AECOM report reveals questionable aims in Rs.72,000 crore Great Nicobar island development plan

Report commissioned by NITI Aayog reveals a bias that may compromise tribal rights and ecological preservation.

Tree ferns at the Great Nicobar Biosphere Reserve. | Photo Credit: Pankaj Sekhsaria

In August 2021, AECOM India Pvt. Ltd, a multinational consultancy firm, prepared a “holistic planning framework for developing Great Nicobar Island.” The report was prepared as part of a consultancy assignment by the NITI Aayog to assist its vision for the “Holistic Development of Great Nicobar Island” that entails the development of a transhipment terminal, an international airport, a power plant and a township.

The mega project is estimated to cost around Rs. 72,000 crore. The AECOM report is part of a detailed masterplan prepared “for the purpose of obtaining necessary environmental and other related clearances”. It highlights an “economic development opportunity” associated with trade in shipping and also tourism.

But the report also contains questionable developmental aims and biases. For instance, AECOM says the Great Nicobar island “needs to trade on its remoteness and exquisite beauty. Some high-net-worth individuals will appreciate the chance to have a luxury home on such an unspoilt island”. It also states, that “if required tribals can be relocated to other parts of the island”. Tourism development, it adds “can capitalize on the exceptional tourism assets to attract high-end tourists interested in tropical forests, adventure tourism… as well as temporarily escaping from the modern world to a remote and beautiful Indian Ocean island.”

It is worth bearing in mind that the Forest Rights Act requires that free and prior informed consent be obtained from tribal and other forest-dwelling communities for any relocation. And therefore, relocation is not a foregone conclusion. Kanchi Kohli, an environmental law and policy researcher said “in any assessment, it is important to be conscious of a confirmation bias.” Such biases occur when those carrying out the assessments selectively use certain information to justify previously held beliefs and mandates, Kohli explained.

“Mandate” in this case, refers to AECOM’s mandate to prepare the report provided by the NITI Aayog. The terms of reference (ToR) state that the key objectives of the consultancy are to “develop a robust base for India’s presence in the Bay of Bengal/ Indian Ocean for a maritime economy”; “Creating a transhipment terminal and tapping into the unutilised potential of the island and building a new global destination” and “attract investment in infrastructure and tourism sector by developing theme-based activities and projects”.

While the ToR includes socioeconomic and environmental aspects, these are subservient to the key developmental objectives. “It is not uncommon for technical studies assessing social and environmental impacts to justify conclusions with notions of development and progress. This directly influences decision-making outcomes, which inturn have the power to alter entire geographies and communities,” Kohli explained.

The economic imperative for the project has been highlighted elsewhere in the AECOM report too. The section titled “Need for the project” states “the southern tip of the Island at Indira Point is about 40 km from the major international sea route which carries about 20-25% of global sea trade and 35% of world oil supplies (2011). This main eastwest shipping route links East Asian exports with the Indian Ocean, Suez Canal and Europe. This strategic location presents immense opportunities to further strengthen India’s trading position in the world, through the holistic development of this island and India can participate more fully in the global shipping trade…”

This echoes the view of the Union government and the shipping Ministry in particular. In February 2024, the Union shipping Ministry released an advertisement packaging the mega project as “a lifetime opportunity for investors to reap gold”. The video concludes that the project will help “India truly realise its vision to become a developed nation by 2047”.

This reporter emailed various persons at AECOM, including those who prepared the report. None of them replied. A request for an interview was also sent to members at NITI Aayog. They too did not respond.

In March 2021, AECOM had also prepared a feasibility report for the NITI Aayog on the Great Nicobar mega project. This writer has previously reported how ancestral land of the Nicobarese and some settlements of the Shompen were wrongly categorised as “uninhabited”. This raises larger questions about the expertise of the consultancy that prepared such reports, i.e. AECOM.

“The key to any assessment is objectivity. The consultant must ensure that the report brings out the pros and cons of any project,” said Ritwick Dutta, an environmental lawyer with the Legal Initiative for Forests and Environment. The duty of care principle must drive assessments of cons, he added, noting that it is important that costs of the project are not externalised and the profits privatised. Dutta pointed out: “Even for strategic projects, environmental and social impacts have to be evaluated scientifically.”

Rishika Pardikar is an environment reporter covering science, law, and policy, based in Bengaluru.