National Agricultural Higher Education Project - NAHEP (IDP SKUAST-K)

0194-2469394
idpskuastk@gmail.com

Environment  Assessment    and Environment Management Framework (EMF) for National Agricultural Higher Education Project (NAHEP) 

Draft Report 

Volume I - Environmental Safeguards 

Indian Council of Agricultural Researh

  (ICAR)

    

 

 Executive Summary

About the project:

The purpose of the National Agriculture Higher Education Project (NAHEP) is to support participating Agricultural Universities (AUs) and ICAR in providing more relevant and higher quality education to agriculture university students. The project components are as follows:

  1. Support to Agricultural Universities a. Sub-component 1a - Support to Institutional Development Plans of AUs b. Sub-component 1b   -   Centers  for   Advanced   Agriculture   Science   and Technology (CAAST) c.Subcomponent 1c - ICAR innovation grants to AUs
  2. Component 2 - Investments in ICAR Leadership in Agriculture Higher Education
  3. Component 3 - Project Management and Learning

 

Environmental safeguards: 

The project is categorized as ‘Category B’ as per the environmental safeguard policy of the World Bank, as the interventions like ‘Institutional Development Plans that would update infrastructure for research and teaching’ (under sub-component 1a) may have negative impact on the surrounding environment. The interventions proposed under sub-components 1b and 1c ‘CAASTs’ and ‘innovation grants’ offers scope for enhancing the positive impacts on environment through integration of pro environmental measures.

Environmental Assessment study:

As a safeguard requirement ICAR has conducted an Environment Assessment study and prepared an Environment Management Framework (EMF). An online survey is conducted targeting the faculty and students to understand the safeguards status and assessing the capacity of the universities for implementing safeguards. The key findings of the survey are:

  •    Relevance of the current curriculum to the local agro ecological problems, sustainable production systems and climate change resilience is moderate.
  •    Shortage of faculty and lack of trainings are key barriers in delivering quality education.
  •    AUs compliance with laboratory standards is medium 
  • In addition to this desk reviews are conducted to understand the safeguard requirements for laboratories, constructions etc.
  • Environment Management Framework: 

Based on the environment assessment an Environment Management Framework is prepared for the project. The purpose of Environment Management is to ‘ensure the environmental sustainability of the project interventions and to integrate the key environmental concerns in agriculture into education and research’.

The approach involves:

  •    Integration   of   Environmental   Sustainability   Plans     (ESPs)   into   the   Institutional Development Plans (sub-component 1a) and innovation grants proposals (sub-component      1c) - which will cover the safeguard requirements, key risks and mitigations.
  •   Integrating environmental sustainability concerns into CAASTs
  •   Suggestions for greening the agricultural curricula and associated research and extension

The EMF presents the ‘legal and regulatory framework’- a compilation of applicable acts,rules and regulations of GoI and identifies potential environmental risks and presents the mitigation measures along with an exclusion list. The scope for integrating concerns of environmental sustainability is also discussed.

The EMF procedures involve:

  1. Awareness generation on EMF through orientation programmes to SAUs
  2. Preparation of Environmental Sustainability Plans (ESPs) as part of proposals       -

Institutional Development Plans, innovation grants by SAUs

  1. Screening of the proposals for activities in exclusion list
  2. Evaluation of ESPs by technical committee and approval with suggestions if any
  3. Implementation of ESPs
  4. Monitoring of ESP implementation

The responsibility of EMF implementation lies with the Education Division/ ICAR which facilitates  the  EMF  implementation  through  capacity  building,  technical  support  and monitoring. A tentative budget estimated at 160 lakh is proposed for implementation of the EMF.

Contents

1.1.       Background of the National Agriculture Higher Education Project (NAHEP)............................... 5

1.2.       Types of Interventions and the need of Environment Management........................................ 8

1.3.       Environment Management Framework for the project:.......................................................... 9

1.4.       Process of Developing EMF..................................................................................................... 9

1.5.       Structure of EMF Report:...................................................................................................... 10

3.2. Legal and Regulatory Framework:.............................................................................................. 13

3.2.1. Research and Education:..................................................................................................... 13

3.2.1. Civil Works:......................................................................................................................... 17

4.1. Component 1: Support to Agricultural Universities..................................................................... 19

4.1.1. Component 1a: Support to Agricultural Universities:............................................................ 19

4.1.2. Component 1b: Centers for Advanced Agriculture Science and Technology:......................... 25

4.1.3. Component 1c: ICAR Innovation grants to AUs:.................................................................... 25

4.2. Component 2: Investments in ICAR Leadership in Agricultural Higher Education.......................... 26

5.1. Integrating Environmental Sustainability Plans (ESPs) into the IDPs and Innovation Grants

Proposals:....................................................................................................................................... 27

5.2. Environmental Evaluation IDPS and Innovation Grants:............................................................... 27

5.2. Institutional Arrangements for EMF Implementation:................................................................. 28

5.3. Capacity Building Arrangements:................................................................................................ 28

5.4. Monitoring:............................................................................................................................... 28

5.4. Budget:..................................................................................................................................... 29

 

List of Tables:

Table 1: Scope of Environment Management in the Project

Table 2: Compliance Requirements Applicable to the Project Activities

Table 3: Compliance Requirements Applicable to the Civil Works

Table 4: Environmental Impacts and Measures for Civil works:

Table 5: Environmental Impacts and Measures for up gradation of Laboratories: Table 6: Budget estimate for implementation of EMF

List of Annexures:

Annexure 1: Exclusion list

Annexure 2: Template for Preparation of Environmental Sustainability Plans (ESPs).

 Section I: Introduction

1.1.   Background of the National Agricultural Higher Education Project (NAHEP)

The Indian Council of Agricultural Research(ICAR) carries the mandate for the coordination and quality assurance of Agricultural Higher Education at Agricultural Universities (AUs) in India. The ICAR-AU System comprises 61 State Agricultural Universities, five Research Institutes (known as Deemed Universities), four Central Agricultural Universities, and three Central Universities with agricultural faculty. ICAR has a mandate to ensure quality of agricultural higher education across the country.ICAR provides voluntary AU accreditation to establish norms and quality standards for agricultural higher education.  ICAR continues its financial support to AUs for such accreditation.  The  agricultural  universities  modeled  on  land  grant  colleges  and established in the early 1960s have made tremendous contribution in the initial decades.Their proliferation and fragmentation into thematic universities dented their capacity in many aspects.  SAUs must adapt to the rapidly changing agricultural sector and its increasing knowledge intensity, and prepare the high-quality human resources essential for any technology and innovation system to succeed.  Improving the quality and relevance of agricultural education requires a fundamental change of approach in governance and control, financial sustainability, accountability, autonomy, transparency and  meritocracy.  There  is  a  strong  justification  for  massive  intervention  through investments in agricultural education front to usher in reforms in the arena of education quality, commercialization and revenue generation and ICT application focusing on effective governance, quality assurance, excellence, transparency and linkages that would lead to increased access, equity and competitiveness in higher agricultural education.

Project Objective:

The proposed NAHEP would support participating Agricultural Universities and ICAR in providing more relevant and higher quality education to agriculture university students.

NAHEP would target the 73 institutions that form the ICAR-AU System, consisting of State Agricultural Universities (61), Deemed Universities (5), Central Universities with Agricultural Faculty (4) and Central Agricultural Universities (3).The Project has the following components: 

  1. Component 1 - Support to Agricultural Universities (USD 146.4 million, of which USD IDA USD 73.2 million): would finance investments by participating AUs to improve the quality and relevance of agricultural education and research for agricultural transformation. The component has three sub-components.Sub-component 1a - Support to State-level AUs (USD 69.4 million, of which IDA USD 34.7 million) would target reform-ready State-level AUs (applying verifiable eligibility criteria as given in the Project Implementation Plan) and support competitively selected and performance-based Institutional Development Plans (IDPs), financed through IC  R’s existing. 
  1. Development Grant window. The IDPs under this subcomponent seek to improve: (a)
    learning outcomes and  future  employment  for AU students;  and (b)  faculty teaching
    performance and scientific effectiveness.   Through the IDPs, the AUs would identify and
    prioritize key challenges, propose interventions to respond to these challenges, and set
    timelines  and  indicators  for  measuring  achievement  of  greater  quality  and  relevance
    attributable to these interventions.  The IDPs would also leverage other funding sources (e.g.,
    existing or additional state-level funds, private sector, foundations) along with ICAR’s
    Development Grant.   NAHEP would finance each IDP through a subproject grant directly to
    the participating AU.  Activities financed under each IDP would include: (a) capacity
    building and training for agreed governance reforms that promote AU autonomy and
    accountability; (b) updated infrastructure (i.e., minor civil works, goods) for research and
    teaching; (c) faculty development (i.e., training, consultant services); (d) networking with
    industry  and  other  learning  institutions,  both  national  and  international; (e)  increased
    vocational education through the launching of certificate programs; (f) more effective student
    job placement; and (g) own-revenue generation for AUs.
  2. Sub-component 1b - Centers for Advanced Agriculture Science and Technology -
    CAASTs (USD 46.2 million, of which IDA USD 23.1 million) would support competitively
    selected IDPs proposed by AUs to establish multidisciplinary centers for teaching, research
    and extension on critical and emerging agricultural topics (e.g., globalization; climate change
    and resilience; land and water use efficiency; scalable technology; effective pedagogy and
    knowledge transfer;   agro-industry;   and   agro-entrepreneurship). Multi-stakeholder
    consultations would inform the geographic locations and core themes for the proposed
    CAASTs, after which eligible AUs would compete for CAAST funding. Approved AUs
    would be financed through a CAAST subproject grant directly to the participating AU. The
    sub-component would finance: (a) research and teaching equipment (i.e., goods); (b) faculty
    and scientist development fellowships, (c) student scholarships, primarily at the postgraduate
    level; and (d) costs associated with twinning arrangements with similar centers (e.g.,
    universities, research centers) both outside and within India (i.e., training, consultant services,
    and non-consultant services).
  3. Subcomponent 1c - ICAR innovation grants to AUs (USD 30.8 million, of which IDA USD 15.4 million) - would be open to all AUs across the ICAR-AU System and primarily support technical assistance and consultant services required to make AUs eligible (i.e., reform ready) for participation in subcomponents 1a and 1b. The subcomponent would also finance theme-based, competitive grants to AUs that: (a) promote intra- and inter-state, international, inter-institutional and public-private collaboration; and (b) stimulate increased private sector linkages for faculty and students.
  4. The Project Implementation Plan, satisfactory to the Bank, would include detailed
    guidelines for developing, evaluating and implementing IDPs (under subcomponent 1a),
    CAAST subprojects (under subcomponent 1b) and innovation grants (under subcomponent
    1c), including financial support available under NAHEP, procedures for inviting, reviewing
    and ranking specific proposals, implementation and monitoring of approved grants. 
  1. Subproject Cycle - IDPs, CAASTs and Innovation Grants:

   Following a dissemination campaign to create overall NAHEP awareness, interested and eligible AUs would define their institutional development goals and develop associated activities and outcomes (with technical assistance as required) into IDPs/ CAASTProposals (or develop Innovation Grant proposals), which are submitted to the Education Division/ ICAR;

  •  IDPs/ CAAST Proposals (or Innovation Grants proposals) are evaluated by the Technical Committee  for  compliance  with  environmental,  financial,  institutional,  social and technical guidelines (per the Project Implementation Plan);
  •   Subproject agreements are signed between AUs and the Education Division/ ICAR to support finance of approved IDPs/ CAASTs (or Innovation Grants) and specify the use of subproject resources, and the rights and responsibilities of AUs and the Education Division/ ICAR;
  •   The Education Division/ ICAR transfers subproject resources to AUs for IDP/ CAAST(or Innovation Grant) implementation;
  •  AUs  contract  goods,  works,  consultant  services  and  non-consultant  services, in accordance with the approved IDP/ CAAST (or Innovation Grant) the norms established in the Project Implementation Plan, and prepare reports (e.g., Financial Utilization Certificates) which they submit to the Education Division/ ICAR to document the use of  subproject resources.
  1. Component 2   -  Investments  in  ICAR  Leadership  in  Agriculture  Higher Education (USD 10.4 million, of which IDA USD 5.2 million) - would finance ICAR’s internal reforms to enhance its effectiveness in: (a) coordinating, guiding and managing agricultural higher education across the ICAR-AU System; and (b) its interactions with AUs and key stakeholders nationwide through interventions that increase the quality and relevance of agricultural higher education.
  2. As the Education Division/ ICAR is responsible for national coordination and quality
    assurance of agricultural higher education in the ICAR-AU System, the component would
    leverage ICAR’s comparative advantage in assessing systemic challenges across the ICAR-
    AU system and incubating solutions. The component would finance goods, training,
    consultant services and non-consultant services such as: (a) change management services to
    aid the Education Division/ ICAR in its reform agenda; (b) digital information systems for
    AU data collection and analysis to improve quality metrics in agricultural higher education;

(c) an improved curricula review process to tighten its relevance in today’s dynamic job market through IDPs and CAASTs; (d) enhanced methods to consolidate and disseminate global   best-practices   in   agricultural   higher   education (e.g.,   benchmarking); (e)institutionalization of stakeholder and advisory inputs to better inform research, education and extension across the ICAR-AU system; and (f) an External Advisory Panel, drawing on both national and international experience relevant to agricultural higher education, to provide a vehicle for best-practice dissemination and adoption by participating AUs. Component 3 - Project Management and Learning (USD 8.2 million, of which IDA USD 4.1 million)- would support NAHEP project management, primarily through the Education Division/ ICAR, to administer, supervise, monitor and evaluate overall project implementation.  The component would support: (a) an NAHEP Steering Committee that would provide strategic guidance to the Education Division/ ICAR throughout project implementation;

  1. (b) a Technical Committee, to evaluate IDP and Innovation Grant proposals; (c) a communication strategy to build awareness among AUs and other stakeholders regarding the objectives and activities of the proposed NAHEP; and (d) training and capacity-building for both ICAR and the AUs to achieve and sustain increased quality, relevance and effectiveness of agricultural higher education across the ICAR-AU system. 

