AEREN FOUNDATIONS

Maharashtra Govt. Reg. No.: F-11724

AN I SO 9 0 0 1 : 2 0 0 8 CERT I FI ED I N T ERN ATI ON AL B-SCH OOL

Name: Gopalan Uppiliappan

Programme: Doctoral Programme in Management
SUBJECT: BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT
(MARKS : 80)
GROUP A:

CASE 1

i)

What are the activities that are critical to the companys environmental management

certification?

Ans:
Companies must adopt various kinds of strategies to meet their goals. The Goals
primarily concern profitability and the interest of shareholders.

Increase in business

growth increases the burden on environment and natural resources. Hence ecological
considerations that support the business ought to be integrated into business strategy.
Many countries are offering subsidies for the companies or industrial sectors that shift
to

clean

technologies,

recycling

programs

or

for

energy

conservation/use

of

non-

conventional energy resources. Incentives for those who incur additional costs in their
operations for the protection of ecosystem. These incentives maybe in the form of
financial compensation.
Companies must work towards:

Improvement of image and sales of products

Manufacturers being more accountable to environmental impacts

Consumers awareness that their choice of product do affect the environment as some

products are less damaging to environment than others.

environmental aspects in accordance with ISO 14001 norms

Measure the activities that causes the impacts and associate the impacts with variuos

Designing of EMS in line with EMPs with PDCA linkages,

ii) List the activities which have potential environmental impacts in a pint industry.

Ans:
In the paint industry the raw materials used deplete natural resources. The process of
paint manufacturing leads to release of toxic gases into the environment. And finally
the by-products and waste generated during manufacturing needs to be disposed off
without effecting the immediate surrounding environment.
Therefore it is important that the paint industry keeps these factors in mind and invests in systems and
procedures to avoid effecting the environment.
Volatile organic compounds are gases emitted by various solids or liquids, many of which have shortand long-term adverse health effects. Solvents in traditional paints often contain high quantities of
VOCs. Paints that are low in VOCs improve indoor air quality and reduce urban smog. The beneficial
characteristics of such paints include: low odor, clean air formula, safer technology, as well as
excellent durability, and a washable finish.
Low-VOC paint types include: Latex (water based), recycled latex (water based), acrylic, and milk
paint.
The labels of paint cans can be checked for the following information:

To be considered Low-VOC, the paint should consist of <50 grams per liter (g/l) of VOC.
To be considered Zero-VOC, the paint should consist of <5 g/l of VOC.
Solid content usually ranges from 25-45%, higher solid percentages ensures less VOC's

iii) List the legal requirements.

Ans:
Eco-Labelling

is

standards

BIS.

of

an

important
Manufactures

requirement.
must

The

produce

products
documentary

must

meet

evidence

the
in

relevant

regard

to

compliance of EPA, Water and Air Acts and other rules and regulations such as
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Drugs and Cosmetics Acts and rules made
there under.
The product to display the list of critical ingredients in descending order of quantity present. The
material used for packaging to be recyclable/reusable/biodegradable.

iv) Is there a trade related issue involved in this case.

Ans:

Yes, Trade related issues pertain to:

Source of raw material

Energy use/conservation in the production

Utilization of wastes

Suitability of recycling or packaging

Production Process

Wastes arising from the process of production

Disposal of wastes

Biodegradability

v) Explain, how your company can prepare itself towards certification.

Ans:

The products must meet the relevant standards of BIS.

Manufactures must produce documentary evidence in regard to compliance of
EPA, Water and Air Acts and other rules and regulations such as Prevention of
Food Adulteration Act and Drugs and Cosmetics Acts and rules made there

under.
The product to display the list of critical ingredients in descending order of quantity present.
The material used for packaging to be recyclable/reusable/biodegradable

CASE 2 :
Please answer the following questions:

i) Should XYZ Co take up the assignment?

Ans:

No, XYZ Co shouldnt take up the assignment because it is an equal opportunity employer which has
always upheld the spirits of freedom, human welfare, fair practices and fair treatment to all
employees.

ii) How can XYZ Co maintain business viability and growth without compromising on basic rights
and values enshrined? In the mission statement of the company?

Ans:
The viability of a business is measured by its long-term survival, and its ability to have sustainable
profits over a period of time. If a business is viable, it is able to survive for many years, because it
continues to make a profit year after year. The longer a company can stay profitable, the better its
viability.
Examples:
The small company showed its viability by making a profit every year of its existence.

Viability means: ability to survive.

For many enterprises, viability is ultimately linked to profit. Even if the business is not
currently profitable -perhaps it is in the early stages of development, undergoing a growth
spurt, or just going through a bad patch- there is an expectation that it will be profitable at
some future date. The expectation of future profit justifies continued investment.

This economic notion of viability can also be extended to not-for-profit enterprises such as
public sector organizations and charities. Such organizations are viable if they are seen to
deliver social or other value, sufficient to justify adequate funding and support on an ongoing

basis.
In addition to economic notions of viability, we can also consider the social viability of an
organization. An organization is socially viable if it provides enough value to justify any
social costs (internal or external)

iii) What alterations may be sought in the agreement and why?

