What is the use of accumulating billions of dollars if there is no clean water and no healthy environment to sustain life? In the end, we must ask ourselves a simple question: can we truly prosper by destroying the very natural resources on which our survival depends?