1.2.   Types   of   Interventions   and   the   need   of   Environment Management The project is categorised as ‘Category B’ as the interventions like ‘updating infrastructure or  research  and  teaching’    (under  component   1a)  may  have  negative  impact  on  the surrounding  environment.  The  interventions  proposed  under  components         1b  and    1c ‘CAASTs’ and ‘innovation grants’ offers scope for enhancing the positive impacts on environment through integration of pro environmental measures.

Given below is the snapshot of applicability of environment management to the project components, sub components:

Table 1: Scope of environment Management in the Project

Component

Sub component and

Interventions

Impact on

environment /scope

for enhancement

EMF procedures to be put

in place

Support to

Agricultural

Universities

Support to Institutional

Development Plans which

may propose for

 

   Updating

infrastructure for

research and teaching

 

 

 

 

   Faculty development

(training and

consultant services)

 

 

 

   Infrastructure

related activities are

likely to have

negative impact on

the environment

 

 

   Scope for due

allocation of

trainings on

sustainable

agriculture, climate

resilience etc.

   Environment Criteria for

Screening and

evaluation of IDPs

 

   Environmental

guidelines for

infrastructure

development

   Checklist of mandatory

requirements in research

facilities

   Suggestive list of

trainings and capacity

building programmes

Centers for Advanced

Agriculture Science and

Technology (CAAST)

   Research and

teaching equipment

   Faculty and scientist

development

fellowships

   Weightage for

pro

environmental

themes and

locating

CAASTs in

sensitive agro

ecological

   Suggestive list of

pro environmental

themes and regions

of ecological

importance.

   

regions

 

Innovation grants

   Integrating

parameters for

environmental

sustainability.

   Environment criteria for

screening and evaluation

of proposals for

innovation grants to

ensure sustainability

Investment in

ICAR

Leadership in

Agricultural

Higher

Education

   Improved curricula

review process as test

cases under IDPs and

CAASTs contemplated

courses

   Balanced

integration of

environmental

sustainability

concerns

   Suggestive list of

themes for integration

into curricula - through

seminars, workshops

Project

Management

and Learning

   

   EMF implementation

plans and monitoring

mechanisms.

1.3.   Environment Management Framework for the project:

The purpose of Environment Management is to ‘ensure the environmental sustainability of the project interventions and to integrate the key environmental concerns in agriculture into education and research’.

The approach involves:

   Integration of Environmental Sustainability Plans (ESPs) (Annexure 2) into the IDPs and innovation grants proposals - which will cover the safeguard requirements, key risks and mitigations.

   Integrating environmental sustainability concerns into CAASTs

   Suggestions for greening the agricultural curricula and associated research and extension.

 This volume (Volume I) of the EMF report focuses on safeguard compliance of the NAHEP interventions which will be ensured through ESPs. This EMF is a dynamic document which will be updated followed by the project launch to guide the environment management needs of IDPs and Innovations grants in a more focused manner.

1.4.   Process of Developing EMF

The process of developing the EMF includes:

Desk review

: Desk review of applicable acts, rules, regulations and laws of Government of India, EMFs developed for earlier projects like NAIP, guidelines and Codes of Practices (CoPs) pertaining to research laboratories, key environmental concerns in Indian agriculture, sustainable agriculture etc.

Stakeholder survey

: An online survey was conducted covering faculty, scientists and students to understand the need and capacity for implementation of environment safeguards.

Consultations

: The project was discussed during the annual VCs conferences during 2013 and 2015, institution-industry interface meeting held in June 2015, intensive interaction with the Agricultural Education Division, etc.

Disclosure

: The report is being disclosed by hosting in the ICAR/project website for sufficient time to invite suggestions from stakeholders.

1.5   Structure of EMF Report:

Section 1, (this section) gives the background of the NAHEP, applicability of environment management, objectives of EMF and approach.

Section 2 discusses the capacity of agricultural universities (AUs) on safeguards compliance and needed measures.

Section 3 provides the requirement of safeguard compliance and lists out the legal and regulatory requirements as per the Government of India.

Section 4 discusses the potential adverse impacts of NAHEP interventions and proposes measures to mitigate such impact.

Section 5 describes the processes that should be in place for effective implementation of EMF. 

Section      2:      Baseline    Survey    of Agricultural Universities - Constraints Faced by State Agricultural Universities in   livering   Quality   Agricultural Higher Education ICAR with the support of World Bank conducted a baseline survey to assess the capacity of the State-level Agricultural Universities and Research Institutions within the ICAR-AU system for understanding their ability to comply with the World Bank safeguard policies.Both Environment and Social questions are combined into one survey (20 questions in total)and there are 2 sets (links) - one for faculty and one for students. The survey link was provided   for   the   participant   in   a   communication   addressed   to   all   the   Vice-chancellors/Directors with a request to identify on coordinator who will facilitate online responses  from  a  minimum  of 50  faculty  and 100  students  from  the  participatinguniversity/institution.The survey covered environmental (relevance of the curricula to local agro ecological problems, student learning and field experience on climate change resilient agriculture,  focus on sustainable agricultural production systems, constraints  in delivering quality education,and  in meeting the prescribed laboratory standards, emergency plan for safety,  disposal of hazardous chemical and biological wastes,  support required for quality education) and Social (quality of curriculum taught in relation to labor market demand, institutional capacity for globally competitive education, constraints in attracting high-quality students and female students, ability in complying with the laboratory standards, ability in complying with the employment demand by the industry,  university’s systems for mainstreaming students from vulnerable groups, issues faced by female faculty, support required for upgrading the facilities and conducting quality research) and social aspects posed in 20 questions with graded/multiple responses.The survey response rate was fairly high: 54% for students and 47% for Faculty.  The response ranged from 1115 to 4225 across the questions, may be because of the differences in the perception or relevance of the individual questions to the respondent.Eighty per cent of faculty respondents belong to state or central agricultural universities.Four percent were holding managerial positions in education.  Lack of human resources(35.82%), lack of expertise (29.65%), and shortage of fund (25.85%) were cited as the major constraints towards delivery of quality education by the faculty. While 40 % of the faculty felt the current curriculum relevant for local agricultural agro ecological problems, 51 % found the focus on student learning and associated field experience on climate change resilient  agriculture  as  moderate.  The  faculty  response  on  the  requirement  regarding upgradation of facilities was almost equal among training, equipment, manpower and finance as in the order.  One third of the female faculty expressed lack of human resource development policy and opportunity for career enhancement as a major impediment for their progress.  The existing opportunities for social inclusion  and  educational  attainment  were  rated  high. Training    (33%),  twinning arrangements   (32%)  and  reforming  curriculum      (30%)  were  cited  as  major  ways  of overcoming human resources shortage. Twenty one percent of the faculty found the current curriculum as highly relevant to meet the labour market demand while sixty four percent found it moderately relevant.  Lack of training, funds and facilities were cited as the major reasons for not meeting the laboratory standards by 26.78%, 22.97 % and 22.89 % faculty respectively.Of those participated in the students’ survey, 52.15 % were bachelors, followed by Masters(32.05%) and Ph.D scholars (15.80%).  The response of the students on the relevance (26%)of the current curriculum for local agricultural agro ecological problems, and the focus on student learning and associated field experience on climate change resilient agriculture (51%)were similar to that of the faculty in kind though differed in magnitude.  The students reported  training  opportunities (30.81%),  modern  equipment (28.04%)  and  additional manpower (23.24%) as the major requirements for quality educational experience.  While 4.44 % of the students rated the existing agricultural higher education as excellent, 28.63% rated as very good and 39.82% as good. Only 5.78% rated as poor and the rest as moderate.Scope for jobs and assured employment was the reason attributed by twenty five per cent of the students for their choice of agricultural education as a pursuit. While 13.96% of the students found the relevance of the teaching quality to meet the labour market demand as high, 61.54% considered the same as moderate. Nearly 70 per cent of the students reported their job or employment prospects as more than good.  The major constraint faced by students in accessing quality higher agricultural education was the lack of specialized knowledge intensity (23%) followed by lack of education, extension and training facilities, lack of credit/scholarships and poor infrastructure (18% each) and disconnect between curriculum and employment (16.75%).   While 20.29% of female students reported no obstacles for participation in extension and training, 29.96% felt the attitudes and assumptions as male biased and 28.10% opined agricultural research priorities as male dominated. The major accessibility issues for rural students were lack information about courses (32.93%) and lack of scholarships/funding (24.58%).  Collaboration with foreign universities and knowledge and skill intensive job driven courses can enhance enrolment in agricultural courses as  reported by 21.88% and 22.46% students respectively.The summary highlights of the survey results highlighted that the faculty emphasis were - a.human resource development - more manpower (recruitment) and better training;   b. access to technology in the classroom; c. linkage with industry; and d. alignment of curricula with skills demanded in the marketplace and that of the students’ were - a. experiential and practical learning opportunities; b. updated teaching techniques and c. learning relevant for future employment. 

Section 3: Safeguard Compliance Requirements

3.2. Legal and Regulatory Framework:

3.2.1. Research and Education: 

Table 2: Compliance Requirements Applicable to the Project Activities 

S.

No

Act, Policy or

Government

Order

Brief Overview

Applicability to

NAHEP

National Legislations

1.

Environment

Protection      Act

(1986).

 

“Rules   for   the

manufacture, use/

import/export

and   storage   of

hazardous

microorganisms/

genetically

engineered

organisms         or

cells, 1989”

   Certain   experiments   for   the

purpose of education within the

field   of   gene   technology   or

microorganism  may  be  carried

out outside the laboratories and

laboratory   areas   mentioned   in

sub-rule (2) and will be looked

after by the Institutional Biosafety

Committee.

   No person shall import, export,

transport,  manufacture,  process,

use   or   sell   any   hazardous

microorganisms   of   genetically

engineered  organisms/substances

or cells except with the approval

of   the   Genetic   Engineering

Approval Committee.

   Use             of              pathogenic

microorganisms           or          any

genetically engineered organisms

or   cells   for   the   purpose   of

research shall only be allowed in

laboratories or inside laboratory

area notified by the Ministry of

Environment and Forests.

   Any  person  operating  or  using

genetically                    engineered

organisms/microorganisms

mentioned  in  the  schedule  for

scale up or pilot operations shall

Applicable, as the P.G,

Ph.D. research project

may involve use of

genetically engineered

organisms.

   

have to obtain license issued by

the         Genetic         Engineering

Approval Committee for any such

activity

   Deliberate      or       unintentional

release of genetically engineered

organisms/hazardous

microorganisms          or         cells,

including  deliberate  release  for

the purpose of experiment shall

not be allowed without the special

approval of GEAC

 

2

Insecticides Act

1968

 

An     Act     to

regulate           the

import,

manufacture,

sale,      transport,

distribution   and

use                    of

insecticides  with

a view to prevent

risk   to   human

beings               or

animals, and for

matters

connected

therewith.

   Any person desiring to stock or

exhibit or distribute any

insecticide or to undertake

commercial pest control

operations with the use of any

insecticide may make an

application to the licensing officer

for the grant of a license.

Not applicable if the

universities, research

institutes stock the

insecticides for

experimental purposes

only.

3

Hazardous

Wastes

(Management

and    Handling)

Rules, 1989 and

Amendment

Rules, 2000   &

2003.

   Every        occupier         handling

hazardous wastes shall make an

application   to   the   Member-

Secretary, State Pollution Control

Board or Committee, as the case

may be or any officer designated

by  the  State  Pollution  Control

Board or Committee for the grant

of authorization

   Occupier not having a hazardous

wastes   treatment   and   disposal

facility of his own as the case

may be, for a common Treatment,

Storage   and   Disposal   Facility

(TSDF) shall become a member

of this facility and send his waste

to this facility to ensure proper

treatment    and    disposal    of

hazardous wastes generated

Partners to verify the

applicability of the

acts and ensure

compliance.