Ans:
The following conditions are to be fulfilled by the XYZ Co employee:
a) Employees should not bring families with them during the assignment.
b) Women managers should not accompany the team.
c) The country and the collaborating company are not responsible if any accident or any other
untoward incidents take place.

GROUP B

Environmental Pollution:

CASE 3

Questions:
i) From Bhopal Tragedy, what an industrial manager learns? What safety procedures are to be
followed. Study the case deeply and state what were the defects of MIL unit. In view of this case,
prepare a disaster management plan, which could cover be useful to a chemical company. (10 Marks)

Ans:
Lessons from Bhopal Tragedy
The events in Bhopal revealed that expanding industrialization in developing countries without
concurrent evolution in safety regulations could have catastrophic consequences. The disaster
demonstrated that seemingly local problems of industrial hazards and toxic contamination are often
tied to global market dynamics. UCC's Sevin production plant was built in Madhya Pradesh not to
avoid environmental regulations in the U.S. but to exploit the large and growing Indian pesticide
market. However the manner in which the project was executed suggests the existence of a double
standard for multinational corporations operating in developing countries. Enforceable uniform
international operating regulations for hazardous industries would have provided a mechanism for
significantly improved in safety in Bhopal. Even without enforcement, international standards could
provide norms for measuring performance of individual companies engaged in hazardous activities
such as the manufacture of pesticides and other toxic chemicals in India. National governments and
international agencies should focus on widely applicable techniques for corporate responsibility and
accident prevention as much in the developing world context as in advanced industrial nations.
Specifically, prevention should include risk reduction in plant location and design and safety
legislation.
Local governments clearly cannot allow industrial facilities to be situated within urban areas,
regardless of the evolution of land use over time. Industry and government need to bring proper
financial support to local communities so they can provide medical and other necessary services to
reduce morbidity, mortality and material loss in the case of industrial accidents.

Public health infrastructure was very weak in Bhopal in 1984. Tap water was available for only a few
hours a day and was of very poor quality. With no functioning sewage system, untreated human
waste was dumped into two nearby lakes, one a source of drinking water. The city had four major
hospitals but there was a shortage of physicians and hospital beds. There was also no mass casualty
emergency response system in place in the city. Existing public health infrastructure needs to be
taken into account when hazardous industries choose sites for manufacturing plants. Future
management of industrial development requires that appropriate resources be devoted to advance
planning before any disaster occurs. Communities that do not possess infrastructure and technical
expertise to respond adequately to such industrial accidents should not be chosen as sites for
hazardous industry

Safety Procedures
Immediately after the disaster, UCC began attempts to dissociate itself from responsibility for the gas
leak. Its principal tactic was to shift culpability to UCIL, stating the plant was wholly built and
operated by the Indian subsidiary. It also fabricated scenarios involving sabotage by previously
unknown Sikh extremist groups and disgruntled employees but this theory was impugned by
numerous independent sources.
The toxic plume had barely cleared when, on December 7, the first multi-billion dollar lawsuit was
filed by an American attorney in a U.S. court. This was the beginning of years of legal machinations
in which the ethical implications of the tragedy and its affect on Bhopal's people were largely
ignored. In March 1985, the Indian government enacted the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster Act as a way
of ensuring that claims arising from the accident would be dealt with speedily and equitably. The Act
made the government the sole representative of the victims in legal proceedings both within and
outside India. Eventually all cases were taken out of the U.S. legal system under the ruling of the
presiding American judge and placed entirely under Indian jurisdiction much to the detriment of the
injured parties.
In a settlement mediated by the Indian Supreme Court, UCC accepted moral responsibility and
agreed to pay $470 million to the Indian government to be distributed to claimants as a full and final
settlement. The figure was partly based on the disputed claim that only 3000 people died and 102,000
suffered permanent disabilities. Upon announcing this settlement, shares of UCC rose $2 per share or
7% in value. Had compensation in Bhopal been paid at the same rate that asbestosis victims where
being awarded in US courts by defendant including UCC which mined asbestos from 1963 to 1985
the liability would have been greater than the $10 billion the company was worth and insured for in
1984. By the end of October 2003, according to the Bhopal Gas Tragedy Relief and Rehabilitation

Department, compensation had been awarded to 554,895 people for injuries received and 15,310
survivors of those killed. The average amount to families of the dead was $2,200.
At every turn, UCC has attempted to manipulate, obfuscate and withhold scientific data to the
detriment of victims. Even to this date, the company has not stated exactly what was in the toxic
cloud that enveloped the city on that December night. When MIC is exposed to 200 heat, it forms
degraded MIC that contains the more deadly hydrogen cyanide (HCN). There was clear evidence that
the storage tank temperature did reach this level in the disaster. The cherry-red color of blood and
viscera of some victims were characteristic of acute cyanide poisoning. Moreover, many responded
well to administration of sodium thiosulfate, an effective therapy for cyanide poisoning but not MIC
exposure. UCC initially recommended use of sodium thiosulfate but withdrew the statement later
prompting suggestions that it attempted to cover up evidence of HCN in the gas leak. The presence of
HCN was vigorously denied by UCC and was a point of conjecture among researchers.
As further insult, UCC discontinued operation at its Bhopal plant following the disaster but failed to
clean up the industrial site completely. The plant continues to leak several toxic chemicals and heavy
metals that have found their way into local aquifers. Dangerously contaminated water has now been
added to the legacy left by the company for the people of Bhopal.

