Environment Reports have "cooked" data

[Chandra Kishore]

Here's another slap in the eyes of unscrupulous environment professionals who cook data to help their masters. Something that we have been discussing on Indian Environment Network for years now. I am sure that from all these discussions one day we will be able to develop a model code of professional conduct for members of IEN , abide by it and truly say, to everyone one "We don't do it"!!

The National Green Tribunal is the latest to point out that consultants are including “cooked data” in the key environment impact assessment (EIA) reports which determine green clearances for industrial projects. The Tribunal has told the government to come up with a mechanism to ensure authentic data.

The Tribunal made its comments last week while suspending the environment clearance given to Scania Steel and Power for the expansion of its sponge iron and captive power plant project in Chhattisgarh, on the grounds that no public hearing had been held. 

Read more here

[Prof Dr V N Sivasankara Pillai]

Dear Friends,

Cooking data is just like corruption in the country.

If you go through the project reports submitted by students of colleges and universities (especially IGNOU), the magnitude of plagiarism in the country can be felt. There is no competent supervisor with integrity, and students are encouraged to find out data from their own resources. In our country, internet has provided an easy route. Many of the external users of university libraries are looking for chapters from earlier dissertations that suit to their needs. The calculator has done a great disservice by helping easy cooking of data. many researchers have have no basic training in experimental methodology. One specific instance is non-chemists doing chemical analysis. Many of the Ph.D. dissertations in water quality clearly demonstrate the point. Even VCs of university's have got their degree based on invalid (cooked?) data. You may take a simple check with regard to "significant figures" in the data - the data was generated either out of ignorance of metrology, or by "cooking".

Remedy:

1. Teach ethics in science (and engineering) from very early stage of science projects

2. Make "cooking of data" a punishable crime. (see how it is doe by USEPA by declaring them punishable under law.

3. Generate proper guidelines for qualifications of monitoring personnel, methodology to be followed (including SOP for chain of custody), the format in which data must be procured, and methods including software to prevent data tampering etc.

The derogatory comments made here are applicable to frauds, and not to true professions who hesitate to tread in to EIA realm.

[Pradipta Halder]

Dear all,

This is not something very new and it is not only among 'environmental professionals' in the country. For example, many bachelor and master level students often obtain 'cooked data' for their projects/thesis and they go unnoticed. Their supervisors are either incapable to find out the fraud or they are simply blind to this malpractice. May be they also did it while they were students! It is really challenging to collect authentic data even from a small sample size and those students who really try end up having data not enough for their projects/theses. On the other hand, those who master in fabricating data get away with good grades. I have personally seen this during my master study in a reputed institute in India. Therefore, this is a deeply rooted cultural problem and we prepare our students to indulge in doing frauds which are again reflected in their professional careers. Moreover, since getting a higher salary is the only motivation behind higher education in India, people can go to any lengths. We do not talk about ethics and morality in our education and we get this kind of final product. Anyway, it is good that this is now coming into public discourse and we are becoming aware of the situation. Hopefully one day we will improve.

I also endorse the opinions of Prof. Pillai.      

[Dr. Sudhanshu Kumar]

Personally, I don’t see any harm in “cooking data” ;-) until unless, intention is GOOD!

Anyway, I did (not) join this discussion to make this statement so better ignore it, in fact, I want to highlight a less discussed but a critical aspect of the whole problem - WHY ARE WE COOKING DATA?

[Anjali Grover]

I agree, this is the reality with the way EIAs are being done. A consultant does not find an EIA (as a project) giving a good return, and hence data is manipulated because data-collection is the only time and money consuming process. This is highly unethical and a greater deal of data checks and analysis at Govt. end needs to be done, a more stringent policy needs to be framed.

[Arpita Bhagat]

well, the way I see it there are two basic reasons - 1. the supervisor didn't provide with the necessary training and his time 2. the laid-back and lazy attitude on the part of the researcher.

Anyhow, a solution should be sought since it is one of the major cause of our country lagging behind in this aspect.