4

The   Seed   Act,

   Selling,  bartering  or  otherwise

Applicable   as   some

 

1966

supplying   any   seed   of   any

notified kind or variety, requires

that -

a) Such seed is identifiable as

to its kind or variety

b) Such seed conforms to the

minimum           limits           of

germination        and       purity

specified

c) The container of such seed

bears    in    the    prescribed

manner,  the  mark  or  Label

containing        the        correct

particulars.

To provide for regulating the quality

of  certain  seeds  for  sale,  and  for

related matter

State-level AUs supply

seed       material       to

farmers.

5

National

Biodiversity Act,

2002

   Any person who intends to obtain

any biological resource occurring

in India or knowledge associated

thereto   for   research   or   for

commercial utilization or for bio-

survey   and   bio-utilization   or

transfer   the   results   of   any

research   relating   to   biological

resources    occurring    in,    or

obtained from, India, shall make

application   in   such   form   and

payment of such fees as may be

prescribed,   to   the   National

Biodiversity Authority.

   Any   person   who   intends   to

transfer any biological resource or

knowledge   associated   thereto

referred  to  in  sub-section  shall

make an application in such form

and in such manner as may be

prescribed    to    the    National

Biodiversity Authority.

   The       National        Biodiversity

Authority  shall,  subject  to  any

regulations made in this behalf,

determine   the   benefit   sharing

which shall be given effect in all

or any of the following manner,

namely: transfer of technology, or

association  of  Indian  scientists,

benefit  claimers  and  the  local

people    with    research    and

development        in        biological

Applicable    as    the

students’ research may

involve           obtaining

biological resources or

associated knowledge.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Applicable                 as

partnerships           with

foreign        universities

may involve sharing of

knowledge  related  to

biological resources of

the country.

   

resources and bio-survey and bio-

utilization;

 

Guidelines and Codes of Practices

6

Recombinant

DNA guidelines,

1990

   The  guidelines  cover  areas  of

research   involving   genetically

engineered organism. It also deals

with  genetic  transformation  of

green plants, rDNA technology in

vaccine development and on large

scale production and deliberate/

accidental release of organisms,

plants,   animals   and   products

derived by rDNA technology into

the environment.

The levels of risk and classification

of   the   organisms   within   these

categories have been defined in these

guidelines.   Appropriate   practices,

equipment and facilities necessary for

safeguards  in  handling  organisms,

plants  and animals in  various  risk

groups have been recommended. The

guidelines  employ  the  concept  of

physical and biological containment

and the principle of good laboratory

practices.

Applicable.            Any

proposals   by   SAUs

that      may    involve

research       concerning

genetically engineered

organisms   should   be

informed by the rDNA

guidelines       and    a

compliance   statement

should be given as part

of  ESP (detailed  on

section 4).

7

Guidelines       for

research             in

transgenic crops,

1998

In 1998, DBT brought out separate

guidelines for carrying out research

in   transgenic   plants   called   the

Revised Guidelines for Research in

Transgenic Plants. These also include

the   guidelines   for   toxicity   and

allergenicity   of   transgenic   seeds,

plants and plant parts.

These   guidelines   cover   areas   of

recombinant DNA research on plants

including    the    development    of

transgenic plants and their growth in

soil      for    molecular    and    field

evaluation. The guidelines also deal

with   import   and   shipment   of

genetically    modified    plants    of

research purposes.

do

8

WHO  laboratory

safety  manual -

incorporated into

R                 DNA

guidelines

The 3

rd

edition of the manual focuses

on risk assessment, safe use of

recombinant DNA technology and

transport of infectious materials. It

also introduces bio security concepts

- the protection of microbiological

assets from theft, loss or diversion,

do

   

which could lead to the inappropriate

use of these agents to cause public

health harm.

 

9

NABL guidelines

for            residue

analysis labs

It supplements ISO/ IEC 17025: 2005

standard and provides specific

guidance on the accreditation of

chemical laboratories for both

assessors and laboratories preparing

for accreditation. It gives detailed

guidance for those undertaking

quantitative and qualitative

examination of the composition,

nature and properties of materials,

products and substances. The

requirements for accreditation are

laid down in the International

Standard ISO/IEC 17025: 2005

(General requirements for the

competence of calibration and testing

laboratories).

Applicable to up

gradation of

laboratories concerned

with food testing,

pesticide residue

analysis etc.

3.2.1. Civil Works: 

Table 3: Compliance Requirements Applicable to the Civil Works 

S.

No

Act, Policy or

Government

Order

Brief Overview

Applicability to

NAHEP

National Legislations

1

Preservation of

Trees Acts

   Permissions are required to clear

trees.  State  specific  acts  with

regard  to  this  speak  about  the

provisions.

Applicable as site

clearance for

construction may

involve cutting of trees

2

Ground water

Acts

   Permission required to drill bore

wells,      water    quality    tests,

recharge, rainwater harvest etc.

 

4

National

Building Code of

India 2005

   The code provides regulations for

building         construction         by

departments,                  municipal

administrations and public bodies.

It lays down a set of minimum

provisions to protect the safety of

the   public   with   regard   to

structural sufficiency, fire hazards

and health aspects.

Applicable.

5

Energy

Conservation

   ECBC   sets   minimum   energy

standards        for        commercial

Applicable       to      air

conditioned

 

Building Code

(Energy

Conservation Act

2001)

buildings having a connected load

of 100kW or contract demand of

120 KVA and above. While the

Central Government has powers

under the EC Act 2001, the state

governments have the flexibility

to modify the code to suit local or

regional needs and notify them.

commercial   buildings

with   connected   load

more than 100 kW.

6

The Noise

Pollution

(Regulation And

Control) Rules

2000).

To regulate and

control noise

producing and

generating

sources with the

objective of

maintaining the

ambient air

quality standards

in respect of

noise.

   Sound emitting construction

equipment shall not be used or

operated during night times in

residential areas and silence zones

(hospitals and educational

institutions).

Applicable

7

e-waste

(management

and    Handling)

Rules, 2011

Consumers  or  Bulk  consumers  of

electrical and electronic Schedule I

shall ensure that e-waste generated by

them is channelized to the authorised

collection   centre(s),   or   registered

dismantler(s)   or   recycler(s)   or   is

returned to the pick up or take back

service provided by the producers;

and Bulk consumers shall maintain

record of e-waste generated by them

in the Form 2 and make such record

available for scrutiny by the State

Pollution   Control   Board   or   the

Pollution        Control        Committee

concerned.

Applicable                 as

electronic   equipment

will be purchased.

Section 4: Environmental Impacts of Project Interventions and Mitigation Measures

This section discusses the environmental impacts of the project interventions and suggests mitigation measures. 

4.1. Component 1: Support to Agricultural Universities

4.1.1. Component 1a: Support to Agricultural Universities:

The AUs receive financial support for their Institutional Development Plans (IDPs) which may involve the following activities.

4.1.1.1. Updating Infrastructure for Research and Teaching

This will involve minor civil works; laboratory equipment etc. Up to 60% of the IDP fund is likely to be used for updating infrastructure and equipment. The type of infrastructure created/upgraded will include laboratories. Building construction will have direct and indirect impacts on environment during construction, maintenance etc. It is important to ensure that the surrounding environment is not compromised during the process.

The table below presents the possible impacts on environment and mitigation measures.

Table 4: Environmental Impacts and Measures for Civil works:

Activity

Environmental Impacts

Mitigation Measures

Site clearing

   Site clearing sometimes

leads to loss of greenery

by felling trees, clearing

vegetation etc.

   In  cases  where  cutting of trees  is

required, permission should be taken

from officers concerned.

   Compensatory plantation of trees of

local species should be done in equal

or more number near the same site or

suitable alternate site

   In case of tree felling in forest or

tribal areas, permission from Forest

Department  should be  obtained by

applying to Range Officer (in any

case  the  felling  must  not  involve

more   than 75   trees   per   ha -

proportionate to the area).

Raw materials for

construction

   Possibility   of   use   of

illegally  mined  or  low

quality              materials

affecting                     the

sustainability                of

environment   and   the

infrastructure.

   All raw materials should be sourced

from authentic and approved vendors,

possessing  valid  permits.  Relevant

supporting   documents   should   be

presented for scrutiny on request.

Building Design

(research facilities)

Ventilation, water

harvesting etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Safety measures

 

 

 

 

Disaster proof

construction

   Lack  of  solar  passive

features  demands  high

energy  requirement  for

artificial lighting and air

circulation.

   Use  of  non  renewable

energy   contributes   to

emissions

   Lack of water source in

the   premises   or   over

exploited   source   may

lead   to   pressure   on

water resources and may

involve    transportation

cost.

 

   Risk   due   to   lack   of

safety measures

 

 

 

   Absence    of    disaster

proofing    makes    the

buildings  vulnerable  to

disaster

   Building   design   should   be   solar

passive and should incorporate the

proper ventilation requirements like

sufficient   number   of   ventilators,

windows.

   Possibility of solar electrification (at

least partly) should be explored

 

   Every building should be equipped

with rain water harvesting structure

which    can    meet    the    water

requirement of the facility at least for

non-drinking purposes.

 

   All  buildings  should  be  equipped

with fire safety equipment

   Constructions in seismic zones, flood

prone areas should have integration

disaster proof features in consultation

with PWD/relevant authority.

Construction

operations

   The             construction

equipment        operation

may                        cause

inconvenience   to   the

workers and by passers

due to dust, noise etc.

 

 

   Inconvenience          and

health   issues   to   the

workers involved

 

   Possibility                   of

involvement   of   child

labour.

   Possibility   of   chance

finds   of   archeological

importance.

   Land acquisition

   Operations like mixing raw materials

should   be   done   in   areas   where

people’s   movement   is   less   and

workers should use masks.

   Construction  equipment  that  emits

noise   should   not   be   used   in

residential areas during night or near

schools and hospitals.

   The workers should be provided with

gloves, masks, helmets etc.

 

 

   Use   of   child   labour   should   be

avoided.

 

   Any chance finds should be deposited

with District Collector

 

 

   The project does not fund for any

land acquisition

(It is important to integrate relevant

clauses into the civil works contracts)

Disposal of debris

 

   Open       disposal        of

   Debris should be put to alternate use

 

construction  debris  near

the site

such as land filling in consultation

with municipal corporations.

Environment Friendly Designs and Green Building CertificationsEnvironment Friendly Designs:

Apart from following the legal and regulatory framework and mitigating any negative impacts, the scope of EMF can be extended to integration of environment friendly features into the building designs depending on the feasibility. Integrating the environment friendly features will provide aesthetic value and conducive environment to work besides reducing the use of energy.   Environment friendly parameters such as use of eco friendly construction materials (eg: mud bricks, bamboo, stone etc.) traditional architecture, roof top solar SPV, landscaping and improving greenery in the premises.

Green Building Certification:

Buildings have direct and indirect impacts on environment during construction and post construction. During construction, renovation, demolition and occupancy, the buildings use raw materials, energy, water and generates wastes and lead to harmful emissions.As an effort towards sustainable design and maintenance ‘Green Building Rating System’ is introduced which aims to

   reduce the environmental impact of construction of new buildings by promotingresource conservation

   reduce the use of resources during operation and maintenance.

The following are the criteria for rating a building as ‘Green Building’:

    Proper site planning

   Building envelope design

   Building system design for Heating Ventilation and Air Condition (HVAC)

   Integration of renewable energy sources to generate energy onsite

   Selection of ecologically sustainable materials with low emission potential

   Indoor thermal and visual comfort and air quality leading to less energy consumption    Water harvesting and efficient water management

   Low operation and maintenance costs

   Proper access to community infrastructure systems

The following are the agencies that support for rating the ‘Green Buildings’:

   LEED India (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Rating System by Indian Green Building Council (IGBC): Indian Green Building Council (IGBC) is formed by the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII). IGBC facilitates green buildings in India through ‘IGBC Green New Buildings’ rating system. This rating tool enables the designer to apply green concepts and reduce environmental impacts which are measurable. The rating programme covers diverse climatic zones and changing lifestyles.GBC has licensed the LEED Green Building Standard from the US Green Building Council (USGBC). LEED certification provides independent verification of a building Green Buildings are Energy Efficient, Sourced at 

http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/green%20building.pdf 

accessed on 22

nd

February 2016. or neighborhood’s green features, including the design, construction, operations and maintenance of resource-efficient, high-performing, healthy, cost-effective buildings.