The tragedy of Bhopal continues to be a warning sign at once ignored and heeded. Bhopal and its
aftermath were a warning that the path to industrialization, for developing countries in general and
India in particular, is fraught with human, environmental and economic perils. Some moves by the
Indian government, including the formation of the MoEF, have served to offer some protection of the
public's health from the harmful practices of local and multinational heavy industry and grassroots
organizations that have also played a part in opposing rampant development. The Indian economy is
growing at a tremendous rate but at significant cost in environmental health and public safety as large
and small companies throughout the subcontinent continue to pollute. Far more remains to be done
for public health in the context of industrialization to show that the lessons of the countless thousands
dead in Bhopal have truly been heeded.

Q 4)
i)

List the methods of waste management in the order of preference.

(5 Marks)

Ans:
Landfill
When all the trucks arrive to the landfills, they first get separated into their proper place; disposing of
waste in a landfill involves burying the waste, and this remains a common practice in most countries.
Landfills were often established in abandoned or unused quarries, mining voids or borrow pits. A
properly designed and well-managed landfill can be a hygienic and relatively inexpensive method of
disposing of waste materials. Older, poorly designed or poorly managed landfills can create a number
of adverse environmental impacts such as wind-blown litter, attraction of vermin, and generation of
liquidleachate. Another common product of landfills is gas (mostly composed of methane and carbon
dioxide), which is produced as organic waste breaks down anaerobically. This gas can create odor
problems, kill surface vegetation, and is a greenhouse gas.
Design characteristics of a modern landfill include methods to contain leachate such as clay or plastic
lining material. Deposited waste is normally compacted to increase its density and stability, and
covered to prevent attracting vermin (such as mice or rats). Many landfills also have landfill gas
extraction systems installed to extract the landfill gas. Gas is pumped out of the landfill using
perforated pipes and flared off or burnt in a gas engine to generate electricity.
Incineration
Incineration is a disposal method in which solid organic wastes are subjected to combustion so as to
convert them into residue and gaseous products. This method is useful for disposal of residue of both
solid waste management and solid residue from waste water management.This process reduces the
volumes of solid waste to 20 to 30 percent of the original volume. Incineration and other high
temperature waste treatment systems are sometimes described as "thermal treatment". Incinerators
convert waste materials into heat, gas, steam and ash.
Incineration is carried out both on a small scale by individuals and on a large scale by industry. It is
used to dispose of solid, liquid and gaseous waste. It is recognized as a practical method of disposing
of certain hazardous waste materials (such as biological medical waste). Incineration is a
controversial method of waste disposal, due to issues such as emission of gaseous pollutants.
Incineration is common in countries such as Japan where land is more scarce, as these facilities
generally do not require as much area as landfills. Waste-to-energy (WtE) or energy-from-waste
(EfW) are broad terms for facilities that burn waste in a furnace or boiler to generate heat, steam or
electricity. Combustion in an incinerator is not always perfect and there have been concerns about

pollutants in gaseous emissions from incinerator stacks. Particular concern has focused on some very
persistent organics such as dioxins, furans, PAHs which may be created which may have serious
environmental consequences.
Recycling
Recycling is a resource recovery practice that refers to the collection and reuse of waste materials
such as empty beverage containers. The materials from which the items are made can be reprocessed
into new products. Material for recycling may be collected separately from general waste using
dedicated bins and collection vehicles are sorted directly from mixed waste streams and are known as
kerb-side recycling, it requires the owner of the waste to separate it into various different bins
(typically wheelie bins) prior to its collection.
The

most

common

cans, copper such

as

consumer

products

wire, steel food

recycled

and

include aluminium such

aerosol

equipment, polyethylene and PET bottles, glass bottles

and

cans,

old

steel

as

beverage

furnishings

or

jars, paperboard cartons, newspapers,

magazines and light paper, and corrugated fiberboard boxes.

PVC, LDPE, PP, and PS (see resin identification code) are also recyclable. These items are usually
composed of a single type of material, making them relatively easy to recycle into new products. The
recycling of complex products (such as computers and electronic equipment) is more difficult, due to
the additional dismantling and separation required.
The type of material accepted for recycling varies by city and country. Each city and country have
different recycling programs in place that can handle the various types of recyclable materials.
However, variation in acceptance is reflected in the resale value of the material once it is reprocessed.
Sustainability
The management of waste is a key component in a business' ability to maintaining ISO14001
accreditation. Companies are encouraged to improve their environmental efficiencies each year by
eliminating waste through resource recovery practices, which are sustainability-related activities. One
way to do this is by shifting away from waste management to resource recovery practices
like recycling materials such as glass, food scraps, paper and cardboard, plastic bottles and metal.
Biological reprocessing
Recoverable materials that are organic in nature, such as plant material, food scraps, and paper
products, can be recovered through composting and digestion processes to decompose the organic
matter. The resulting organic material is then recycled as mulch or compost for agricultural or
landscaping purposes. In addition, waste gas from the process (such as methane) can be captured and
used for generating electricity and heat (CHP/cogeneration) maximising efficiencies. The intention of

