The Great Nicobar Island Project has once again sparked the long-standing debate between environmental conservation and developmental priorities. Launched under the “Holistic Development of Islands” programme, this mega project promises economic and strategic gains for India but has also raised serious ecological and social concerns due to its potential impact on the island’s fragile ecosystem.

Economic and Strategic Importance

The Great Nicobar Island holds immense strategic significance as it lies close to the Malacca Strait—one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world connecting the Indian and Pacific Oceans. The project, estimated at over ₹92,000 crore, includes the construction of an International Container Transshipment Terminal (ICTT), a greenfield international airport, a greenfield city, and a gas-solar power plant. These initiatives aim to transform Great Nicobar into a regional maritime and logistics hub, aligning with the Maritime India Vision 2030. It is expected to reduce India’s dependency on foreign ports like Singapore and Colombo for cargo transshipment and strengthen the country’s maritime and defense presence in the Indo-Pacific, especially amid China’s growing influence.

Environmental Concerns and Ecological Threats

Despite its promises, the project has been criticized for its high environmental cost. One of the major concerns is the large-scale deforestation involving the felling of around 18 million trees, which could permanently disturb the island’s delicate ecological balance. The compensatory afforestation plan—declaring degraded land in Haryana and Madhya Pradesh as forest land—has also been questioned for being ecologically unsuitable. Great Nicobar is home to rich biodiversity, including several endangered species like the leatherback sea turtle, Nicobar megapode, and coral reefs, all of which are at risk due to massive land clearance and habitat destruction.

Impact on Indigenous Tribes

The project’s social implications are equally serious. The island is home to the Shompen and Nicobarese tribes, both classified as Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs). These communities depend heavily on the forests for their sustenance, cultural identity, and way of life. Displacement caused by the project could severely disrupt their social fabric and destroy their traditional livelihoods. Critics argue that this development represents not only environmental degradation but also cultural and social marginalization of indigenous people.

Geological and Climatic Vulnerabilities

Great Nicobar lies in a highly sensitive seismic zone prone to earthquakes and tsunamis, as witnessed during the 2004 disaster. The island also faces challenges like heavy rainfall, soil erosion, and rising sea levels due to climate change. These geographical vulnerabilities make large-scale construction projects risky, as they may intensify environmental hazards and endanger lives in the long term.

Government Efforts to Balance Development and Ecology

The government has emphasized that the project is being implemented with environmental safeguards. An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been conducted, and reputed institutions like the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) and the National Institute of Ocean Technology (NIOT) have been involved in planning. Only 166 square kilometers of land have been earmarked for development, and some villages will be relocated. The compensatory afforestation plan aims to restore ecological balance by planting trees in the Aravalli range. Conservation measures have also been proposed for species such as the Nicobar megapode and saltwater crocodiles. However, environmentalists argue that these measures are inadequate and lack a strong scientific foundation.

Way Forward for Sustainable Development

A balanced approach is essential to ensure both ecological preservation and strategic growth. The project must involve local tribal participation, respect their ecological knowledge, and prioritize community-led decision-making. Continuous scientific monitoring of project impacts on forests, wildlife, and tribal welfare should be mandatory. The compensatory afforestation strategy should focus on restoring native ecosystems rather than monoculture planting. Additionally, infrastructure planning must consider climate vulnerability assessments to ensure resilience against future environmental threats.

Conclusion

The Great Nicobar Project represents the larger dilemma of reconciling environmental protection with developmental aspirations. While it holds great promise for India’s strategic and economic future, sustainable and participatory planning is essential to preserve the ecological richness and cultural heritage of the island. Only through a balanced, science-driven approach can India achieve true harmony between growth and environmental stewardship.