Great Nicobar Project Debate | Ecology, Tribal Rights & Development | UPSC Current Affairs 2025

The Issue

The Great Nicobar Project is among India’s most ambitious infrastructure plans — proposed as a mega transshipment port, airport, power plant and township on the ecologically fragile Great Nicobar Island. Supporters say that it will enhance India’s strategic and economic profile across the Indo-Pacific, but critics have emphasized catastrophic environmental destruction, loss of biodiversity and uprooting of indigenous populations.

 Ecological Concerns

Deforestation: More than 850,000 trees are to be cut for the construction of the rainforest, also home to the threatened Nicobar megapode bird, salt water crocs and leatherback turtles.

Fragile Coastline: Great Nicobar is susceptible to tsunamis, cyclones and sea-level rise, rendering large-scale construction in the island dangerous.

Biodiversity Hotspot: The island lies within the Indo-Burma biodiversity hotspot and hosts distinctive flora and fauna.

 Tribal Concerns

Impacts of Displacement The Shompens and Nicobarese are both listed as particularly vulnerable tribal groups (PVTGs) Loss of habitat, livelihood and cultural identity.

Forest Rights Act (2006): If FRA & PESA were subverted around consent from communities, the clearances cannot be deemed legal.

Socio-Cultural Dislocation: Demographic distortion and marginalization of aborigines may occur due to dump of infrastructure.

 Development vs Conservation Debate

Pro-Development View: Enhanced maritime security, reduced reliance on Singapore/Colombo for shipping and connected jobs/boost to GDP.

Conservationist View: Retaining short-term rewards cannot be at the cost of an irreversible ecological loss besides trampling tribal rights.

 Government Measures

EIA Clearance (2022): Project were cleared with conditions like mangrove conservation and wildlife corridors.

Compensatory Afforestation: suggested in Haryana and Madhya Pradesh Ecologically irrelevant for island loss defaultstate}”.

Critics say plan ignores Nicobar’s carrying capacity NITI Aayog Vision:Promotes sustainable island development, but critics say Nicobar’s carrying capacity is being ignored.

 Challenges

Weighing up the benefits of strategic location vs ecological vulnerability.

Safeguarding tribal rights in FRA, 2006.

Mega-engineering and climate change vulnerability reconciled.

Poor implementation of environmental protections in previous works.

 Way Forward

Thoughts Carry out “Carrying Capacity-Based Planning” before carrying out any project.Communicating the Issues Ministry Of of Ministry Of Science & Technology46 THOUGHTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT, NATURE, SCIENCE & TECH.

Recharge free, prior and informed consent of indigenous communities.

Take care of our climate by using green infrastructure & renewable energy instead of coal plants.

Support ecological tourism and locally sustainable means of making a living, not industrial operations.

 UPSC Relevance

Prelims (GS I): Geography of Andaman & Nicobar, Forest Rights Act (2006), EIA fundamentals.

Mains (GS III): EIA, tribal displacement, sustainable development, coastal vulnerabilities.

PYQ 1: Geography of Great Nicobar (2017)

Question:
Which of the following is geographically closest to Great Nicobar?

a) Sumatra
b) Borneo
c) Java
d) Sri Lanka

 Correct Answer: a) Sumatra

Explanation:

• The Great Nicobar Island (southernmost island of India’s Andaman & Nicobar group) is separated from Sumatra (Indonesia) by the 10° Channel in the Andaman Sea.

• Distance: Only about 163 km between Indira Point (Great Nicobar) and Aceh (Sumatra).

• Borneo and Java are farther away in Indonesia, and Sri Lanka is northwest of Nicobar across the Bay of Bengal.

UPSC Linkage:

• Important for map-based questions in Prelims.

• Shows India’s strategic maritime location in the Indo-Pacific, relevant for Act East Policy & security.

 PYQ 2: Critical Wildlife Habitat (2018)

Question:
Consider the following statements:

1. The definition of ‘Critical Wildlife Habitat’ is incorporated in the Forest Rights Act, 2006.

2. For the first time in India, Baigas have been given Habitat Rights.

3. Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) officially decides and declares Habitat Rights for Primitive Tribal Groups.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

a) 1 and 2 only
b) 2 and 3 only
c) 3 only
d) 1, 2 and 3

 Correct Answer :  a) 1 and 2 only

Explanation :

•  Statement 1 – Correct

  •  The concept of Critical Wildlif e Habitat (CWH) is defined under the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006.

  • It refers to areas within National Parks and Sanctuaries where the rights of forest dwellers may be modified for wildlife conservation, subject to due process.

• Statement 2 – Correct

  • The Baiga tribe in Madhya Pradesh was the first tribal community in India to be granted Habitat Rights (2015) under FRA, 2006.

  • These rights include access to forest resources, livelihood, and cultural practices.

• Statement 3 – Incorrect

  • It is not the MoEFCC but the State Government & Ministry of Tribal Affairs (in consultation with Gram Sabhas) that decide and notify habitat rights.

  • MoEFCC deals with wildlife clearances, but habitat rights recognition lies under FRA (Tribal Affairs Ministry).

UPSC Linkage:

• Relevant for Environment + Tribal Rights.

• Useful for Great Nicobar Project context since tribal displacement and FRA rights are central to the debate.

 So, the final answers are:

• 2017 Question: Sumatra

• 2018 Question: 1 and 2 only

Mains

1. Rehabilitation & Development Projects (2016, GS-3) :
   “ Rehabilitation  of human settlements is one of the important environmental impacts which always attracts controversy while , planning major projects , Discuss the measures suggested for mitigation  .”

2.   Tr ibal Displacement & Development ( 2015 , GS -3):
   “ The persisting drives of the government for development of large industries in backward areas have resulted in isolatin g the tribal,  population and farmers who face multiple  displacements . Discuss corrective strategies.”

Conclusion

The Great Nicobar Project debate epitomizes India’s development-environment dilemma. While strategic imperatives are undeniable, ignoring ecological fragility and tribal rights could trigger irreversible damage. For true sustainability, India must adopt a balanced, inclusive, and climate-resilient approach to island development.