biological processing in waste management is to control and accelerate the natural process of
decomposition of organic matter. (See resource recovery).
Energy recovery
The energy content of waste products can be harnessed directly by using them as a direct combustion
fuel, or indirectly by processing them into another type of fuel. Thermal treatment ranges from using
waste as a fuel source for cooking or heating and the use of the gas fuel (see above), to fuel
for boilers to generate steam and electricity in a turbine. Pyrolysis and gasification are two related
forms of thermal treatment where waste materials are heated to high temperatures with
limited oxygen availability. The process usually occurs in a sealed vessel under highpressure.
Pyrolysis of solid waste converts the material into solid, liquid and gas products. The liquid and gas
can be burnt to produce energy or refined into other chemical products (chemical refinery). The solid
residue (char) can be further refined into products such as activated carbon. Gasification and
advanced Plasma arc gasification are used to convert organic materials directly into a synthetic gas
(syngas) composed of carbon monoxide andhydrogen. The gas is then burnt to produce electricity
and steam. An alternative to pyrolisis is high temperature and pressure supercritical water
decomposition (hydrothermal monophasic oxidation).
Resource recovery
Resource recovery (as opposed to waste management) uses LCA (life cycle analysis) attempts to
offer alternatives to waste management. For mixed MSW (Municipal Solid Waste) a number of broad
studies have indicated that administration, source separation and collection followed by reuse and
recycling of the non-organic fraction and energy and compost/fertilizer production of the organic
material via anaerobic digestion to be the favoured path.
Avoidance and reduction methods
An important method of waste management is the prevention of waste material being created, also
known as waste reduction. Methods of avoidance include reuse of second-hand products, repairing
broken items instead of buying new, designing products to be refillable or reusable (such as cotton
instead of plastic shopping bags), encouraging consumers to avoid using disposable products (such as
disposable cutlery), removing any food/liquid remains from cans, packaging, and designing products
that use less material to achieve the same purpose (for example, lightweighting of beverage cans).

ii) What are the advantages of solid waste incernaton?

(5 Marks)

Ans:
Solid waste incinerators are used to combust organic substances contained in waste. Incineration
converts solid waste into ash, flue gas and heat. Incineration is the main alternative to landfills, which
hold solid waste in a contained area. Modern solid waste incinerators separate most dangerous gases
and particulates from the flue gas produced during incineration.

Reduces Volume of Solid Waste

Incinerators reduce waste volume by approximately 95 percent and reduce the solid mass of the
original waste by 80 percent to 85 percent. (The exact percentage depends on the constituent
materials of the solid waste). Therefore, while incineration does not eliminate the need for dumping
ground completely, it certainly reduces the amount of land needed. For small countries, this is
significant as landfills take up large amounts of space that could be used more productively.

Power and Heat Generation

As energy costs went up in the 1950s, numerous countries sought to incorporate the energy and heat
generated from garbage incinerators for the production of electricity through steam turbines.
Furthermore, Europe and Japan have incorporated incinerators into urban central heating systems.
Sweden, for instance, produces 8 percent of its heating needs from 50 percent of the waste
incinerated.

Reduces Pollution
Studies have shown that solid waste incinerators produce less pollution than landfills. One study in
particular, conducted during a 1994 lawsuit in the United States, showed that a waste incinerator site
was more environmentally friendly than an equivalent landfill. (Both were 1,500-ton-per-day
facilities.) The study found that the landfill released higher amounts of greenhouse gases,
hydrocarbons, nonmethane organic compounds, hazardous air pollutants, nitrogen oxides and dioxin
than an incinerator. Landfills further leach dangerous chemical into the underlying groundwater,
which can contaminate underground water systems.

Filters Trap Pollutants

A major concern associated with incinerating solid waste was the release of dangerous compounds,
dioxin in particular. Nevertheless, modern incineration plants use filters to trap dangerous gases and
particulate matter like dioxin. The release of dioxin by most modern incineration plants is well within
the recommended limits prescribed by the Environmental Protection Agency and international
protocols.

iii) Define hazardous waste

(5 Marks)

Ans:
A Hazardous waste is waste that poses substantial or potential threats to public health or the
environment. In the United States, the treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous waste is regulated
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Hazardous wastes are defined under
RCRA in 40 CFR 261 where they are divided into two major categories: characteristic wastes and
listed wastes.

Characteristic hazardous wastes are materials that are known or tested to exhibit one or more of
the following four hazardous traits:

Ignitability (i.e., flammable)

Reactivity
Corrosivity
Toxicity

Listed hazardous waste are materials specifically listed by regulatory authorities as a hazardous
waste which are from non-specific sources, specific sources, or discarded chemical products.

iv) List the legal provisions in the Environment Protection Act pertaining to hazardous waste.