Contact address: 

CII - Sohrabji Godrej Green Business Centre Survey No 64, Kothaguda Post Near Kothaguda Cross Roads Ranga Reddy Dist Hyderabad - 500 084 Tel: 040 - 44185111 Fax: 040 - 44185189 Email

: igbc@cii.in

   Green Rating of Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA):GRIHA is a rating tool that helps people assesses the performance of their building against certain nationally acceptable benchmarks. It evaluates the environmental performance of a building holistically over its entire life cycle, thereby providing a definitive standard for what constitutes a ‘green building’. The rating system, based on accepted energy and environmental principles, will seek to strike a balance between  the  established  practices  and  emerging  concepts,  both  national  and international. The system will help to ‘design and evaluate’ new buildings (buildings that are still at the inception stages). A building is assessed based on its predicted performance over its entire life cycle - inception through operation.The stages of the life cycle that have been identified for evaluation are: 

   Pre-construction stage: (intra- and inter-site issues like proximity to public transport, type of soil, kind of land, where the property is located, the flora and fauna on the land before construction activity starts, the natural landscape and land features).

   Building planning and construction stages: (issues of resource conservation and reduction in resource demand, resource utilization efficiency, resource recovery and reuse, and provisions for occupant health and well-being). The  prime resources that are considered in this section are land, water, energy, air, and green cover.

   Building  operation  and  maintenance  stage:         (issues   of   operation   and maintenance of building systems and processes, monitoring and recording of energy consumption, and occupant health and well-being, and also issues that affect the global and local environment).

   Small Versatile Affordable GRIHA (SVAGRIHA): SVAGRIHA is part of Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA Council). GRIHA is India’s own rating system jointly developed by The Energy Research Institute (TERI) and the     Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), Government of India. SVAGRIHA has been designed as an extension of GRIHA and has been specifically developed for projects with built-up area less than 2500 sq. mtr which could be followed for the project given the size of the treasury offices. In this system buildings are rated in a three-tier process. The process initiates with the online submission of documents as per the prescribed criteria followed by on site visit and evaluation of the building by a  team of professionals and experts from GRIHA Secretariat.  GRIHA rating systemconsists of 34 criteria categorized in four different sections - Site selection and site planning, Conservation and efficient utilization of resources, Building operation and maintenance, and Innovation. 

Contact address:

The Energy Resources Institute (TERI) GRIHA, SVAGRIHA

First floor, A 260,

Bhisham Pitamah Marg, Defence Colony,

New Delhi 110024

Tel. - (+91 11) 46444500/24339606-08

Helpline no. - (+91 11) - 40589139

Website:

http://www.grihaindia.org/

 

   Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE): BEE has developed a rating system for the buildings based on a 1 to 5 star scale. More stars mean more energy efficiency.   BEE rating system considers the Energy Performance Index (EPI). The unit of Kilo watt      hours per square meter per year is considered for rating the building and especially targets  air  conditioned  and  non-air  conditioned  office  buildings.  The  Energy Conservation Building Code (ECBC) is taken into consideration under the rating      system.

Contact address: 

Bureau of Energy Efficiency Ministry of Power,Govt. of India 4th Floor, Sewa Bhawan 

K. Puram, New Delhi - 110066 Fax: +91 11 26178352

Email:

admin@beenet.in

Website:

https://beeindia.gov.in

Eco-friendly designing does not necessarily require any extra costs but may rather reduce the cost of construction. However at times the   green building processes and certification may lead to an increase in the overall cost of construction, however, the operational costs are reduced in long run besides the environmental benefits and conducive work atmosphere.ICAR will aim to get all buildings certified as green buildings, including laboratories and will commission a report on green building s and laboratories.

Table 5: Environmental Impacts and Measures for up gradation of Laboratories:

Activity

Environmental Impacts

Mitigation Measures

Building designs

and construction

   Dearth  of  space,  poor

ventilation                 and

illumination,   lack   of

basic facilities may  lead

to             uncomfortable

working conditions

   The    laboratories    should    have

sufficient        space,        ventilation,

lighting, regular supply of essentials

like  quality  water.  Stack  rooms,

store rooms etc. should be spacious

and well ventilated

Electricity supply

and safety.

   Irregular supply of  and

fluctuations                  in

electricity  may  hazard

   Regular and stabilized electricity

supply (220-230 volts) preferably

green and captive should be ensured.

 

 

quality and safety.

   Provision of standby source for

power supply to sensitive and costly

equipment.

   Ground all sources of power supply

for human and equipment safety.

Safeguards

   Lack    of    safeguards

poses risk of exposure to

harmful  chemicals  and

accidents

   An   efficient   hood   system   is

necessarily required at laboratories

in order to remove various toxic and

hazardous  fumes  from  the  work

place   generated   during   use   of

organic   solvent/or   during   acid

digestion

   The top surface of working bench

should be made of acid and alkali

resistant materials

   All   the   laboratories   should   be

equipped with fire fighting facilities,

first aid kit, look into the feasibility

for provision of eye wash fountains,

safety showers etc. There should be

adequate number of exit doors in

case of emergency.

   Fire  safety  instructions  should  be

displayed in the form of posters in

the   wall   and   all   the   students,

technicians,      housekeeping    staff

should  be  oriented  on  immediate

response to accidental burns, acid

spills, fire etc.

   All the hazardous substances should

be labeled with precautions for the

user.

Waste disposal

   Open                 disposal

hazardous of laboratory

wastes into gutters may

contaminate   the   soil,

groundwater etc.

   The labs should have provisions for

safe disposal of hazardous wastes

   There should be a plan for separate

collection of hazardous wastes

which should be properly treated or

disposed

 4.1.1.2. Faculty Development (training, consultant services):

The faculty development programmes proposed should have balanced integration of environmental themes such as:

   Laboratory safety

   Biosafety

   Waste disposal

   Green energy and buildings for laboratories

   Biodiversity conservation    Food safety

This list is only an indicative and more areas shall be identified once the environmental consultancy under the project is in place.

4.1.1.3. Improved Practical Education through KVKs and Vocational Education through Certificate Programs:

Practical education programmes should have due integration of pro environmental themes, non-invasive techniques, sustainable options, green and efficient energy use, waste recycling, water harvesting, more crop per drop, promotion of soil health, integrated pest management, organic agriculture,  integrated farming system, etc. The programme will identify more such themes relevant to the local agro ecosystems and resource base.

4.1.2. Component 1b: Centers for Advanced Agriculture Science and Technology:

The component would support establishing multi disciplinary centers for teaching, research and extension on critical and emerging themes in agriculture. The themes and geographical locations would be identified through multi stakeholder consultations.  EMF suggests a list of themes and locations which will become a part of base document for consultations.The themes would focus on - bringing in water efficiency measures, sustainable land use and land management practices; a special focus on land based and environment/biodiversity friendly measures for productivity enhancement in forestlands where titles have been transferred to communities/individuals through the FRA etc.

4.1.3. Component 1c: ICAR Innovation grants to AUs:Innovation grants are theme based competitive grants to AUs, Colleges and Departments,faculty and students to promote inter-state, international, inter-institutional and public-private collaboration. , including matching funds from the private sector; and needs-based equipment, training and technical assistance.EMF suggests evaluation criteria for innovation grants:

    No activities in the exclusion list are part of innovation grants. Exclusion list attached Annexure 1.

   Activity should not have any negative impact on surrounding environment - land,  water, biodiversity, etc.

   Sustainability concerns integrated into the education, research activity proposed

   Ability of the project to deliver some knowledge on environmental sustainability- limited, medium, high

   Stimulates the scientific creativity, research capacity on issues of environmental importance

   Agreements in place on safeguards measures with private partners who join the project and beyond either through PPP or as bilateral partners in research, teaching, marketing and/or construction etc.

4.2. Component 2: Investments in ICAR Leadership in Agricultural Higher Education

This component would finance improved curricula review process.The curriculum review process should consider the requisite knowledge and skills for facingthe challenges of food security, degrading environment, climate change etc. In addition to the curriculam review theme based modular workshops could be conducted for PG and PhD students.

Research should be encouraged on these specific themes. 

   Low green house gas agriculture

   Carbon credits for sustainable farming systems  

Section 5: EMF Implementation Plan 

This  section  presents  the  EMF  implementation  plan      -  which  includes  Environmental Evaluation  of  subproject  proposals (IDPs,  CAASTs  and  Innovation  grants),  Capacity Building and Monitoring requirements. A tentative budget and time plan is also included.

5.1. Integrating Environmental Sustainability Plans (ESPs) into the IDPs and Innovation Grants Proposals:

The sub project proposals (IDPs, CAASTs and Innovation Grants Proposals) will include an ESP which will identify the mandatory requirements, risks and mitigation measures. This will be prepared by the Environment Specialist at the participating AU and annexed to the proposal.

5.2. Environmental Evaluation IDPS and Innovation Grants:

In order to ensure the environmental sustainability of the ‘Institution Development Plans (IDPs)’ , CAASTs and ‘innovation grants’ the proposals will be evaluated. This process will be termed as “Environmental Evaluation (EE)” of the plans/proposals. The process of environmental appraisal is done in 2 steps:

Step 1:

screening the proposals for inclusion of any activities that are in the exclusion list.

Step 2:

evaluation of the proposals (specifically Environmental Sustainability Plan) for due integration of mitigation measures for identified risks.

The process of environmental evaluation is detailed below: 

Submission of IDPs, CAASTs and Innovation Grant Proposals to ICAR by AUs which includes  Environmental Susutainability Plan (ESP)Environment Evaluation of ESPs by Environment Specialist and clearence Approval by Techncial Committee Implementation of ESPs by the AUs Monitoring by ICAR External Monitoring 

5.2. Institutional Arrangements for EMF Implementation:

For successful implementation of EMF institutional arrangements are the key. The following are the proposed institutional arrangements Environment Specialist at AU (professor of Envt. Science Dept can be given this charge Environment Specilsit      at PMU (ICAR) Evlauation byTechnical committee 

  • Reviews subproject proposal, preapre
    an ESP which is annexed to proposals
  • Coordinates the implemnetation of

ESPs 

  • Conducts EE to IDPs, CAASTs and Innovation
    grants, clears ESPs.
  • Conducts capacity Building Programmes to
    AUs and Monitors the implementation of ESPs 
  • Approves the proposals after environmental
    evaluation - i.e. verification of ESP

5.3. Capacity Building Arrangements:

EMF orientation to Environment Specialists at AUs:

A main orientation programme will be conducted for the Environment Specialists at AUs to orient them on the context and importance of EMF, preparation of ESPs, implementation, monitoring, documentation etc. This will be coordinated by an Environment Specialist at the Education Division/ ICAR.

Refresher trainings:

As part of review meetings or as spate sessions refresher training will be conducted once in 6 months or at stipulated intervals to keep them abreast with the key issues, best practices etc. 

5.4. Monitoring:

Internal Monitoring:

As part of regular monitoring visits the Education Division/ ICAR    - Environment Specialist will review the ESP implementation and prepares implementation status reports. Any key identified constraints will be resolved by providing required hand holding support.


External Monitoring:

An external agency will be hired to conduct an evaluation during                2

nd

  - 3

rd

year of implementation with a purpose to understand the effectiveness of EMF, constraints etc, and to offer recommendations. 

5.5. Budget:

The tentative budget for the EMF implementation is as follows: 

Table 6: Budget estimate for implementation of EMF 

Item

Unit cost (INR)

Total cost (INR)

Timeline

Hiring       environment

specialist        at        the

Education      Division/

ICAR

Rs. 75000/- per month

for 60 months

Rs.        52        lakhs

(reckoning          10%

increase every year )

Within 2  months

after   the   project

launch

Capacity         Building

Programmes               to

Environment

Specialist                    at

participating AUs.

Orientation and

Refresher trainings

 

 

 

Rs.      5      lakh      per

programme

 

 

 

Rs.50,00,000/-    for

10 programmes

6

th

   month   after

project        launch;

Subsequently

twice / year

Monitoring   visits   to

participating AUs

Rs. 20000/- per visit

Rs.40,00,000/-    for

20 visits

Once    every        6

months

External evaluation

Rs.10,00,000/-         per

evaluation

Rs.20,00,000/-    for

two evaluations

During 2

nd

or 3 rd

year of the project.

 and  II  are  not  permitted  under  any  project interventions

   Partnership with foreign universities/private firms will not involve exchange of any bio resources (genetic  material)  without  due  notice  to  and  permissions  from  National Biodiversity Authority

   Research with genetically engineered organisms is not permitted without approval of GEAC

   For  construction  works,  no  trees  should  be  cut  without  permission  from  relevant departments

    No bore wells should be drilled without permissions

   No child labour should be hired for any construction activities 

Annexure 2: Template for preparation of Environmental Sustainability Plans (ESPs).

Proposed

intervention

/activity

Possible

Environmental

Impacts

Mitigation

Measures

Scope for

integration of

environmental

sustainability

concerns

Resource

required

(budget,

technical

support etc.)

