At the time of writing, December 19, 2020, we hear a lot of people joining the bandwagon celebrating the liberation of Goa from ‘colonial powers’. We hear endless talk as to how a foreign regime suppressed the welfare of local population. But we hear very little about what has been accomplished over the last 59 years, post liberation. Importantly, very little is said about what is achieved in terms of conservation of the environment in general and the coastal ecosystems in particular. The impact on the natural systems by the relentless assault of tourism-related human actions is simply ignored.
Coastal laws are disobeyed. Sorrowfully, the tourism plan 2020 has failed to address these crucial concerns. The upmarket tourism and related activities which are mostly concentrated along the sea coast have brought in a number of positive benefits in the form of revenue through employment related opportunities. However, due to a rapid rate of growth of coastal tourism, there are several environmental impacts, particularly on coastal ecosystems that are being felt but are not being addressed.
During the erstwhile ‘colonial regime’, development along the Goan coastline took place 90 m away from the shoreline, based on laws imposed by the Portuguese in the 1930s. Although the trend of global population migration has been towards the coast, most of Goa’s coastline was developed only beyond 90 m from the beach, and away from frontal pioneer sand dune fields. The Calangute-Candolim belt in the north and the Velsao–Benaulim coastal stretch in the south are classic examples where there were rows of small and big palatial houses of typically Goan (Portuguese) style, all located away from the sea shore. Large open spaces existed between the dunes and hinterland habitations.
It is well established that the rapid expansion of sea front structures in many coasts of India compelled the government to formulate specific laws to administer and restrain haphazard growth and to promote sensible coastal development in tune with the natural aesthetics. The CRZ 1991 was thus promulgated. With such an instrument, India ranks among the select countries of the world to have a legal frame work meant to control construction activity and human actions along the sea front.
It is routinely argued that CRZ is a hindrance for tourism. Coastal tourism activities are generally located around areas with rich biodiversity and aesthetically pleasing environments. In comparison, the idea of CRZ revolves around protection of environmentally sensitive and ecologically endangered areas. Degradation of seashores and rivers elsewhere has led to the concept of protection of vulnerable marine areas in those parts. It later developed into integrated management of coastal areas, a process in initial stages of evolution in most maritime nations, but the central theme of environmental and ecological protection has remained focused throughout. Applied to the Goan scenario, once known for its clean, tranquil and bountiful nature, the local inhabitants traditionally kept off the sea coast, to a safe distance behind wooded sand dunes. However, CRZ regulations demand setbacks of 500m, 200m or 100m depending upon the CRZ category with respect to ecosystems present, as elaborated in the prevailing strategies. Such guidelines adequately take care of the aesthetics and the practical value of coastal biodiversity.
In Goa, most hotels or resorts have copied facilities from across the globe. Therefore, the concept of sun-sea-sand in respect to a resort with facilities and decor emulated from elsewhere, displays a monotonous sameness for all of them. The thick spread of resorts as in north Goa cannot be appealing even to a local tourist, much less to a Westerner who has come to Goa to get away from the hustle and bustle. Thus, properly implemented, CRZ regulations encourage tourism in a very environment friendly way. A coast with its natural environment and ecology has its own aesthetic value. Therefore, tourism needs to go along with and according to the laws of Nature. CRZ regulations therefore discourage haphazardly planned activities which do not take cognizance of natural ambience and its inherited identity and also those which have not accounted for the uplift of the coastal inhabitants.
The longstanding tirade against CRZ by vested interests is a cause for concern. This is apparently because CRZ is coming in the way of various powerful corporate lobbies. Violations of coastal protocols have been castigated by the courts of law. In Goa, officials want to control coastal problems at the State level, not realising that for a diverse country like India where coastal ecosystems are distributed across the borders, coastal problems do not obey State boundaries as environmental impacts are trans-boundary in nature.
The destructive signs discussed above make it clear that if the situation is not tackled judiciously, the environment would be damaged beyond repair.
Therefore, it is obvious that CRZ laws do not hamper the development of coastal tourism but, on the contrary, encourage it only in tune with the protection of coastal ecosystems.
Although those ‘colonial powers’ might have inflicted more harm than good, we do not find tangible post-liberation efforts in enriching the natural heritage that Goa is famous for. The glaring absence of the concept of conservation of nature in the Goa tourism policy 2020 says it all.
(Dr Antonio Mascarenhas is a former Scientist, NIO, Goa)