(5 Marks)
Ans:
Legislation for environmental protection in India
Water
Water quality standards especially those for drinking water are set by the Indian Council of Medical
Research. These bear close resemblance to WHO standards. The discharge of industrial effluents is
regulated by the Indian Standard Codes and recently, water quality standards for coastal water marine
outfalls have also been specified. In addition to the general standards, certain specific standards have
been developed for effluent discharges from industries such as, iron and steel, aluminium, pulp and
paper, oil refineries, petrochemicals and thermal power plants. Legislation to control water pollution
are listed below.
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
This Act represented Indias first attempts to comprehensively deal with environmental issues. The
Act prohibits the discharge of pollutants into water bodies beyond a given standard, and lays down
penalties for non-compliance. The Act was amended in 1988 to conform closely to the provisions of
the EPA, 1986. It set up the CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board) which lays down standards for
the prevention and control of water pollution. At the State level, the SPCBs (State Pollution Control
Board) function under the direction of the CPCB and the state government.
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977
This Act provides for a levy and collection of a cess on water consumed by industries and local
authorities. It aims at augmenting the resources of the central and state boards for prevention and
control of water pollution. Following this Act, The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess
Rules were formulated in 1978 for defining standards and indications for the kind of and location of
meters that every consumer of water is required to install.
Air
Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
To counter the problems associated with air pollution, ambient air quality standards were established,
under the 1981 Act. The Act provides means for the control and abatement of air pollution. The Act
seeks to combat air pollution by prohibiting the use of polluting fuels and substances, as well as by
regulating appliances that give rise to air pollution. Under the Act establishing or operating of any
industrial plant in the pollution control area requires consent from state boards. The boards are also
expected to test the air in air pollution control areas, inspect pollution control equipment, and
manufacturing processes.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for major pollutants were notified by the CPCB
in April 1994. These are deemed to be levels of air quality necessary with an adequate margin of
safety, to protect public health, vegetation and property (CPCB 1995 cited in Gupta, 1999). The
NAAQS prescribe specific standards for industrial, residential, rural and other sensitive areas.
Industry-specific emission standards have also been developed for iron and steel plants, cement
plants, fertilizer plants, oil refineries and the aluminium industry. The ambient quality standards
prescribed in India are similar to those prevailing in many developed and developing countries.
To empower the central and state pollution boards to meet grave emergencies, the Air (Prevention
and Control of Pollution) Amendment Act, 1987, was enacted. The boards were authorized to take
immediate measures to tackle such emergencies and recover the expenses incurred from the
offenders. The power to cancel consent for non-fulfilment of the conditions prescribed has also been
emphasized in the Air Act Amendment.
The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules formulated in 1982, defined the procedures for
conducting meetings of the boards, the powers of the presiding officers, decision-making, the
quorum; manner in which the records of the meeting were to be set etc. They also prescribed the
manner and the purpose of seeking assistance from specialists and the fee to be paid to them.
Complementing the above Acts is the Atomic Energy Act of 1982, which was introduced to deal with
radioactive waste. In 1988, the Motor Vehicles Act, was enacted to regulate vehicular traffic, besides
ensuring proper packaging, labelling and transportation of the hazardous wastes. Various aspects of
vehicular pollution have also been notified under the EPA of 1986. Mass emission standards were
notified in 1990, which were made more stringent in 1996. In 2000 these standards were revised yet
again and for the first time separate obligations for vehicle owners, manufacturers and enforcing
agencies were stipulated. In addition, fairly stringent Euro I and II emission norms were notified by
the Supreme Court on April 29, 1999 for the city of Delhi. The notification made it mandatory for car
manufacturers to conform to the Euro I and Euro II norms by May 1999 and April 2000, respectively,
for new non-commercial vehicle sold in Delhi.

Q 5)

i) Discuss the role of CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board) in the pollution control activities in
India.

(2 Marks)

Ans:
The main function of the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB as spelt out in Water (Prevention
and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 are:1. To promote cleanliness of streams and wells in different areas of the States through
prevention, control and abatement of water pollution;
2. To improve the quality of air and to prevent, control or abate air pollution in the country;
3. Advise the Central Government on any matter concerning prevention and control of water and
air pollution and improvement of the quality of air;
4. Plan and cause to be executed a nation-wide programme for the prevention, control or
abatement of water and air pollution;
5. Coordinate the activities of the State Boards and resolve disputes among them;
6. Provide technical assistance and guidance to the State Boards, carry out and sponsor
investigations and research relating to problems of water and air pollution, and for their
prevention, control abatement;
7. Plan and organise training of persons engaged in programmes for prevention, control or
abatement of water and air pollution;
8. Organise through mass media, a comprehensive mass awareness programme on prevention,
control or abatement of water and air pollution;
9. Collect, compile and publish technical and statistical data relating to water and air pollution
and the measures devised for their effective prevention, control and abatement;
10. Prepare manuals, codes and guidelines relating to treatment and disposal of sewage and trade
effluents as well as for stack gas cleaning devises, stacks and ducts;
11. Disseminate information in respect of matters relating to water and air pollution and their
prevention and control;
12. Lay down, modify or annul, in consultation with the State Government concerned, the
standards for stream or well, and lay down standards for quality of air;
13. Establish or recognize laboratories to enable the Board to perform; and

14. Perform such other functions as and when prescribed by the Government of India.
15. In addition to the above, the CPCB is empowered, on behalf of the Ministry of Environment
& Forests
16. To issue directions to any industry, local bodies, or other authority for violation of the notified
general emission and effluent standards, and rules relating to hazardous waste, bio-medical
waste, hazardous chemicals, industrial solid waste, municipal solid waste including plastic
waste under the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986

ii) Mention the salient points of the 3 Acts:

(2 Marks)

The Air (prevention and control of pollution) Act 1981

The Water (prevention and control of pollution) Act 1974
The Environment (Protection) Act 1986