         
         
         
         
         

 

Signature of Environment Specialist AU:                                           Date:

Signature of Environment Specialist PMU (ICAR):                            Date

Higher Education Project (NAHEP) 

Draft Report

Volume I - Environmental Safeguards Indian Council of Agricultural Research  (ICAR) 

Executive SummaryAbout the project:

The purpose of the National Agriculture Higher Education Project (NAHEP) is to support participating Agricultural Universities (AUs) and ICAR in providing more relevant and higher quality education to agriculture university students. The project components are as follows:

Support to Agricultural Universities

  1. Sub-component 1a - Support to Institutional Development Plans of AUs
  2. Sub-component 1b   -   Centers  for   Advanced   Agriculture   Science   and Technology (CAAST)
  1. Subcomponent 1c - ICAR innovation grants to AUs
  2. Component 2 - Investments in ICAR Leadership in Agriculture Higher Education
  3. Component 3 - Project Management and Learning
  4. Environmental safeguards:

The project is categorized as ‘Category B’ as per the environmental safeguard policy of the World Bank, as the interventions like ‘Institutional Development Plans that would update infrastructure for research and teaching’ (under sub-component 1a) may have negative impact on the surrounding environment. The interventions proposed under sub-components 1b and 1c ‘CAASTs’ and ‘innovation grants’ offers scope for enhancing the positive impacts on environment through integration of pro environmental measures.

Environmental Assessment study

As a safeguard requirement ICAR has conducted an Environment Assessment study and prepared an Environment Management Framework (EMF). An online survey is conducted targeting the faculty and students to understand the safeguards status and assessing the capacity of the universities for implementing safeguards. The key findings of the survey are:

   Relevance of the current curriculum to the local agro ecological problems, sustainable production systems and climate change resilience is moderate

   Shortage of faculty and lack of trainings are key barriers in delivering quality education    AUs compliance with laboratory standards is medium in addition to this desk reviews are conducted to understand the safeguard requirements for laboratories, constructions etc.

Environment Management Framework:

Based on the environment assessment an Environment Management Framework is prepared for the project. The purpose of Environment Management is to ‘ensure the environmental sustainability of the project interventions and to integrate the key environmental concerns in agriculture into education and research’.

The approach involves:

   Integration   of   Environmental   Sustainability   Plans     (ESPs)   into   the   Institutional

Development Plans (sub-component 1a) and innovation grants proposals (sub-component


      1c) - which will cover the safeguard requirements, key risks and mitigations.


   Integrating environmental sustainability concerns into CAASTs

   Suggestions for greening the agricultural curricula and associated research and extension 

The EMF presents the ‘legal and regulatory framework’- a compilation of applicable acts,rules and regulations of GoI and identifies potential environmental risks and presents the mitigation measures along with an exclusion list. The scope for integrating concerns of environmental sustainability is also discussed.

The EMF procedures involve:

  1. Awareness generation on EMF through orientation programmes to SAUs
  2. Preparation of Environmental Sustainability Plans (ESPs) as part of proposals       -

Institutional Development Plans, innovation grants by SAUs

  1. Screening of the proposals for activities in exclusion list
  2. Evaluation of ESPs by technical committee and approval with suggestions if any
  3. Implementation of ESPs
  4. Monitoring of ESP implementation

The responsibility of EMF implementation lies with the Education Division/ ICAR which facilitates  the  EMF  implementation  through  capacity  building,  technical  support  and monitoring. A tentative budget estimated at 160 lakh is proposed for implementation of the EMF.

Contents

1.1.       Background of the National Agriculture Higher Education Project (NAHEP)............................... 5

1.2.       Types of Interventions and the need of Environment Management........................................ 8

1.3.       Environment Management Framework for the project:.......................................................... 9

1.4.       Process of Developing EMF..................................................................................................... 9

1.5.       Structure of EMF Report:...................................................................................................... 10

3.2. Legal and Regulatory Framework:.............................................................................................. 13

3.2.1. Research and Education:..................................................................................................... 13

3.2.1. Civil Works:......................................................................................................................... 17

4.1. Component 1: Support to Agricultural Universities..................................................................... 19

4.1.1. Component 1a: Support to Agricultural Universities:............................................................ 19

4.1.2. Component 1b: Centers for Advanced Agriculture Science and Technology:......................... 25

4.1.3. Component 1c: ICAR Innovation grants to AUs:.................................................................... 25

4.2. Component 2: Investments in ICAR Leadership in Agricultural Higher Education.......................... 26

5.1. Integrating Environmental Sustainability Plans (ESPs) into the IDPs and Innovation Grants

Proposals:....................................................................................................................................... 27

5.2. Environmental Evaluation IDPS and Innovation Grants:............................................................... 27

5.2. Institutional Arrangements for EMF Implementation:................................................................. 28

5.3. Capacity Building Arrangements:................................................................................................ 28

5.4. Monitoring:............................................................................................................................... 28

5.4. Budget:..................................................................................................................................... 29

List of Tables:

Table 1: Scope of Environment Management in the Project

Table 2: Compliance Requirements Applicable to the Project Activities

Table 3: Compliance Requirements Applicable to the Civil Works

Table 4: Environmental Impacts and Measures for Civil works:

Table 5: Environmental Impacts and Measures for up gradation of Laboratories: Table 6: Budget estimate for implementation of EMF

List of Annexures:

Annexure 1: Exclusion list

Annexure 2: Template for Preparation of Environmental Sustainability Plans (ESPs). 

Section I: Introduction 

1.1.   Background of the National Agricultural Higher Education Project (NAHEP) The Indian Council of Agricultural Research         (ICAR) carries the mandate for the coordination and quality assurance of Agricultural Higher Education at Agricultural universities (AUs) in India. The ICAR-AU System comprises 61 State Agricultural Universities, five Research Institutes (known as Deemed Universities), four Central Agricultural Universities, and three Central Universities with agricultural faculty. ICAR has a mandate to ensure quality of agricultural higher education across the country.ICAR provides voluntary AU accreditation to establish norms and quality standards for agricultural higher education.  ICAR continues its financial support to AUs for such accreditation.  The  agricultural  universities  modeled  on  land  grant  colleges  and established in the early 1960s have made tremendous contribution in the initial decades.Their proliferation and fragmentation into thematic universities dented their capacity in many aspects.  SAUs must adapt to the rapidly changing agricultural sector and its increasing knowledge intensity, and prepare the high-quality human resources essential for any technology and innovation system to succeed.  Improving the quality and relevance of agricultural education requires a fundamental change of approach in governance and control, financial sustainability, accountability, autonomy, transparency and  meritocracy.  There  is  a  strong  justification  for  massive  intervention  through investments in agricultural education front to usher in reforms in the arena of education quality, commercialization and revenue generation and ICT application focusing on effective governance, quality assurance, excellence, transparency and linkages that would lead to increased access, equity and competitiveness in higher agricultural education.

Project Objective:

The proposed NAHEP would support participating Agricultural Universities and ICAR in providing more relevant and higher quality education to agriculture university students.

NAHEP would target the 73 institutions that form the ICAR-AU System, consisting of State Agricultural Universities (61), Deemed Universities (5), Central Universities with Agricultural Faculty (4) and Central Agricultural Universities (3).The Project has the following components:

 

  1. Component 1 - Support to Agricultural Universities (USD 146.4 million, of which USD IDA USD 73.2 million): would finance investments by participating AUs to improve the quality and relevance of agricultural education and research for agricultural transformation. The component has three sub-components.  Sub-component 1a - Support to State-level AUs (USD 69.4 million, of which IDA USD 34.7 million)would target reform-ready State-level AUs (applying verifiable eligibility criteria as given in the Project Implementation Plan) and support competitively selected and performance-based Institutional Development Plans (IDPs), financed through IC  R’s existingDevelopment Grant window. The IDPs under this subcomponent seek to improve: (a) 
  1. learning outcomes and  future  employment  for AU students;  and (b)  faculty teaching
    performance and scientific effectiveness.   Through the IDPs, the AUs would identify and
    prioritize key challenges, propose interventions to respond to these challenges, and set
    timelines  and  indicators  for  measuring  achievement  of  greater  quality  and  relevance
    attributable to these interventions.  The IDPs would also leverage other funding sources (e.g.,
    existing or additional state-level funds, private sector, foundations) along with ICAR’s
    Development Grant.   NAHEP would finance each IDP through a subproject grant directly to
    the participating AU.  Activities financed under each IDP would include: (a) capacity
    building and training for agreed governance reforms that promote AU autonomy and
    accountability; (b) updated infrastructure (i.e., minor civil works, goods) for research and
    teaching; (c) faculty development (i.e., training, consultant services); (d) networking with
    industry  and  other  learning  institutions,  both  national  and  international; (e)  increased
    vocational education through the launching of certificate programs; (f) more effective student
    job placement; and (g) own-revenue generation for AUs.
  2. Sub-component 1b - Centers for Advanced Agriculture Science and Technology -
    CAASTs (USD 46.2 million, of which IDA USD 23.1 million) would support competitively
    selected IDPs proposed by AUs to establish multidisciplinary centers for teaching, research
    and extension on critical and emerging agricultural topics (e.g., globalization; climate change
    and resilience; land and water use efficiency; scalable technology; effective pedagogy and
    knowledge transfer;   agro-industry;   and   agro-entrepreneurship). Multi-stakeholder
    consultations would inform the geographic locations and core themes for the proposed
    CAASTs, after which eligible AUs would compete for CAAST funding. Approved AUs
    would be financed through a CAAST subproject grant directly to the participating AU. The
    sub-component would finance: (a) research and teaching equipment (i.e., goods); (b) faculty
    and scientist development fellowships, (c) student scholarships, primarily at the postgraduate
    level; and (d) costs associated with twinning arrangements with similar centers (e.g.,
    universities, research centers) both outside and within India (i.e., training, consultant services,
    and non-consultant services).
  3. Subcomponent 1c - ICAR innovation grants to AUs (USD 30.8 million, of which IDA USD 15.4 million) - would be open to all AUs across the ICAR-AU System and primarily support technical assistance and consultant services required to make AUs eligible (i.e., reform ready) for participation in subcomponents 1a and 1b. The subcomponent would also finance theme-based, competitive grants to AUs that: (a) promote intra- and inter-state, international, inter-institutional and public-private collaboration; and (b) stimulate increased private sector linkages for faculty and students.
  4. The Project Implementation Plan, satisfactory to the Bank, would include detailed
    guidelines for developing, evaluating and implementing IDPs (under subcomponent 1a),
    CAAST subprojects (under subcomponent 1b) and innovation grants (under subcomponent
    1c), including financial support available under NAHEP, procedures for inviting, reviewing
    and ranking specific proposals, implementation and monitoring of approved grants. 
  1. Subproject Cycle - IDPs, CAASTs and Innovation Grants:

   Following a dissemination campaign to create overall NAHEP awareness, interested and


      eligible AUs would define their institutional development goals and develop associated


      activities and outcomes (with technical assistance as required) into IDPs/ CAAST


      Proposals (or develop Innovation Grant proposals), which are submitted to the Education


      Division/ ICAR;

   IDPs/ CAAST Proposals (or Innovation Grants proposals) are evaluated by the Technical


      Committee  for  compliance  with  environmental,  financial,  institutional,  social  and


      technical guidelines (per the Project Implementation Plan);

   Subproject agreements are signed between AUs and the Education Division/ ICAR to


      support finance of approved IDPs/ CAASTs (or Innovation Grants) and specify the use of


      subproject resources, and the rights and responsibilities of AUs and the Education


      Division/ ICAR;

   The Education Division/ ICAR transfers subproject resources to AUs for IDP/ CAAST


      (or Innovation Grant) implementation;

   AUs  contract  goods,  works,  consultant  services  and  non-consultant  services,  in


      accordance with the approved IDP/ CAAST (or Innovation Grant) the norms established


      in the Project Implementation Plan, and prepare reports (e.g., Financial Utilization


      Certificates) which they submit to the Education Division/ ICAR to document the use of subproject resources.

  1. Component 2   -  Investments  in  ICAR  Leadership  in  Agriculture  Higher Education (USD 10.4 million, of which IDA USD 5.2 million) - would finance ICAR’s internal reforms to enhance its effectiveness in: (a) coordinating, guiding and managing agricultural higher education across the ICAR-AU System; and (b) its interactions with AUs and key stakeholders nationwide through interventions that increase the quality and relevance of agricultural higher education.
  2. As the Education Division/ ICAR is responsible for national coordination and quality
    assurance of agricultural higher education in the ICAR-AU System, the component would
    leverage ICAR’s comparative advantage in assessing systemic challenges across the ICAR-
    AU system and incubating solutions. The component would finance goods, training,
    consultant services and non-consultant services such as: (a) change management services to
    aid the Education Division/ ICAR in its reform agenda; (b) digital information systems for
    AU data collection and analysis to improve quality metrics in agricultural higher education;

(c) an improved curricula review process to tighten its relevance in today’s dynamic job


market through IDPs and CAASTs; (d) enhanced methods to consolidate and disseminate


global   best-practices   in   agricultural   higher   education (e.g.,   benchmarking); (e)


institutionalization of stakeholder and advisory inputs to better inform research, education


and extension across the ICAR-AU system; and (f) an External Advisory Panel, drawing on


both national and international experience relevant to agricultural higher education, to


provide a vehicle for best-practice dissemination and adoption by participating AUs.

