India Indigenous People Adani Ports
Adani eyeing huge Nicobar Island port project with massive impacts on ecology and tribals
Feb 03, 2025
Adani has expressed interest in developing a massive port on Great Nicobar Island, part of a development that threatens the ecology and indigenous people of this idyllic, remote outpost. Image Arne Mueseler / www.arne-mues / Wikimedia Commons

Adani eyeing huge Nicobar Island port project with massive impacts on ecology and tribals

The Adani Group has lodged an official expression of interest to develop a massive trans-shipment port on remote Great Nicobar Island, a biodiversity hotspot and home to vulnerable indigenous people. The project also involves a large airport, a whole new town, tourism developments and power-generating facilities. It aims to turn this idyllic outpost into a regional shipping hub. Experts in conservation and anthropology have expressed alarm about the likely impacts of this invasive development on the unique ecology and indigenous people of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Ltd (APSEZ) is among eleven companies that have expressed interest in developing and operating the International Container Transshipment Terminal (ICTT) at Galathea Bay, off Great Nicobar Island, that is proposed to be constructed by agencies of the Government of India.

The proposed port has roused serious concerns relating to its likely impacts on indigenous communities and the rich biodiversity of the Andaman & Nicobar archipelago. The project, part of a broader ‘holistic development’ estimated to cost US$9 billion, includes the transshipment port, a greenfield airport, a solar and gas-based power plant, and a township and tourism complex spread over 130 square kilometres. It aims to transform the sanctuary-like island into a developed regional shipping hub.

The Andaman and Nicobar islands are located at the edge of the Bay of Bengal, between the bay and the Andaman Sea. Great Nicobar, which is 190 kilometres to the north of the huge Indonesian island of Sumatra, includes the Great Nicobar Biosphere Reserve which comprises two of India’s national parks—Campbell Bay National Park and Galathea National Park. Biosphere reserves are recognised under the Man and the Biosphere programme of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

Map of the Andaman and Nicobar archipelago. Image Wikimedia Commons

The Great Nicobar Biosphere Reserve, consisting of tropical evergreen forests and unique coastal ecosystems, is home to a vast range of wildlife and marine life—including endangered species. All of this as well as the survival of the island’s indigenous tribes stand threatened by the proposed project.

The invitation for expressions of interest to build the terminal was issued in March 2023, according to The Scroll. Besides Adani, the other companies vying to build the terminal include Essar Ports and JSW Infrastructure. Reports indicate that by August that year, the Indian government was working on finalising the detailed project report for the broader initiative, of which the transhipment port is the primary project.

The project was initiated based on a feasibility report prepared by AECOM India Pvt Ltd, headquartered in Gurugram near the national capital of Delhi. The company is the Indian counterpart of the US-based AECOM, a consulting firm that specialises in infrastructure projects. The feasibility report was prepared under the direction of NITI Aayog (NITI stands for National Institution for Transforming India) —the Government of India’s think tank on public policy and the nodal agency for economic development. The report emphasised the island’s strategic positioning, being equidistant from Colombo Port to the west and the ports of Klang and Singapore in the southeast.

The execution of the project has been entrusted to a little-known Indian government agency, the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Integrated Development Corporation Limited (ANIIDCO).

(Story continues below)

More stories See all
Residents express fears as Dharavi faces Adani's wrecking ball
Gondalpura coal mines: coal miners and government sent packing by feisty farmers
Adani offshore firms’ hidden role in the Carmichael railway
Adani eyeing huge Nicobar Island port project with massive impacts on ecology and tribals
The Ben Pennings case: Adani suffers big setback

ANIIDCO’s lack of experience

Concerns have been raised around ANIIDCO’s lack of experience in managing such high-profile, high-risk ventures as this ambitious project.

Based in Port Blair, capital of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands territory, ANIIDCO was incorporated on 28 June 1988 under the Companies Act. Its stated goal is ‘to develop and commercially exploit natural resources for the balanced and environment-friendly development of the territory’. The corporation’s activities include trading petroleum products, liquor and milk; managing tourism resorts; and developing infrastructure for tourism and fisheries. Over the past three years, its average annual turnover has been US $44.6 million, with profits of around US $4.22 million.