[Anjan Prusty]

Hello Chandra Sekhar

I really do not know how to react to these news and information. The National Green Tribunal's comments may be true. Some handful of stupids does this nonsense stuff only to defame a genuine lot. Why can't those stupids present true facts and figures while during the environmental assessments.

Any ways only they know, when they are going to behave professionally and sensibly.

There need to be model code conduct while doing EIAs, and also certain provisions (legal punishments) need to be opted as in corruption cases.

 

 

 

 

[IRSHAD A KHAN]

Well, this is a usual practice. The task given to a consultant is to prepare a report that facilitates environmental clearance. The Ministry of Environment and forests has also made the registration process for EIA firms extremely expensive and cumbersome that it would prohibit new entrants in the market. MOEF cannot have means to verify the authenticity of data provided in a report and in a single sitting a committee has to consider a large number of cases. It cannot in short time do the job. 

[Kailash Chandra Bhatt]

yes my dear sir today every on consultant "cooked data" for survival of his consultancy services.

even well educated consultant are doing such type of work cut,copy and past, even environmental parameter which are more impotent for the baseline study for EIA. before start the project and end of the project.  

[Sandeep Mukherjee]

Dear colleagues,  

Practically speaking, perhaps we should be asking why someone cooks data? Consultants are not born criminals. He is, in most cases, a victim of low pay and high delivery pressure. He will (as per my opinion) tend to cook data because of lack of data, time, money, red tapes and /or lack of knowledge of availability of data. 

It will be prudent if we find out the root cause (like lack of authentic data with the competent agencies, enormous cost & time involved in generating primary data etc.). If some agency (preferably like CPCB and/or SPCBs) acts as a repository of data, then feel the tendency of cooking will reduce. Also it will be easier for the authority to cross check / verify the data.

Would like your observations on it. 

Regards. 

Sandeep

 

[Kailash Chandra Bhatt]

agree my Dear sir,

consultants are not born criminal, why thy are doing the work at low cost.you know sir this is competition.actually there is no need of root cause analysis because all system is corrupt even govt. agency(MOEF,SPCB,CPCB) who grant the consent to particular project.

[RAGHAVA]

Hello to All,

 

After a long gap i am entering into a discussion which is the hot topic of the day. Why does an consultant cooks up a data. I think here we need to go to grass root level of collection of data. Is the criteria prescribed by CPCP for collecting Ambient Air Quality is possible on the actual ground? if so how many reading from one location are possible. will a contiuous data at one location represent the regional background. Will the public allow the highly noise samplers to run continuously in their premises. (for example how many of us Can we keep a AAQ sampler twice a week for four weeks in a month for all the three months in our premises)???????.......... The time has come to change the policy / procedure etc.

 

May be it is better to prepare an environmental report which depicts the anticipated impacts due to project and provide the necessary mitigative / management plan options for the identified impacts in a crisp manner rather than a huge and massive report wasting many papers. Honourable expert committees instead of finding the faults or lacuna should rather suggest and insist on more stringent Environmental pollution control strategies and only if the project proponent provides / commit all the necessary measures to curb the pollution then only a project should be cleared. Moreover the cleared projects needs to be reviewed for pollution control strategies within a period of six months to one year. Not a mere submission of EC compliance but a authentic proof of the measures undertaken.

[DR. (MRS) RAVINDRA KAUR]

Yes Sir,

            I personally know this fact since 1994, I am really delighted that ultimately someone has raised the voice. Being a very young professional and environmental activist I could not do anything against the "cheating with our precious environment", by the senior consultants. Now I have designed a PCP model in which I have emphasized that a consultant must be qualified from CDC, an autonomous Inst. of the Department of scientific and industrial Research (DSIR), Govt. of India, and he should be answerable to the public body concerning the project/ scheme. Private parties /NGO,s should not be allowed to hire the consultants just being a faculty / professional from some organization and get away with the EIA reports at their whims and fancy to achieve their revenue generating projects

Regards

Dr(Ravindra Kaur),

School of Environmental Sciences, J.N.U.