Great Nicobar Project Exclusive, Alarming Eco Impact

What’s at Stake on Great Nicobar Island

The Great Nicobar Project has ignited a storm of concern among ecologists, tribal rights advocates, and climate scientists, who warn that rapid, large-scale construction on one of India’s most biodiverse and geologically sensitive islands could trigger irreversible damage. Envisioned as a multi-component development featuring an international transshipment port, a greenfield airport, a township, and power infrastructure, the project promises strategic and economic dividends. But critics say the costs—measured in biodiversity loss, disruption to Indigenous lifeways, and heightened disaster risk—could be far greater than advertised.

At the heart of the debate is Great Nicobar’s unique ecological fabric. The island harbors primary tropical rainforest, endemic flora and fauna, mangrove ecosystems, coral reefs, and nesting beaches for the critically endangered leatherback turtle. Scientists warn that clearing large tracts of forest and altering coastal geomorphology can fragment habitats, reduce carbon sequestration, and degrade marine nurseries that sustain fisheries—each change echoing across the island’s delicately balanced ecosystems.

Indigenous Rights and Cultural Survival

Two communities, the Shompen and the Great Nicobarese, stand to be profoundly affected. The Shompen, a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group (PVTG), rely on deep-forest habitats and customary use areas for sustenance and cultural continuity. The Great Nicobarese have established settlements and traditional livelihoods along the coast. Experts caution that road networks, township expansion, and restricted access zones could erode food security, introduce disease risks, and hasten cultural dislocation. Meaningful consultation, free prior and informed consent, and respect for customary rights under existing forest and tribal protection laws are not procedural boxes to tick—they are foundational to equitable development.

Advocacy groups and social scientists also point to relocation pressures. Even “voluntary” shifts often unfold in contexts where existing livelihoods are made untenable by surrounding infrastructure, effectively coercing movement. Without robust livelihood guarantees, culturally appropriate housing, and legal protections for land and resource rights, displacement can deepen vulnerability, especially for communities with limited access to state services.

Biodiversity, Forests, and Marine Ecosystems

The island’s forests serve as critical carbon sinks and refuges for species found nowhere else. Fragmentation from roads, clearances for ports and airports, and associated real estate development can create edge effects that invite invasive species, intensify human-wildlife conflict, and reduce genetic diversity. Nocturnal species, including endemic bats and arboreal mammals, are particularly sensitive to light and noise pollution.

Equally threatened are coastal and marine systems. The proposed transshipment port and dredging operations risk smothering coral reefs, disrupting fish spawning grounds, and altering sediment transport dynamics. Mangrove belts—natural storm barriers and nurseries for juvenile fish—could be weakened just when climate resilience is essential. Conservationists warn that compensatory afforestation on the mainland cannot replace the ecological complexity and services of primary tropical forest or coral reef systems in Great Nicobar.

Disaster Risk in a Seismically Active Zone

Great Nicobar lies along a seismically active arc where the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami left a deep imprint. Large coastal infrastructure and dense settlements in low-lying zones could intensify exposure to earthquakes, tsunamis, cyclones, and sea-level rise. Building codes and evacuation plans can lower immediate risk, but they cannot eliminate the structural reality of placing critical assets in hazard-prone areas. Long-term sea-level rise and coastal erosion may also reduce the functional lifespan of expensive coastal assets, raising questions about the project’s cost-benefit calculus.

Environmental Assessment and Oversight

Concerns have been raised about the adequacy and scope of environmental impact assessments. Scientists urge cumulative impact analysis that evaluates how the port, airport, township, power systems, and road networks interact over time, rather than assessing components in isolation. They call for seasonal baseline data, multi-year wildlife surveys, wave and sediment dynamics modeling, and transparent public disclosure of methodologies and assumptions. Adaptive management—triggered by independent monitoring of coral health, turtle nesting success, forest canopy integrity, and groundwater quality—should be built into legally enforceable project conditions.

Focus on the Great Nicobar Project: Alternatives and Mitigation

To address the most alarming eco impact signals, experts propose several improvements to the Great Nicobar Project:

– Redesign and resiting: Evaluate alternative alignments that avoid prime turtle nesting beaches, dense mangrove stands, and primary rainforest. Consider scaling down the footprint or phasing components to match carrying-capacity thresholds.
– No-go ecological zones: Establish inviolate core areas for critical habitats, including leatherback nesting sites, coral patches, and Shompen use areas, with buffer zones that restrict noise, light, and vessel speeds.
– Stronger marine safeguards: Limit dredging windows, employ silt curtains, use less destructive dredging technologies, and implement real-time turbidity and coral health monitoring with automatic work stoppages if thresholds are breached.
– Forest and wildlife protections: Maintain contiguous forest corridors, restrict night-time construction, and install wildlife crossings on roads to reduce fragmentation and mortality.
– Water and energy planning: Avoid over-extraction of freshwater aquifers; favor decentralized renewables over diesel-based generation; invest in energy-efficient design to reduce the project’s carbon footprint.
– Rights and participation: Institutionalize free prior and informed consent processes, extend livelihood support in culturally appropriate forms, and legally protect access to forests and shores essential to Shompen and Great Nicobarese survival.
– Independent oversight: Set up a multi-stakeholder monitoring body including local community representatives, ecologists, and disaster management experts with authority to recommend course corrections.

Strategic Objectives vs. Ecological Integrity

Proponents highlight the project’s strategic value: boosting maritime connectivity, enabling logistics capacity in the Indian Ocean, and creating jobs. Critics do not dismiss these goals but argue that strategic infrastructure can co-exist with ecological integrity if designed to the highest environmental standards and tailored to local realities. In hazard-prone, biodiversity-rich regions, the margin for error is slim. The choice is not growth versus conservation; it is whether growth is pursued in ways that conserve the very assets—natural buffers, fisheries, cultural knowledge—that underpin long-term security and resilience.

The Path Forward

The Great Nicobar Project sits at a critical decision point. A transparent, science-based review, rigorous cumulative assessment, and genuine engagement with the Shompen and Great Nicobarese can still recalibrate the project toward a safer, more climate-resilient trajectory. In one of India’s last intact island rainforests, the standard for due diligence must be exceptionally high. Getting it right is not only about protecting species and cultures; it is about designing infrastructure that will endure in a warming, more volatile world.

A course correction grounded in ecological science, Indigenous rights, and risk-aware planning would strengthen—not weaken—the long-term prospects of the Great Nicobar Project, ensuring that development does not come at the expense of the island’s irreplaceable natural and cultural heritage.