Ans:

Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981

To counter the problems associated with air pollution, ambient air quality standards were established,
under the 1981 Act. The Act provides means for the control and abatement of air pollution. The Act
seeks to combat air pollution by prohibiting the use of polluting fuels and substances, as well as by
regulating appliances that give rise to air pollution. Under the Act establishing or operating of any
industrial plant in the pollution control area requires consent from state boards. The boards are also
expected to test the air in air pollution control areas, inspect pollution control equipment, and
manufacturing processes.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for major pollutants were notified by the CPCB
in April 1994. These are deemed to be levels of air quality necessary with an adequate margin of
safety, to protect public health, vegetation and property (CPCB 1995 cited in Gupta, 1999). The
NAAQS prescribe specific standards for industrial, residential, rural and other sensitive areas.
Industry-specific emission standards have also been developed for iron and steel plants, cement
plants, fertilizer plants, oil refineries and the aluminium industry. The ambient quality standards
prescribed in India are similar to those prevailing in many developed and developing countries.
To empower the central and state pollution boards to meet grave emergencies, the Air (Prevention
and Control of Pollution) Amendment Act, 1987, was enacted. The boards were authorized to take
immediate measures to tackle such emergencies and recover the expenses incurred from the
offenders. The power to cancel consent for non-fulfilment of the conditions prescribed has also been
emphasized in the Air Act Amendment.

The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules formulated in 1982, defined the procedures for
conducting meetings of the boards, the powers of the presiding officers, decision-making, the
quorum; manner in which the records of the meeting were to be set etc. They also prescribed the
manner and the purpose of seeking assistance from specialists and the fee to be paid to them.
Complementing the above Acts is the Atomic Energy Act of 1982, which was introduced to deal with
radioactive waste. In 1988, the Motor Vehicles Act, was enacted to regulate vehicular traffic, besides
ensuring proper packaging, labelling and transportation of the hazardous wastes. Various aspects of
vehicular pollution have also been notified under the EPA of 1986. Mass emission standards were
notified in 1990, which were made more stringent in 1996. In 2000 these standards were revised yet
again and for the first time separate obligations for vehicle owners, manufacturers and enforcing
agencies were stipulated. In addition, fairly stringent Euro I and II emission norms were notified by
the Supreme Court on April 29, 1999 for the city of Delhi. The notification made it mandatory for car
manufacturers to conform to the Euro I and Euro II norms by May 1999 and April 2000, respectively,
for new non-commercial vehicle sold in Delhi.

iii) Explain the very elements of EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) different types of
Impact Assessments the benefits of EIA The EIA process, key points to remember while
conducting an effective EIA.

(2 Marks)

Ans:
An environmental impact assessment (EIA) is an assessment of the possible positive or negative
impact that a proposed project may have on the environment, together consisting of
the environmental, social and economic aspects.
The purpose of the assessment is to ensure that decision makers consider the ensuing environmental
impacts when deciding whether to proceed with a project. The International Association for Impact
Assessment (IAIA) defines an environmental impact assessment as "the process of identifying,
predicting, evaluating and mitigating the biophysical, social, and other relevant effects of
development proposals prior to major decisions being taken and commitments made." EIAs are
unique in that they do not require adherence to a predetermined environmental outcome, but rather
they require decision makers to account for environmental values in their decisions and to justify
those decisions in light of detailed environmental studies and public comments on the potential
environmental impacts of the proposal.
EIAs began to be used in the 1960s as part of a rational decision making process. It involved a
technical evaluation that would lead to objective decision making. EIA was made legislation in the
US in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 1969. It has since evolved as it has been used
increasingly in many countries around the world. As per Jay et al.(2006), EIA as it is practiced today,
is being used as a decision aiding tool rather than decision making tool. There is growing dissent on
the use of EIA as its influence on development decisions is limited and there is a view it is falling
short of its full potential.There is a need for stronger foundation of EIA practice through training for
practitioners, guidance on EIA practice and continuing research.
EIAs have often been criticized for having too narrow spatial and temporal scope. At present no
procedure has been specified for determining a system boundary for the assessment. The system
boundary refers to the spatial and temporal boundary of the proposals effects. This boundary is
determined by the applicant and the lead assessor, but in practice, almost all EIAs address the direct,
on-site effects alone.
However, as well as direct effects, developments cause a multitude of indirect effects through
consumption of goods and services, production of building materials and machinery, additional land
use for activities of various manufacturing and industrial services, mining of resources etc. The

indirect effects of developments are often an order of magnitude higher than the direct effects
assessed by EIA. Large proposals such as airports or ship yards cause wide ranging national as well
as international environmental effects, which should be taken into consideration during the decisionmaking process.
Broadening the scope of EIA can also benefit threatened species conservation. Instead of
concentrating on the direct effects of a proposed project on its local environment some EIAs used a
landscape approach which focused on much broader relationships between the entire population of a
species in question. As a result, an alternative that would cause least amount of negative effects to the
population of that species as a whole, rather than the local subpopulation, can be identified and
recommended by EIA.
There are various methods available to carry out EIAs, some are industry specific and some general
methods:

Industrial products - Product environmental life cycle analysis (LCA) is used for identifying and
measuring the impact on the environment of industrial products. These EIAs consider
technological activities used for various stages of the product: extraction of raw material for the
product and for ancillary materials and equipment, through the production and use of the product,
right up to the disposal of the product, the ancillary equipment and material.

