Author(s): Pranshula
Paper Details: Volume 3, Issue 4
Citation: IJLSSS 3(4) 03
Page No: 17 – 20
Maurice Strong, while addressing the Rio Summit in 1992 in his opening statement, said, “Development that does not destroy or undermine the ecological, economic, or social basis on which continued development depends is the only viable pathway to a more secure and hopeful future for rich and poor alike. In recent judgment Vellore District Environment Monitoring Committee Rep Vs Vellore District and Others [1], the term ‘ecocide’ is defined as ‘unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there is a substantial likelihood of severe and either widespread or long-term damage to the environment.”
A tussle between development and environmental preservation has been a point of contention for long. Striking a balance between the two has been an ongoing challenge for government agencies. Thus techniques linked resource exploitation becomes an important to understand this struggle.
There are three distinct scenarios for resource exploitation: overutilisation, underutilisation, and balanced utilisation. Each circumstance has various effects. Overutilization and underutilisation of natural resources create an imbalance between nature and humanity, resulting in two types of poverty traps: the degradation trap, where overutilization of resources and destruction of the environment occur, and the conservation trap, which results in preservation of the environment but leads to insufficient personal income. Only a balanced use of natural resources can produce sustainable development that serves the demands of both the environment and mankind. Consequently to give effect to this balanced approach policy formation and implementation comes into foreplay.
A major challenge in front of the government in today’s time is recognizing environment-degrading industries and bringing in an effective action plan. Often government has to face and address various points of issue while bringing in new policies, such as employment shifts, economic disruption, disproportionate burden on low-income and marginalised groups, and investment uncertainty due to stringent environmental guidelines.
In the famous Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union of India & Ors. (1996), the Supreme Court Bench consisting of Kuldip Singh, Faizan Uddin, and K. Venkataswami [2], in context of pollution caused by leather industry, stated that—
“It is no doubt correct that the leather industry in India has become a major foreign exchange earner, and at present Tamil Nadu is the leading exporter of finished leather, accounting for approximately 80% of the country’s export. Though the leather industry is of vital importance to the country, as it generates foreign exchange and provides employment avenues, it has no right to destroy the ecology, degrade the environment, and pose as a health hazard. It cannot be permitted to expand or even to continue with the present production unless it tackles by itself the problem of pollution created by the said industry…”
Hence according to this judgment environment preservation is kept at par in regard to economic growth. This judicial approach underscores the need for a balanced policy framework, yet it also highlights that translating such policies into effective action poses significant challenges for government agencies. While formulation of policy could be considered an easy task as opposed to the challenges that government agencies have to face during implementation.
Political and Economic Interests— one enduring obstacle is the conflicting interests of environmental preservation and economic progress. Regulations that jeopardise job growth or profitability may be resisted by influential political figures and industry, resulting in lobbying and policy impasse. Often the behaviour of these actors leads to delays in the implementation of policies. This pattern can be traced in an ongoing case between Petroleum Traders Welfare Association Delhi (Regd.) Versus Union of India and Ors [3]. Where new rules were brought in by CPCB while expanding the scope of the ‘Hazardous and Other Wastes [Management and Transboundary Movement] Rules 2016 and included base oil, which is considered the main ingredient of used oil, and lubrication oil pollution in the EPR ambit. However, these rules are now challenged in high court over their constitutional validity and are called impugned. Concerned authorities have made it clear that importers are only required to register, and their burden of extended producer liability will be shifted to the actual manufacturer. But challenging the rules in court, which are hitting basic components of oil pollution, results in unnecessary delays in the implementation of policy. The ambition and coherence of environmental policies are weakened by short-term political cycles, which frequently place a higher priority on short-term economic rewards than long-term sustainability.
Gaps in Implementation and Enforcement: Inadequate implementation, a lack of monitoring systems, a weak enforcement capability, and corruption can all cause even well-thought-out policies to fail.
Policy Fragmentation and Coordination: Insufficient funding and resources frequently make it difficult to implement aggressive environmental projects and enforce laws. The interdependence of environmental problems can be overlooked by fragmented systems, where distinct laws handle trash, water, and air separately. This can result in inefficiencies and unforeseen effects. Effective policy design and implementation are further complicated by a lack of cooperation between government agencies and stakeholders.
In Union of India v. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action (1996) [4] The Supreme Court compelled the payment of damages for ecological restoration and ordered the liquidation of dangerous companies. The ruling emphasised that industries have an obligation to compensate and repair impacted communities and workers.
Order on Construction Workers by the Supreme Court (2025) The NCR states were ordered by the Supreme Court to compensate construction workers whose work was halted because of environmental rules (such as the Graded Response Action Plan for air pollution). In order to ensure workers’ survival during periods of enforced unemployment brought on by environmental protection measures, the Court ordered that compensation be provided from labour cess funds.
Programs such as the Counselling, Retraining, and Redeployment (CRR) Scheme seek to offer self-employment or wage job alternatives to workers who have been left behind after Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs) have been restructured or closed, including for environmental compliance.
Even labour and environmental law principles—the polluter pays principle—businesses that cause environmental damage are accountable for paying damages and providing rehabilitation to impacted communities and employees. The right to livelihood is to be acknowledged by the court such that environmental preservation and the right to livelihood must be balanced, and they frequently order governments to provide restitution and rehabilitation for workers impacted by closures.
However, the judgments and efficacy of such plans remain doubtful. Only a small percentage of the thousands of workers who received short-term training and counselling through the CRR initiative were able to find long-term employment or be effectively redeployed. There has been little follow-up on actual results, and the emphasis has mostly been on training rather than assured job placement. Despite the Supreme Court’s numerous decisions requiring compensation and rehabilitation, government organisations and employers have frequently failed to comply fully or on time. Courts have had to restate or reinforce their orders to guarantee action, and status reports regularly point out implementation flaws.
To address such socioeconomic challenges, government agencies have to formulate policies that not just address the environmental concern but also address these issues. Approaches that can be adopted by policymakers include—
Threshold approach—this concept recognizes a point at which both ecological integrity and socioeconomic benefits are at maximum. The idea is to find optimal level of conservation which avoids excessive development and excessive conservation
Another approach is the mitigation hierarchy. this framework prioritises avoiding environmental harm first, then minimising and restoring, and finally compensating for unavoidable impacts.
Integrated approach—this conceptual framework recognises five types of capital: natural, social, human, built, and financial. Effective intervention required attention to all five, ensuring that conservation also enhances social well-being, human skills, infrastructure, and economic opportunities
Co-management and participatory governance—this model, where communities and authorities jointly oversee resources, has proven effective in balancing conservation benefits
In summary, it is critical that authorities develop strong and creative plans to deal with these complex issues. Agencies must take a multifaceted approach while creating policies in order to guarantee the efficient application of environmental laws, advance sustainability, and satisfy India’s international commitments. By carefully balancing ecological preservation with economic advancement, such policies should not only protect the environment’s fundamental components and halt ecocide, but also promote sustainable development.