Locations of the mega-project’s components (source: Pre-Feasibility Report, AECOM)

ANIIDCO’s structure and capabilities have drawn scrutiny. When it was appointed as the project proponent in July 2020, the corporation lacked critical capacity such as an environmental policy, specialised environmental staff and a human-resources department. It was only in late 2022 that ANIIDCO began recruiting professionals such as urban and environmental planners, infrastructure specialists, and legal and financial experts.

In May 2021, the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) of the Indian federal government’s Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) questioned ANIIDCO’s environmental governance framework. It asked whether ANIIDCO had a corporate environment policy, a compliance system for environmental approvals, and a standard operating procedure for handling environmental violations. ANIIDCO admitted it lacked an environment policy. Notwithstanding this, the EAC granted the project environmental clearance in November 2022.

Petition challenging environmental approval

In July 2024, The Indian Express reported on a legal case which began in April 2023 when the Conservation Action Trust, a non-profit organisation formed to protect India’s forests and wildlife, and environmental activist Ashish Kothari filed a petition before the National Green Tribunal (NGT) challenging the project’s environmental clearance.

The petition raised concerns about violations of the Island Coastal Regulation Zone (ICRZ) and potential adverse impacts on ecologically sensitive areas, coral colonies, nesting grounds for leatherback turtles and Nicobar megapode birds, as well as the ancestral lands of tribal communities.

The ICRZ was proclaimed in 2019, it aim being sustainable development along scientific principles, while conserving the unique environment of India’s coastal regions and its marine biodiversity.

In response to the petition, the NGT formed a High-Powered Committee (HPC) to reassess the project’s environmental clearance. The HPC was tasked with reviewing alleged deficiencies in the clearance process, such as limited environmental baseline data, the project’s proximity to ICRZ-1A zones, which are the most ecologically sensitive, with crucial geomorphological features where development work is prohibited, and plans for protecting 4518 coral colonies. The NGT also ordered that no work on the project was to proceed until the HPC had submitted its report.

The HPC completed its review and publicly disclosed its findings in July 2024. It concluded that the proposed transshipment port fell within the ICRZ-1B zone, where such activities are permissible, contradicting earlier claims by the Andaman & Nicobar Coastal Management Authority, which had stated that parts of the project overlapped with prohibited ICRZ-1A zones.

Additionally, the HPC recommended translocating 16,150 coral colonies while directing further studies for the remaining 4518 colonies. It also validated the use of one-season baseline environmental data, in line with the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) notification issued by the MoEFCC in 2006.

ANIIDCO assured the NGT that no port developments were planned within ICRZ-1A zones. However, the corporation refrained from clarifying the status of other components of the project, such as the airport and township, that may overlap with restricted areas. ANIIDCO also withheld the minutes of HPC meetings, citing confidentiality due to the project’s defence and strategic objectives.

Mongabay reported that, initially, the National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management (NCSCM), a research institute under the MoEFCC, mapped parts of the project area as CRZ-1A zones. However, a later assessment concluded the entire area was CRZ-B, where ports are permitted, enabling approval of the project. This change, based on a ‘ground truthing’ exercise, has sparked questions about transparency and methodology. Critics argue that the NCSCM’s conclusions undermine the recommendations of the Andaman & Nicobar Coastal Management Authority while also lacking public disclosure of the rationale or data employed.

According to The Hindu, critics have also flagged multiple conflicts of interest in ANIIDCO’s role. At the time the approval to destroy forest for the project was granted, ANIIDCO’s managing director was also the Commissioner-cum-Secretary (Environment and Forests) of the islands. This dual role led to concerns about the corporation certifying itself. Similarly, the Chief Secretary of the islands, who chairs ANIIDCO’s board, was part of the high-powered committee investigating complaints against the project.

Extent of impact: wide, devastating, irreversible

The project threatens the Shompen and Nicobarese tribes, whose cultures and livelihoods are deeply tied to the island environment. The Shompen, a ‘particularly vulnerable tribal group’, rely on hunting, gathering and small-scale horticulture. The Nicobarese, similarly, depend on land and coastal resources. The planned increase in the island’s population—from 8000 to 350,000 over 30 years—could overwhelm these communities, exposing them to disease, displacement and loss of cultural heritage. Additionally, a portion of the designated tribal reserve is set to be ‘de-notified’ (ie revoked) for the project, further encroaching on the ancestral lands of these tribal people.