Genetically modified plants - There are specific methods available to perform EIAs of genetically
modified plants. Some of the methods are GMP-RAM, INOVA etc.

Fuzzy Arithmetic - EIA methods need specific parameters and variables to be measured to
estimate values of impact indicators. However many of the environment impact properties cannot
be measured on a scale e.g. landscape quality, lifestyle quality, social acceptance etc. and
moreover these indicators are very subjective. Thus to assess the impacts we may need to take the
help of information from similar EIAs, expert criteria, sensitivity of affected population etc. To
treat this information, which is generally inaccurate, systematically, fuzzy arithmetic and
approximate reasoning methods can be utilised. This is called as a fuzzy logic approach.

At the end of the project, an EIA should be followed by an audit. An EIA audit evaluates the
performance of an EIA by comparing actual impacts to those that were predicted. The main objective
of these audits is to make future EIAs more valid and effective. The two main considerations are:

scientific - to check the accuracy of predictions and explain errors.

management- to assess the success of mitigation in reducing impacts.

Some people believe that audits be performed as a rigorous scientific testing of the null hypotheses.
While some believe in a simpler approach where you compare what actually occurred against the
predictions in the EIA document.
After an EIA, the precautionary and polluter pays principles may be applied to prevent, limit, or
require strict liability or insurance coverage to a project, based on its likely harms. Environmental
impact assessments are sometimes controversial.

iv) Compare and contrast polluter pays principle with beneficiary pays principle.

(2 Marks)

Ans:
Polluter pays principle
The polluter pays principle (PPP) identifies the parties who caused the pollution and apportions
responsibility for paying the costs of dealing with climate change among those parties. Arguably, the
PPP is the most intuitive way of thinking about the ethics of climate change. It is based on the widely
shared idea that those who cause harm to others should be morally responsible for remedying that
harm. As such, the PPP has the ability to provide the appropriate incentive to prevent polluting by
directly linking moral responsibility, and the resulting accountability, to the kinds of actions that
should be discouraged.
The polluting to which the PPP refers should be taken to mean the emitting of greenhouse gases
above some agreed upon quota. The quotas agreed upon in the Kyoto Protocol are all self-imposed
and based on a reduction of their absolute per capita or per gross national product emissions relative
to some past point in time. These arbitrary quotas are patently unfair because they fail to
acknowledge that there is no good moral reason for any distribution of a common global good, like
the atmosphere, other than an equal share for everyone (Singer 2008, p. 671). There is a much fairer
method of creating a quota (and one that would do more to reduce the likely catastrophic effects of
climate change). This method would see the annual amount of total emissions considered safe by
current United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) estimates to be
distributed to states based on their near-future population trajectory as compiled by the United
Nations. If this approach were adopted, then the per capita aspect of this method would plausibly
result in current andfuture people receiving their fair share of the atmosphere. The use of near-future
population trajectories instead of actual populations is meant to eliminate perverse incentives for
population control.

The PPP fares well when applied to current and future polluting. However, when the PPP is applied
to historical emitting a problem arises from the fact past polluters, for the most part, were not aware

that their actions would have harmful consequences. This fact suggests two versions of the PPP. One
version is an exacting version: the full liability PPP assigns moral responsibility to agents to redress
all of the relevant harms they cause even when they are unaware their actions would lead to such
harm. The other version is a weaker version: the conditional liability PPP (CPPP) assigns moral
responsibility only to those who knowingly pollute or who should have known that their greenhouse
gas emitting was likely to cause harm. We refer to such polluting as culpable polluting. Culpable
polluting is to be distinguished from non-culpable polluting on the basis of whether the polluter can
reasonably be held to have known that their polluting was likely to cause harm. We believe this
distinction is morally significant, so adopt a version of the CPPP in our hybrid account.
Applying the CPPP to the current climate change debate requires a method to discern who can
reasonably be held to have known that their polluting was likely to cause harm. We conservatively
recommend taking 1992 (when the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development was signed) as
the date past which all states should be deemed as knowing that greenhouse gas emissions over a
certain level are likely to cause harm. By using 1992 as the starting date for culpable polluting, the
CPPP can satisfyingly deal with the problem of non-culpable polluting. However, Page (2008,
p. 570) has criticised the use of this fairly recent date as the relevant starting date because he thinks it
results in harsh treatment for the newly industrialised populations and lax treatment of those residing
in countries of transition. To move the starting date further back would decrease Pages fairness
concerns but would exacerbate the unfairness to polluters who truly were not aware of the
consequences of their actions. The combination of these two concerns makes it difficult to specify a
fair date after which states should be deemed as knowing that greenhouse gas emissions over a
certain level are likely to cause harm. And this difficulty, in turn, creates a problem for the PPP that it
cannot easily solve by itself.
The main problem for the CPPP is that it fails to designate sufficient moral responsibility to address
the problem given that a large portion of the polluting was caused before 1992 (Caney 2005). A
common response to this sufficiency problem has been to argue that individuals currently residing in
states that are primarily responsible for climate change should be held morally responsible for
polluting that was caused by the previous generations of those states. Closer inspection reveals that
this response is unfair. Why should the mere fact someone lives in a country, whose previous citizens
polluted, make them responsible for the polluting? A possible response to this intergenerational
problem is to agree that current generations should have to pay only for their own polluting and not
for the polluting of past generations. Although this would be a fair and consistent application of the
PPP, it suffers from the same problem as the CPPP: it fails to designate enough moral responsibility
to ensure adequate mitigation of and adaptation to the potentially catastrophic effects of rapid climate
change.