Component 3 - Project Management and Learning (USD 8.2 million, of which IDA USD 4.1 million)

- would support NAHEP project management, primarily through the Education Division/ ICAR, to

administer, supervise, monitor and evaluate overall project implementation.  The component would support: (a) an NAHEP Steering Committee that would provide strategic guidance to the Education Division/ ICAR throughout project implementation; 

  1. (b) a Technical Committee, to evaluate IDP and Innovation Grant proposals; (c) a communication strategy to build awareness among AUs and other stakeholders regarding the objectives and activities of the proposed NAHEP; and (d) training and capacity-building for both ICAR and the AUs to achieve and sustain increased quality, relevance and effectiveness of agricultural higher education across the ICAR-AU system.

 

1.2.   Types   of   Interventions   and   the   need   of   Environment  Management The project is categorised as ‘Category B’ as the interventions like ‘updating infrastructure

for  research  and  teaching’    (under  component   1a)  may  have  negative  impact  on  the

surrounding  environment.  The  interventions  proposed  under  components         1b  and    1c

‘CAASTs’ and ‘innovation grants’ offers scope for enhancing the positive impacts on environment through integration of pro environmental measures.

 

Given below is the snapshot of applicability of environment management to the project components, sub components:

 

Table 1: Scope of environment Management in the Project

 

Component

Sub component and

Interventions

Impact on

environment /scope

for enhancement

EMF procedures to be put

in place

Support to

Agricultural

Universities

Support to Institutional

Development Plans which

may propose for

 

   Updating

infrastructure for

research and teaching

 

 

 

 

   Faculty development

(training and

consultant services)

 

 

 

   Infrastructure

related activities are

likely to have

negative impact on

the environment

 

 

   Scope for due

allocation of

trainings on

sustainable

agriculture, climate

resilience etc.

   Environment Criteria for

Screening and

evaluation of IDPs

 

   Environmental

guidelines for

infrastructure

development

   Checklist of mandatory

requirements in research

facilities

   Suggestive list of

trainings and capacity

building programmes

Centers for Advanced

Agriculture Science and

Technology (CAAST)

   Research and

teaching equipment

   Faculty and scientist

development

fellowships

   Weightage for

pro

environmental

themes and

locating

CAASTs in

sensitive agro

ecological

   Suggestive list of

pro environmental

themes and regions

of ecological

importance.

   

regions

 

Innovation grants

   Integrating

parameters for

environmental

sustainability.

   Environment criteria for

screening and evaluation

of proposals for

innovation grants to

ensure sustainability

Investment in

ICAR

Leadership in

Agricultural

Higher

Education

   Improved curricula

review process as test

cases under IDPs and

CAASTs contemplated

courses

   Balanced

integration of

environmental

sustainability

concerns

   Suggestive list of

themes for integration

into curricula - through

seminars, workshops

Project

Management

and Learning

   

   EMF implementation

plans and monitoring

mechanisms.

 1.3.   Environment Management Framework for the project:

The purpose of Environment Management is to ‘ensure the environmental sustainability of the project interventions and to integrate the key environmental concerns in agriculture into education and research’.

The approach involves:

   Integration of Environmental Sustainability Plans (ESPs) (Annexure 2) into the IDPs and


      innovation grants proposals - which will cover the safeguard requirements, key risks and


      mitigations.

   Integrating environmental sustainability concerns into CAASTs

   Suggestions for greening the agricultural curricula and associated research and extension.

 

This volume (Volume I) of the EMF report focuses on safeguard compliance of the NAHEP interventions which will be ensured through ESPs. This EMF is a dynamic document which will be updated followed by the project launch to guide the environment management needs of IDPs and Innovations grants in a more focused manner.

1.4.   Process of Developing EMF

The process of developing the EMF includes:

Desk review

: Desk review of applicable acts, rules, regulations and laws of Government of India, EMFs developed for earlier projects like NAIP, guidelines and Codes of Practices (CoPs) pertaining to research laboratories, key environmental concerns in Indian agriculture, sustainable agriculture etc.

Stakeholder survey

: An online survey was conducted covering faculty, scientists and students to understand the need and capacity for implementation of environment safeguards.

 

Consultations

: The project was discussed during the annual VCs conferences during 2013 and 2015, institution-industry interface meeting held in June 2015, intensive interaction with the Agricultural Education Division, etc.

Disclosure

: The report is being disclosed by hosting in the ICAR/project website for sufficient time to invite suggestions from stakeholders. 

1.5   Structure of EMF Report:

Section 1, (this section) gives the background of the NAHEP, applicability of environment management, objectives of EMF and approach.

Section 2 discusses the capacity of agricultural universities (AUs) on safeguards compliance and needed measures.

Section 3 provides the requirement of safeguard compliance and lists out the legal and regulatory requirements as per the Government of India.

Section 4 discusses the potential adverse impacts of NAHEP interventions and proposes measures to mitigate such impact.

Section 5 describes the processes that should be in place for effective implementation of EMF. 

Section      2:      Baseline    Survey    of Agricultural Universities - Constraints Faced by State Agricultural Universities in   Delivering   Quality   Agricultural Higher Education ICAR with the support of World Bank conducted a baseline survey to assess the capacity of the State-level Agricultural Universities and Research Institutions within the ICAR-AU system for understanding their ability to comply with the World Bank safeguard policies. Both Environment and Social questions are combined into one survey (20 questions in total) and there are 2 sets (links) - one for faculty and one for students. The survey link was provided   for   the   participant   in   a   communication   addressed   to   all   the   Vice-chancellors/Directors with a request to identify on coordinator who will facilitate online responses  from  a  minimum  of 50  faculty  and 100  students  from  the  participatinguniversity/institution.The survey covered environmental (relevance of the curricula to local agro ecological problems, student learning and field experience on climate change resilient agriculture,  focus on sustainable agricultural production systems, constraints  in delivering quality education,and  in meeting the prescribed laboratory standards, emergency plan for safety,  disposal of hazardous chemical and biological wastes,  support required for quality education) and Social (quality of curriculum taught in relation to labor market demand, institutional capacity for globally competitive education, constraints in attracting high-quality students and female students, ability in complying with the laboratory standards, ability in complying with the employment demand by the industry,  university’s systems for mainstreaming students from vulnerable groups, issues faced by female faculty, support required for upgrading the facilities and conducting quality research) and social aspects posed in 20 questions with graded/multiple responses.The survey response rate was fairly high:  54% for students and 47% for Faculty.  The response ranged from 1115 to 4225 across the questions, may be because of the differences in the perception or relevance of the individual questions to the respondent.Eighty per cent of faculty respondents belong to state or central agricultural universities.Four percent were holding managerial positions in education.  Lack of human resources (35.82%), lack of expertise (29.65%), and shortage of fund (25.85%) were cited as the major


constraints towards delivery of quality education by the faculty. While 40 % of the faculty


felt the current curriculum relevant for local agricultural agro ecological problems, 51 %


found the focus on student learning and associated field experience on climate change resilient  agriculture  as  moderate.  The  faculty  response  on  the  requirement  regarding upgradation of facilities was almost equal among training, equipment, manpower and finance as in the order.  One third of the female faculty expressed lack of human resource development policy and opportunity for career enhancement as a major impediment for their progress.  The existing opportunities for social

inclusion  and  educational  attainment  were  rated  high.             Training    (33%),  twinning

arrangements   (32%)  and  reforming  curriculum      (30%)  were  cited  as  major  ways  of

overcoming human resources shortage. Twenty one percent of the faculty found the current


curriculum as highly relevant to meet the labour market demand while sixty four percent


found it moderately relevant.  Lack of training, funds and facilities were cited as the major


reasons for not meeting the laboratory standards by 26.78%, 22.97 % and 22.89 % faculty


respectively.

Of those participated in the students’ survey, 52.15 % were bachelors, followed by Masters


(32.05%) and Ph.D scholars (15.80%).  The response of the students on the relevance (26%)


of the current curriculum for local agricultural agro ecological problems, and the focus on


student learning and associated field experience on climate change resilient agriculture (51%)


were similar to that of the faculty in kind though differed in magnitude.  The students


reported  training  opportunities (30.81%),  modern  equipment (28.04%)  and  additional


manpower (23.24%) as the major requirements for quality educational experience.  While

4.44 % of the students rated the existing agricultural higher education as excellent, 28.63%


rated as very good and 39.82% as good. Only 5.78% rated as poor and the rest as moderate.


Scope for jobs and assured employment was the reason attributed by twenty five per cent of


the students for their choice of agricultural education as a pursuit. While 13.96% of the


students found the relevance of the teaching quality to meet the labour market demand as


high, 61.54% considered the same as moderate. Nearly 70 per cent of the students reported


their job or employment prospects as more than good.  The major constraint faced by students


in accessing quality higher agricultural education was the lack of specialized knowledge


intensity (23%) followed by lack of education, extension and training facilities, lack of


credit/scholarships and poor infrastructure (18% each) and disconnect between curriculum


and employment (16.75%).   While 20.29% of female students reported no obstacles for


participation in extension and training, 29.96% felt the attitudes and assumptions as male


biased and 28.10% opined agricultural research priorities as male dominated.  The major


accessibility issues for rural students were lack information about courses (32.93%) and lack


of scholarships/funding (24.58%).  Collaboration with foreign universities and knowledge


and skill intensive job driven courses can enhance enrolment in agricultural courses as


reported by 21.88% and 22.46% students respectively.

The summary highlights of the survey results highlighted that the faculty emphasis were - a.


human resource development - more manpower (recruitment) and better training;   b. access


to technology in the classroom; c. linkage with industry; and d. alignment of curricula with


skills demanded in the marketplace and that of the students’ were - a. experiential and


practical learning opportunities; b. updated teaching techniques and c. learning relevant for future employment. 

Section 3: Safeguard Compliance Requirements

3.2. Legal and Regulatory Framework:

3.2.1. Research and Education:

Table 2: Compliance Requirements Applicable to the Project Activities

S.

No

Act, Policy or

Government

Order

Brief Overview

Applicability to

NAHEP

National Legislations

1.

Environment

Protection      Act

(1986).

 

“Rules   for   the

manufacture, use/

import/export

and   storage   of

hazardous

microorganisms/

genetically

engineered

organisms         or

cells, 1989”

   Certain   experiments   for   the

purpose of education within the

field   of   gene   technology   or

microorganism  may  be  carried

out outside the laboratories and

laboratory   areas   mentioned   in

sub-rule (2) and will be looked

after by the Institutional Biosafety

Committee.

   No person shall import, export,

transport,  manufacture,  process,

use   or   sell   any   hazardous

microorganisms   of   genetically

engineered  organisms/substances

or cells except with the approval

of   the   Genetic   Engineering

Approval Committee.

   Use             of              pathogenic

microorganisms           or          any

genetically engineered organisms

or   cells   for   the   purpose   of

research shall only be allowed in

laboratories or inside laboratory

area notified by the Ministry of

Environment and Forests.

   Any  person  operating  or  using

genetically                    engineered

organisms/microorganisms

mentioned  in  the  schedule  for

scale up or pilot operations shall

Applicable, as the P.G,

Ph.D. research project

may involve use of

genetically engineered

organisms.

   

have to obtain license issued by

the         Genetic         Engineering

Approval Committee for any such

activity

   Deliberate      or       unintentional

release of genetically engineered

organisms/hazardous

microorganisms          or         cells,

including  deliberate  release  for

the purpose of experiment shall

not be allowed without the special

approval of GEAC

 

2

Insecticides Act

1968

 

An     Act     to

regulate           the

import,

manufacture,

sale,      transport,

distribution   and

use                    of

insecticides  with

a view to prevent

risk   to   human

beings               or

animals, and for

matters

connected

therewith.

   Any person desiring to stock or

exhibit or distribute any

insecticide or to undertake

commercial pest control

operations with the use of any

insecticide may make an

application to the licensing officer

for the grant of a license.

Not applicable if the

universities, research

institutes stock the

insecticides for

experimental purposes

only.

3

Hazardous

Wastes

(Management

and    Handling)

Rules, 1989 and

Amendment

Rules, 2000   &

2003.

   Every        occupier         handling

hazardous wastes shall make an

application   to   the   Member-

Secretary, State Pollution Control

Board or Committee, as the case

may be or any officer designated

by  the  State  Pollution  Control

Board or Committee for the grant

of authorization

   Occupier not having a hazardous

wastes   treatment   and   disposal

facility of his own as the case

may be, for a common Treatment,

Storage   and   Disposal   Facility

(TSDF) shall become a member

of this facility and send his waste

to this facility to ensure proper

treatment    and    disposal    of

hazardous wastes generated

Partners to verify the

applicability of the

acts and ensure

compliance.

