This paper describes the experiences of Nepal to compliances on IA preparation , implementation of three decades and examine the compliances in differ infrastructures in Nepal and suggest learnings.
Nepal has 3 decades of experiences with IA, starting from IA guidelines and evolving through successive legal and institutional reforms, including the EPA and EPR. During this period, IA has become an established requirement for infrastructures. Yet an important question remains, has IA in Nepal substantively influences project design, environmental protection and social outcomes, or it become regulatory compliance exercise? This paper reviews Nepals Exercise with IA to examine how IA practice has evolved and what has actually been learned like changes in the legal and procedural like EIA, IEE, approval and implementation. Evidence and lessons from infrastructure sectors are used to examine whether assessment findings have influenced project alternatives, design, mitigation, livelihoods and community engagement. Particular attention is given to gap between committeemen in IA report and through implementation during construction and operation. The paper consider institutional capacity, responsibilities, monitoring, enforcement, consultant driven assessment, participation and the tendency to treat IA primarily as an approval requirement. At the same time, it identifies areas where IA has contributed to improve E&S safeguards more systematic to impacts. Looking forward, the paper asks what Nepal should retain, abandon and redesign in its IA system. It argues for moving from document based compliance toward outcome oriented impact assessment. Nepals experience offers broader lessons for countries seeking to transform impact assessment tool for better E&S outcomes.
Navaraj Pokharel is an IA practicer in Nepal. He has 20 years of experiences on implementati and monitoring the environment and social safeguard for various infrastructures in Asia.