It could be argued that the above intergenerational problem presupposes that the relevant moral
agents are individuals as opposed to states. Against this, a collectivist approach to the PPP would
view states as the relevant moral agents for the current climate change debate. Such an approach has
initial intuitive plausibility given that any future agreement the UNFCCC reaches will distribute the
responsibilities for dealing with climate change among states in the first instance. Applying this
collectivist version of the PPP reveals that, because of their relatively long history of greenhouse gas
emitting, the developed nations have the primary responsibility for mitigating and adapting to rapid
climate change. These states should pay, on this collectivist version of the PPP, because they have
caused, and are likely to continue to cause, harms because of the high concentrations of greenhouse
gases they have released through their historic polluting. Caney (2005) has argued against a
collectivist approach to the PPP on the grounds that it would be unfair to the current citizens of an
historically polluting state to have to pay for damages done by their forebears. He asks, individuals
cannot inherit debts from parents or grandparents, so why should this be any different? (Caney 2005,
p. 760). Although we agree with the intuition that innocent individuals should not have a moral
responsibility to remedy harms caused by others, we do not think Caney adequately engages with the
rationale of collectivist views.
As a part of a collective, an individual is usually entitled to some benefits, but those benefits come at
the cost of certain responsibilities. New citizens of New Zealand, by birth or grant, are entitled to,
among other things, the benefits of social welfare, a public health system, and the freedom to live in a
naturally beautiful country. However, these citizens also accrue several responsibilities, including
abiding by the law and paying taxes. As a rule, the responsibilities of being a part of a collective
come ineluctably hand in hand with the benefits. Therefore, individuals who did not vote for the
creation of the benefits that they are now enjoying, as a part of a collective, should understand that
with those benefits come responsibilities and that acceptance of the benefits entails acceptance of the
whole package. Therefore, while citizens of industrialised countries are innocent of historic polluting,
the collective of which they are a part is not. One may decide to opt out of the collective (of both the
benefits and the responsibilities), but no one is entitled to opt out of the responsibilities only. In short,
one can respond to Caneys worries about the unfairness of collective versions of PPP as follows. If
individuals born into rich countries can make the case that it is unfair to require them to pay for
harms they did not cause, then individuals born into poor, non-polluting countries can make an even
stronger case that it is unfair that they lack so many benefits enjoyed by individuals of rich
countries solely because of accidents of birth.
Therefore, a collectivist PPP, which views the relevant moral agents as states, can be defended
against Caneys objections. However, as we argue later, both individual and collective versions of the
PPP are susceptible to a different objection, which we call the ability to pay objection.

Beneficiary pays principle

According to the beneficiary pays principle (BPP), agents who benefit from historic polluting should
bear the moral responsibility for dealing with the problems caused by that polluting. One of the
advantages of the BPP is that it easily avoids the intergenerational problem, since the BPP assigns
moral responsibility to those who benefit regardless of whether they caused the pollution. According
to the BPP, the response to Caneys innocent complainer should be, we agree that you are innocent
of polluting, but you have benefited from the polluting, and that is why you have the moral
responsibility to deal with it.
The strongest ethical rationale for the BPP is based on the idea of minimising the unearned
inequalities that have resulted from polluting. Unearned inequalities are welfare-affecting differences
between agents that have come about because of circumstances beyond the agents control.
According to this rationale, because the benefits and costs associated with historic polluting are
beyond current agents control and are unequally distributed, the fairest way to rectify this is to assign
the moral responsibility to deal with the problems caused by historic polluting to the agents who have
benefited from it. On this view, the more an agent has benefited from greenhouse gas emissions, the
more moral responsibility they have to pay for the mitigation of and adaptation to rapid climate
change. On the face of it, this creates a fair result because it minimises the number of agents who,
despite never having benefited from historic polluting, would nevertheless have to pay for the costs
of it. Furthermore, by apportioning the costs of polluting in this way, the BPP moves everyone closer
to a fair and equitable position in regards to the overall effects of the pollution.

v) What are the tenets of Risk management explain the steps involved through a chart.

(2Marks)

Ans:
Tenets of Risk Management in the Banking Industry
"If a bank is serious about risk management, then it will be serious from the top down. Before we
discuss this statement in more detail, lets first look at the events that precipitated such a statement.
The chain of events that led to the global economic crisis are outlined in figure 1. The resulting global
economic downturn led to a vicious cycle of companies failing or downsizing, thus leading to
unemployment, which further reduced demand for goods and services. In addition, banks across the
globe retrenched and in place of the liberal lending practices credit tightened across the board.
Governments stepped in with fiscal supportthe likes of which has never been seen in modern
recorded history. And now, everyone waits to see what will happen with this never-beforetried experiment of flooding the world markets with government money.