A historical photo of group of Shompen people in 1886 on Great Nicobar Island (source: Wikimedia)

In February 2024, genocide experts from across the globe appealed to the President of India, Droupadi Murmu, to halt the project, cautioning that it could drive the Shompens to extinction. (While the President does not have the power to halt projects, he/she can forward petitions and representations, and seek the advice of the government. The President can also seek the advice of the Supreme Court under Article 143 of the Constitution of India. The judiciary can intervene if it is of the view that provisions of the law or the Constitution have been violated) The experts warned that the hitherto isolated Shompens face a heightened risk of disease transmission from outsiders, a threat likely to balloon once construction starts.

The project proposes ‘geofencing’ using barbed wire to safeguard the Shompens from the power plant, whose site is close to their dwellings. This provision has been condemned by social ecologist Manish Chandi, who called it ‘brutish’, and emphasised that the forests rightfully belong to the Shompens, who have explicitly requested their lands be excluded from development plans.

The project necessitates the felling of nearly a million trees, impacting huge tracts of wildlife habitat. Conservationists warn that habitat destruction will increase human-wildlife conflict and disrupt species reliant on the island’s delicate ecosystem.

Nicobar long-tailed or crab-eating macaque (Macaca fascicularis umbrosa). (Source: Arijit Pal, Wikimedia Commons)

Key animal species under threat include the Nicobar long-tailed macaque, endemic to the island, and the giant leatherback sea turtle, which uses Galathea Bay—slated for port development—as a nesting site. In an astonishing natural phenomenon, female leatherbacks who hatched on the shore of Galathea Bay swim back to it over hundreds of miles of ocean to lay their eggs on the very same beach.

These turtles, a species little changed in 100 million years, the largest and most wide-ranging marine turtle species, are protected under India’s Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. They nest in only three regions, with Indonesia and Sri Lanka being the other two. Surveys show that the Andaman and Nicobar Islands host globally significant colonies. Some of the most crucial nesting beaches on Little Andaman and Great Nicobar face threats from these gargantuan projects.

A leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea). (Source: Rabon David, Wikimedia Commons)

Project feasibility and benefits unclear

The planned transshipment port, estimated to cost US $4.34 billion, faces significant economic and logistical concerns despite its touted strategic location. While the port aims to capitalise on the lucrative east-west trade corridor near the Malacca Strait, experts highlight key challenges:

Distance and Connectivity Issues: The island is over 1600 km from India’s mainland, requiring costly feeder vessels for cargo transport. Unlike ports in Colombo and Singapore, Nicobar lacks mainland connectivity and robust infrastructure.

High Construction Costs: Importing construction materials from the mainland will significantly inflate costs, potentially exceeding initial estimates. The island’s remote location complicates logistics.

Competition from Established Ports: Efficient ports in Singapore and Colombo, with turnaround times under 24 hours and established feeder networks, pose stiff competition. Great Nicobar's success will hinge on handling higher freight volumes and achieving efficiency.

Environmental and Weather Risks: Cyclones, tsunamis and seismic activity are frequent in the region, threatening infrastructure longevity and safety.

Feeder Vessel Shortage: India’s limited fleet of feeder ships further complicates operations, as these vessels are essential for transshipment.

 

Competing with or complementing Adani’s Vizhinjam port in Kerala?

The project’s viability is also challenged by Vizhinjam port (operated by Adani) in Kerala, India’s first transshipment hub, which is strategically located and offers lower costs. However, experts also suggest the ports could complement each other, with Great Nicobar serving India’s eastern coast. The latter’s success will ultimately depend on the volume of trade it attracts and overcoming logistical, environmental and financial hurdles.

As regards security, while some argue the port holds strategic importance for India’s maritime security, others remain sceptical of its economic feasibility. Some defence experts point out that India’s goals for defence and development could have been better achieved by strengthening existing facilities on Great Nicobar with a lighter, less disruptive approach.

For instance, Admiral Arun Prakash, former Indian Navy chief and Commander-in-Chief of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Joint Command, told Civil Society, a Delhi-based magazine, that India’s military presence on the islands is ‘not inadequate’ but could be reinforced without harming the island’s ecology. Admiral Prakash suggested that expanding existing infrastructure could meet the country’s defence needs without disrupting Great Nicobar’s ecological and anthropological wealth.

Given the proximity of Gautam Adani to Narendra Modi, Prime Minister of India, there is no dearth of people who believe that the project – warts and all – will be bagged by the Adani Group. The story is far from over.

The writers are independent journalists in India.