4

The   Seed   Act,

   Selling,  bartering  or  otherwise

Applicable   as   some

 

1966

supplying   any   seed   of   any

notified kind or variety, requires

that -

a) Such seed is identifiable as

to its kind or variety

b) Such seed conforms to the

minimum           limits           of

germination        and       purity

specified

c) The container of such seed

bears    in    the    prescribed

manner,  the  mark  or  Label

containing        the        correct

particulars.

To provide for regulating the quality

of  certain  seeds  for  sale,  and  for

related matter

State-level AUs supply

seed       material       to

farmers.

5

National

Biodiversity Act,

2002

   Any person who intends to obtain

any biological resource occurring

in India or knowledge associated

thereto   for   research   or   for

commercial utilization or for bio-

survey   and   bio-utilization   or

transfer   the   results   of   any

research   relating   to   biological

resources    occurring    in,    or

obtained from, India, shall make

application   in   such   form   and

payment of such fees as may be

prescribed,   to   the   National

Biodiversity Authority.

   Any   person   who   intends   to

transfer any biological resource or

knowledge   associated   thereto

referred  to  in  sub-section  shall

make an application in such form

and in such manner as may be

prescribed    to    the    National

Biodiversity Authority.

   The       National        Biodiversity

Authority  shall,  subject  to  any

regulations made in this behalf,

determine   the   benefit   sharing

which shall be given effect in all

or any of the following manner,

namely: transfer of technology, or

association  of  Indian  scientists,

benefit  claimers  and  the  local

people    with    research    and

development        in        biological

Applicable    as    the

students’ research may

involve           obtaining

biological resources or

associated knowledge.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Applicable                 as

partnerships           with

foreign        universities

may involve sharing of

knowledge  related  to

biological resources of

the country.

   

resources and bio-survey and bio-

utilization;

 

Guidelines and Codes of Practices

6

Recombinant

DNA guidelines,

1990

   The  guidelines  cover  areas  of

research   involving   genetically

engineered organism. It also deals

with  genetic  transformation  of

green plants, rDNA technology in

vaccine development and on large

scale production and deliberate/

accidental release of organisms,

plants,   animals   and   products

derived by rDNA technology into

the environment.

The levels of risk and classification

of   the   organisms   within   these

categories have been defined in these

guidelines.   Appropriate   practices,

equipment and facilities necessary for

safeguards  in  handling  organisms,

plants  and animals in  various  risk

groups have been recommended. The

guidelines  employ  the  concept  of

physical and biological containment

and the principle of good laboratory

practices.

Applicable.            Any

proposals   by   SAUs

that      may    involve

research       concerning

genetically engineered

organisms   should   be

informed by the rDNA

guidelines       and    a

compliance   statement

should be given as part

of  ESP (detailed  on

section 4).

7

Guidelines       for

research             in

transgenic crops,

1998

In 1998, DBT brought out separate

guidelines for carrying out research

in   transgenic   plants   called   the

Revised Guidelines for Research in

Transgenic Plants. These also include

the   guidelines   for   toxicity   and

allergenicity   of   transgenic   seeds,

plants and plant parts.

These   guidelines   cover   areas   of

recombinant DNA research on plants

including    the    development    of

transgenic plants and their growth in

soil      for    molecular    and    field

evaluation. The guidelines also deal

with   import   and   shipment   of

genetically    modified    plants    of

research purposes.

do

8

WHO  laboratory

safety  manual -

incorporated into

R                 DNA

guidelines

The 3

rd

edition of the manual focuses

on risk assessment, safe use of

recombinant DNA technology and

transport of infectious materials. It

also introduces bio security concepts

- the protection of microbiological

assets from theft, loss or diversion,

do

 

16

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

which could lead to the inappropriate

use of these agents to cause public

health harm.

 

9

NABL guidelines

for            residue

analysis labs

It supplements ISO/ IEC 17025: 2005

standard and provides specific

guidance on the accreditation of

chemical laboratories for both

assessors and laboratories preparing

for accreditation. It gives detailed

guidance for those undertaking

quantitative and qualitative

examination of the composition,

nature and properties of materials,

products and substances. The

requirements for accreditation are

laid down in the International

Standard ISO/IEC 17025: 2005

(General requirements for the

competence of calibration and testing

laboratories).

Applicable to up

gradation of

laboratories concerned

with food testing,

pesticide residue

analysis etc.

3.2.1. Civil Works:

Table 3: Compliance Requirements Applicable to the Civil Works

S.

No

Act, Policy or

Government

Order

Brief Overview

Applicability to

NAHEP

National Legislations

1

Preservation of

Trees Acts

   Permissions are required to clear

trees.  State  specific  acts  with

regard  to  this  speak  about  the

provisions.

Applicable as site

clearance for

construction may

involve cutting of trees

2

Ground water

Acts

   Permission required to drill bore

wells,      water    quality    tests,

recharge, rainwater harvest etc.

 

4

National

Building Code of

India 2005

   The code provides regulations for

building         construction         by

departments,                  municipal

administrations and public bodies.

It lays down a set of minimum

provisions to protect the safety of

the   public   with   regard   to

structural sufficiency, fire hazards

and health aspects.

Applicable.

5

Energy

Conservation

   ECBC   sets   minimum   energy

standards        for        commercial

Applicable       to      air

conditioned

 

Building Code

(Energy

Conservation Act

2001)

buildings having a connected load

of 100kW or contract demand of

120 KVA and above. While the

Central Government has powers

under the EC Act 2001, the state

governments have the flexibility

to modify the code to suit local or

regional needs and notify them.

commercial   buildings

with   connected   load

more than 100 kW.

6

The Noise

Pollution

(Regulation And

Control) Rules

2000).

To regulate and

control noise

producing and

generating

sources with the

objective of

maintaining the

ambient air

quality standards

in respect of

noise.

   Sound emitting construction

equipment shall not be used or

operated during night times in

residential areas and silence zones

(hospitals and educational

institutions).

Applicable

7

e-waste

(management

and    Handling)

Rules, 2011

Consumers  or  Bulk  consumers  of

electrical and electronic Schedule I

shall ensure that e-waste generated by

them is channelized to the authorised

collection   centre(s),   or   registered

dismantler(s)   or   recycler(s)   or   is

returned to the pick up or take back

service provided by the producers;

and Bulk consumers shall maintain

record of e-waste generated by them

in the Form 2 and make such record

available for scrutiny by the State

Pollution   Control   Board   or   the

Pollution        Control        Committee

concerned.

Applicable                 as

electronic   equipment

will be purchased.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

18

 

 

Section 4: Environmental Impacts of


Project Interventions and Mitigation


Measures

 

This section discusses the environmental impacts of the project interventions and suggests mitigation measures.

 

4.1. Component 1: Support to Agricultural Universities

4.1.1. Component 1a: Support to Agricultural Universities:

The AUs receive financial support for their Institutional Development Plans (IDPs) which may involve the following activities.

4.1.1.1. Updating Infrastructure for Research and Teaching

This will involve minor civil works; laboratory equipment etc. Up to 60% of the IDP fund is likely to be used for updating infrastructure and equipment. The type of infrastructure created/upgraded will include laboratories. Building construction will have direct and indirect impacts on environment during construction, maintenance etc. It is important to ensure that the surrounding environment is not compromised during the process.

The table below presents the possible impacts on environment and mitigation measures.

 

Table 4: Environmental Impacts and Measures for Civil works:

 

Activity

Environmental Impacts

Mitigation Measures

Site clearing

   Site clearing sometimes

leads to loss of greenery

by felling trees, clearing

vegetation etc.

   In  cases  where  cutting of trees  is

required, permission should be taken

from officers concerned.

   Compensatory plantation of trees of

local species should be done in equal

or more number near the same site or

suitable alternate site

   In case of tree felling in forest or

tribal areas, permission from Forest

Department  should be  obtained by

applying to Range Officer (in any

case  the  felling  must  not  involve

more   than 75   trees   per   ha -

proportionate to the area).

Raw materials for

construction

   Possibility   of   use   of

illegally  mined  or  low

quality              materials

affecting                     the

sustainability                of

environment   and   the

infrastructure.

   All raw materials should be sourced

from authentic and approved vendors,

possessing  valid  permits.  Relevant

supporting   documents   should   be

presented for scrutiny on request.

19

 

 

 

 

 

 

Building Design

(research facilities)

Ventilation, water

harvesting etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Safety measures

 

 

 

 

Disaster proof

construction

   Lack  of  solar  passive

features  demands  high

energy  requirement  for

artificial lighting and air

circulation.

   Use  of  non  renewable

energy   contributes   to

emissions

   Lack of water source in

the   premises   or   over

exploited   source   may

lead   to   pressure   on

water resources and may

involve    transportation

cost.

 

   Risk   due   to   lack   of

safety measures

 

 

 

   Absence    of    disaster

proofing    makes    the

buildings  vulnerable  to

disaster

   Building   design   should   be   solar

passive and should incorporate the

proper ventilation requirements like

sufficient   number   of   ventilators,

windows.

   Possibility of solar electrification (at

least partly) should be explored

 

   Every building should be equipped

with rain water harvesting structure

which    can    meet    the    water

requirement of the facility at least for

non-drinking purposes.

 

   All  buildings  should  be  equipped

with fire safety equipment

   Constructions in seismic zones, flood

prone areas should have integration

disaster proof features in consultation

with PWD/relevant authority.

Construction

operations

   The             construction

equipment        operation

may                        cause

inconvenience   to   the

workers and by passers

due to dust, noise etc.

 

 

   Inconvenience          and

health   issues   to   the

workers involved

 

   Possibility                   of

involvement   of   child

labour.

   Possibility   of   chance

finds   of   archeological

importance.

   Land acquisition

   Operations like mixing raw materials

should   be   done   in   areas   where

people’s   movement   is   less   and

workers should use masks.

   Construction  equipment  that  emits

noise   should   not   be   used   in

residential areas during night or near

schools and hospitals.

   The workers should be provided with

gloves, masks, helmets etc.

 

 

   Use   of   child   labour   should   be

avoided.

 

   Any chance finds should be deposited

with District Collector

 

 

   The project does not fund for any

land acquisition

(It is important to integrate relevant

clauses into the civil works contracts)

Disposal of debris

 

   Open       disposal        of

   Debris should be put to alternate use

 

20

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

construction  debris  near

the site

such as land filling in consultation

with municipal corporations.

 

Environment Friendly Designs and Green Building CertificationsEnvironment Friendly Designs:

Apart from following the legal and regulatory framework and mitigating any negative impacts, the scope of EMF can be extended to integration of environment friendly features into the building designs depending on the feasibility. Integrating the environment friendly features will provide aesthetic value and conducive environment to work besides reducing the use of energy.   Environment friendly parameters such as use of eco friendly construction materials (eg: mud bricks, bamboo, stone etc.) traditional architecture, roof top solar SPV, landscaping and improving greenery in the premises.

Green Building Certification:

Buildings have direct and indirect impacts on environment during construction and post


construction. During construction, renovation, demolition and occupancy, the buildings use


raw materials, energy, water and generates wastes and lead to harmful emissions.


As an effort towards sustainable design and maintenance ‘Green Building Rating System’ is


introduced which aims to

   reduce the environmental impact of construction of new buildings by promoting


      resource conservation

   reduce the use of resources during operation and maintenance.

The following are the criteria for rating a building as ‘Green Building

1

’:


         Proper site planning

   Building envelope design

   Building system design for Heating Ventilation and Air Condition (HVAC)

   Integration of renewable energy sources to generate energy onsite

   Selection of ecologically sustainable materials with low emission potential

   Indoor thermal and visual comfort and air quality leading to less energy consumption    Water harvesting and efficient water management

   Low operation and maintenance costs

   Proper access to community infrastructure systems

 

The following are the agencies that support for rating the ‘Green Buildings’:

   LEED India (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Rating System


      by Indian Green Building Council (IGBC): Indian Green Building Council (IGBC)


      is formed by the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII). IGBC facilitates green


      buildings in India through ‘IGBC Green New Buildings’ rating system. This rating


      tool enables the designer to apply green concepts and reduce environmental impacts


      which are measurable. The rating programme covers diverse climatic zones and


      changing lifestyles.

IGBC has licensed the LEED Green Building Standard from the US Green Building


Council (USGBC). LEED certification provides independent verification of a building

 

 

1

Green Buildings are Energy Efficient, Sourced at

http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/green%20building.pdf

accessed on 22

nd

February 2016.

21

 

 

 

 

 

or neighborhood’s green features, including the design, construction, operations and maintenance of resource-efficient, high-performing, healthy, cost-effective buildings.

Contact address:

CII - Sohrabji Godrej Green Business Centre Survey No 64, Kothaguda Post

Near Kothaguda Cross Roads Ranga Reddy Dist

Hyderabad - 500 084


Tel: 040 - 44185111


Fax: 040 - 44185189


Email

: igbc@cii.in

   Green Rating of Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA):

 

GRIHA is a rating tool that helps people assesses the performance of their building


against certain nationally acceptable benchmarks. It evaluates the environmental


performance of a building holistically over its entire life cycle, thereby providing a


definitive standard for what constitutes a ‘green building’. The rating system, based


on accepted energy and environmental principles, will seek to strike a balance


between  the  established  practices  and  emerging  concepts,  both  national  and


international. The system will help to ‘design and evaluate’ new buildings (buildings


that are still at the inception stages). A building is assessed based on its predicted


performance over its entire life cycle - inception through operation.

 

The stages of the life cycle that have been identified for evaluation are:

 

   Pre-construction stage: (intra- and inter-site issues like proximity to public


      transport, type of soil, kind of land, where the property is located, the flora and


      fauna on the land before construction activity starts, the natural landscape and land features).

   Building planning and construction stages: (issues of resource conservation and reduction in resource demand, resource utilization efficiency, resource recovery and reuse, and provisions for occupant health and well-being). The prime resources that are considered in this section are land, water, energy, air, and green cover.

   Building  operation  and  maintenance  stage:         (issues   of   operation   and maintenance of building systems and processes, monitoring and recording of energy consumption, and occupant health and well-being, and also issues that affect the global and local environment). 

   Small Versatile Affordable GRIHA (SVAGRIHA): SVAGRIHA is part of Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA Council). GRIHA is India’s own rating system jointly developed by The Energy Research Institute (TERI) and the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), Government of India. SVAGRIHA has been designed as an extension of GRIHA and has been specifically developed for projects with built-up area less than 2500 sq. mtr which could be followed for the project given the size of the treasury offices. In this system buildings are rated in a three-tier process. The process initiates with the online submission of documents as per the prescribed criteria followed by on site visit and evaluation of the building by a team of professionals and experts from GRIHA Secretariat.  GRIHA rating system consists of 34 criteria categorized in four different sections - Site selection and site planning, Conservation and efficient utilization of resources, Building operation and maintenance, and Innovation.

 

Contact address:

The Energy Resources Institute (TERI) GRIHA, SVAGRIHA

First floor, A 260,

Bhisham Pitamah Marg, Defence Colony,

New Delhi 110024

Tel. - (+91 11) 46444500/24339606-08


Helpline no. - (+91 11) - 40589139


Website:

http://www.grihaindia.org/

 

   Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE): BEE has developed a rating system for the  buildings based on a 1 to 5 star scale. More stars mean more energy efficiency.   BEE rating system considers the Energy Performance Index (EPI). The unit of Kilo watt      hours per square meter per year is considered for rating the building and especially targets  air  conditioned  and  non-air  conditioned  office  buildings.  The  Energy Conservation Building Code (ECBC) is taken into consideration under the rating      system.

Contact address:

Bureau of Energy Efficiency

Ministry of Power,

Govt. of India

4th Floor, Sewa Bhawan

  1. K. Puram, New Delhi - 110066 Fax: +91 11 26178352

Email:

admin@beenet.in

Website:

https://beeindia.gov.in

Eco-friendly designing does not necessarily require any extra costs but may rather reduce the cost of construction. However at times the   green building processes and certification may lead to an increase in the overall cost of construction, however, the operational costs are reduced in long run besides the environmental benefits and conducive work atmosphere.ICAR will aim to get all buildings certified as green buildings, including laboratories and will commission a report on green building s and laboratories. 

Table 5: Environmental Impacts and Measures for up gradation of Laboratories:

 

Activity

Environmental Impacts

Mitigation Measures

Building designs

and construction

   Dearth  of  space,  poor

ventilation                 and

illumination,   lack   of

basic facilities may  lead

to             uncomfortable

working conditions

   The    laboratories    should    have

sufficient        space,        ventilation,

lighting, regular supply of essentials

like  quality  water.  Stack  rooms,

store rooms etc. should be spacious

and well ventilated

Electricity supply

and safety.

   Irregular supply of  and

fluctuations                  in

electricity  may  hazard

   Regular and stabilized electricity

supply (220-230 volts) preferably

green and captive should be ensured.

 

 

quality and safety.

   Provision of standby source for

power supply to sensitive and costly

equipment.

   Ground all sources of power supply

for human and equipment safety.

Safeguards

   Lack    of    safeguards

poses risk of exposure to

harmful  chemicals  and

accidents

   An   efficient   hood   system   is

necessarily required at laboratories

in order to remove various toxic and

hazardous  fumes  from  the  work

place   generated   during   use   of

organic   solvent/or   during   acid

digestion

   The top surface of working bench

should be made of acid and alkali

resistant materials

   All   the   laboratories   should   be

equipped with fire fighting facilities,

first aid kit, look into the feasibility

for provision of eye wash fountains,

safety showers etc. There should be

adequate number of exit doors in

case of emergency.

   Fire  safety  instructions  should  be

displayed in the form of posters in

the   wall   and   all   the   students,

technicians,      housekeeping    staff

should  be  oriented  on  immediate

response to accidental burns, acid

spills, fire etc.

   All the hazardous substances should

be labeled with precautions for the

user.

Waste disposal

   Open                 disposal

hazardous of laboratory

wastes into gutters may

contaminate   the   soil,

groundwater etc.

   The labs should have provisions for

safe disposal of hazardous wastes

   There should be a plan for separate

collection of hazardous wastes

which should be properly treated or

disposed

4.1.1.2. Faculty Development (training, consultant services):

The faculty development programmes proposed should have balanced integration of environmental themes such as:

   Laboratory safety

   Biosafety

   Waste disposal

   Green energy and buildings for laboratories

    Biodiversity conservation    Food safety

This list is only an indicative and more areas shall be identified once the environmental consultancy under the project is in place.

4.1.1.3. Improved Practical Education through KVKs and Vocational Education through Certificate Programs:

Practical education programmes should have due integration of pro environmental themes, non-invasive techniques, sustainable options, green and efficient energy use, waste recycling, water harvesting, more crop per drop, promotion of soil health, integrated pest management, organic agriculture,  integrated farming system, etc. The programme will identify more such themes relevant to the local agro ecosystems and resource base.

4.1.2. Component 1b: Centers for Advanced Agriculture Science and Technology:

The component would support establishing multi disciplinary centers for teaching, research and extension on critical and emerging themes in agriculture. The themes and geographical locations would be identified through multi stakeholder consultations.  EMF suggests a list of themes and locations which will become a part of base document for consultations.

The themes would focus on - bringing in water efficiency measures, sustainable land use and land management practices; a special focus on land based and environment/biodiversity friendly measures for productivity enhancement in forestlands where titles have been transferred to communities/individuals through the FRA etc.

4.1.3. Component 1c: ICAR Innovation grants to AUs: Innovation grants are theme based competitive grants to AUs, Colleges and Departments,faculty and students to promote inter-state, international, inter-institutional and public-private collaboration. , including matching funds from the private sector; and needs-based equipment, training and technical assistance.

EMF suggests evaluation criteria for innovation grants: 

   No activities in the exclusion list are part of innovation grants. Exclusion list attached

      Annexure 1.

   Activity should not have any negative impact on surrounding environment - land, water, biodiversity, etc.

   Sustainability concerns integrated into the education, research activity proposed

   Ability of the project to deliver some knowledge on environmental sustainability-limited, medium, high

   Stimulates the scientific creativity, research capacity on issues of environmental importance

   Agreements in place on safeguards measures with private partners who join the

project and beyond either through PPP or as bilateral partners in research, teaching, marketing and/or construction etc. 

 4.2. Component 2: Investments in ICAR Leadership in Agricultural Higher Education This component would finance improved curricula review process.The curriculum review process should consider the requisite knowledge and skills for facing the challenges of food security, degrading environment, climate change etc. In addition to the curricula review theme based modular workshops could be conducted for PG and PhD students. 

Research should be encouraged on these specific themes. 

   Low green house gas agriculture

   Carbon credits for sustainable farming systems

Section 5: EMF Implementation Plan This  section  presents  the  EMF  implementation  plan      -  which  includes  Environmental Evaluation  of  subproject  proposals (IDPs,  CAASTs  and  Innovation  grants),  Capacity Building and Monitoring requirements. A tentative budget and time plan is also included.

5.1. Integrating Environmental Sustainability Plans (ESPs) into the IDPs and Innovation Grants Proposals:The sub project proposals (IDPs, CAASTs and Innovation Grants Proposals) will include an ESP which will identify the mandatory requirements, risks and mitigation measures. This will be prepared by the Environment Specialist at the participating AU and annexed to the proposal.

5.2. Environmental Evaluation IDPS and Innovation Grants:

In order to ensure the environmental sustainability of the ‘Institution Development Plans (IDPs)’ , CAASTs and ‘innovation grants’ the proposals will be evaluated. This process will be termed as “Environmental Evaluation (EE)” of the plans/proposals. The process of environmental appraisal is done in 2 steps:

Step 1:

screening the proposals for inclusion of any activities that are in the exclusion list.

Step 2:

evaluation of the proposals (specifically Environmental Sustainability Plan) for due integration of mitigation measures for identified risks.

The process of environmental evaluation is detailed below: 

Submission of IDPs, CAASTs and Innovation Grant

Proposals to ICAR by AUs which includes  Environmental Susutainability Plan (ESP) 

Environment Evaluation of ESPs by Environment Specialist and clearence Approval by Techncial Committee Implementation of ESPs by the AUs Monitoring by ICAR External Monitoring

5.2. Institutional Arrangements for EMF Implementation:For successful implementation of EMF institutional arrangements are the key. The following are the proposed institutional arrangements Environment Specialist at AU (professor of Envt. Science Dept can be given this charge Environment Specilsit at PMU (ICAR) Evlauation by Technical committee

  • Reviews subproject proposal, preapre
    an ESP which is annexed to proposals
  • Coordinates the implemnetation of ESPs 
  • Conducts EE to IDPs, CAASTs and Innovation
    grants, clears ESPs.
  • Conducts capacity Building Programmes to
    AUs and Monitors the implementation of ESPs
  • Approves the proposals after environmental
    evaluation - i.e. verification of ESPs 

5.3. Capacity Building Arrangements:

EMF orientation to Environment Specialists at AUs:

A main orientation programme will be conducted for the Environment Specialists at AUs to orient them on the context and importance of EMF, preparation of ESPs, implementation, monitoring, documentation etc. This will be coordinated by an Environment Specialist at the Education Division/ ICAR.

Refresher trainings:

As part of review meetings or as spate sessions refresher training will be conducted once in 6 months or at stipulated intervals to keep them abreast with the key issues, best practices etc. 

5.4. Monitoring:

Internal Monitoring:

As part of regular monitoring visits the Education Division/ ICAR    - Environment Specialist will review the ESP implementation and prepares implementation status reports. Any key identified constraints will be resolved by providing required hand holding support.


External Monitoring:

An external agency will be hired to conduct an evaluation during  2

nd

  - 3

rd 

year of implementation with a purpose to understand the effectiveness of EMF, constraints etc, and to offer recommendations.

 5.5. Budget:

The tentative budget for the EMF implementation is as follows: 

Table 6: Budget estimate for implementation of EMF

Item

Unit cost (INR)

Total cost (INR)

Timeline

Hiring       environment

specialist        at        the

Education      Division/

ICAR

Rs. 75000/- per month

for 60 months

Rs.        52        lakhs

(reckoning          10%

increase every year )

Within 2  months

after   the   project

launch

Capacity         Building

Programmes               to

Environment

Specialist                    at

participating AUs.

Orientation and

Refresher trainings

 

 

 

Rs.      5      lakh      per

programme

 

 

 

Rs.50,00,000/-    for

10 programmes

6

th

   month   after

project        launch;

Subsequently

twice / year

Monitoring   visits   to

participating AUs

Rs. 20000/- per visit

Rs.40,00,000/-    for

20 visits

Once    every        6

months

External evaluation

Rs.10,00,000/-         per

evaluation

Rs.20,00,000/-    for

two evaluations

During 2

nd

or 3 rd

year of the project.

      

Annexure 1: Exclusion list

   Pesticides  classified  as  class    1a,   1b  and  II  are  not  permitted  under  any  project interventions

   Partnership with foreign universities/private firms will not involve exchange of any bio resources (genetic  material)  without  due  notice  to  and  permissions  from  National Biodiversity Authority

   Research with genetically engineered organisms is not permitted without approval of GEAC

   For  construction  works,  no  trees  should  be  cut  without  permission  from  relevant departments

    No bore wells should be drilled without permissions

   No child labour should be hired for any construction activities

Annexure 2: Template for preparation of Environmental Sustainability Plans (ESPs).

Proposed

intervention

/activity

Possible

Environmental

Impacts

Mitigation

Measures

Scope for

integration of

environmental

sustainability

concerns

Resource

required

(budget,

technical

support etc.)