Environmental and socio-economic impacts of a Hydropower Plant in North East India: Perception of rural people

INTRODUCTION

Energy demand is constantly rising in emerging countries like India to accelerate industrial activity and economy [1]. Renewable energy is an integral component of a nation’s economic growth, sustainable environment, and accelerating the efforts towards climate change mitigation/climate action [2-3]. In a global survey of 2016, around 14% of the world’s population i.e., about 1.1 billion people are deprived of adequate access to electricity [4]. Further, these estimates, emphasized that the majority of people living in rural parts of developing countries (84 %), particularly in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa received no electric supply [5]. In these developing nations, biomass and fossil fuels are the sources of energy for the majority of the rural population [4]. Global burning of fossil fuels accounts for 78.4% of energy consumption, while renewable sources, which are divided into several sub-categories (e.g., hydropower, biomass, biofuel, solar, and wind power) account for 19% [6-7]. However, fossil fuel reserves are depleting at a high rate and the traditional use of solid biomass for cooking which is widely practiced is detrimental to the health of humans and the environment [8]. Therefore, there exists an urgent need to shift towards cleaner alternative energy sources due to the rapidly increasing prices of fossil fuels and pollution resulting from the continuous use of these biomass and fuels [8].

Hydropower projects are considered to have less influence on society and the environment when compared with other conventional energy sources [9-10]. About 70% of the energy generated by all renewable sources comes from hydropower plants, a versatile technology that can also have positive social and economic effects[4]. In addition to producing energy, a hydropower project can help with irrigation, flood control, and ecotourism[11]. India has a great deal of potential for small and medium-sized hydropower projects. These projects might help meet the country’s rising energy needs [12]. Depending on their sizes, hydropower projects are divided into large and small hydro projects. Various nations use different size standards to categorize minor hydropower projects. Small hydropower plants (SHPs) in India are defined as those having a capacity of 25 MW or less [13]. The details of installed capacity to delineate the hydropower projects are listed in Table 1. SHPs are widely employed in rural electrification projects all over the world [14]. It has generally been perceived that rural communities benefit instantly and directly from these projects [14]. However, the perception of rural people on the establishment of SHPs should be prioritized in environmental management and policy formulation perspectives.

The state of Mizoram in North-Eastern India has a distinct geography and rich endemic biodiversity of ethno-medicinal plants [15]. Ecologically, the study region is an integral landscape of the Indo-Burma biodiversity hotspot [16-17]. Serlui B Hydropower Plant in Mizoram, North-Eastern state of India is an SHP that generates less than 25 MW of electricity, as classified by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (Table 1). Few studies attempted to characterize the impact of a hydropower plant on the water quality of Serlui B River and revealed moderate effects [18]. However, there exist scant studies on the effect of renewable energy resources on society and the environment. Most of the studies attempted to study the environmental effects of Thermal Power plants which are non-renewable sources of energy production [2]. Nevertheless, to our knowledge, the societal perception ofthe environmental as well as socio-economic effects of hydropower plants has not been studied, especially concerning rural indigenous populations. This article, therefore aims to provide first-hand information on the societal perception of the Serlui B Hydropower Plant. An in-depth study on the societal perception is of great importance as the indigenous rural inhabitants are subjected to all the environmental and economic changes occurring due to the construction of the power plant.

2.MATERIALS AND METHODS                         

2.1 Study Site

The Serlui B hydropower project(24°20′18.98″ N 94°46′06.86″ E)is located on the Serlui River,12 Km fromBilkhawthlir village and the national highwayin the Kolasib district of Mizoram, India (Figure 1). The research area is located in the Indo-Burma biodiversity hotspot [19-21], which has a high percentage of forest cover with a wide variety of flora and fauna. The Serlui B dam was constructed in 2003 and completed in 2009. The earth-fill embankment dam is 51.3 m high above the riverbed, 293 m long, 8 m thickat the top, and 394.2 m broad at the bottom. With a life storage capacity of 453.59 cubic millilitres of water and 3 turbinesof 4 MW producing 12 MW of power. The catchment area is 397 km² and there is 3028.6 mm of rainfall per year [22]. Before the construction of the dam Builum village used to be situated in the SHP region but the village is now completely submerged due to the construction of the dam [23]. The affected inhabitants were moved to Bawktlang, a neighbourhood settlement located near Kolasib village.

2.2 Methodology

Mixed methods were primarily used in the present research to collect relevant information and to determine the environmental and socioeconomic impact of the Serlui B Hydropower Project.The information was collected employing interviews and questionnaire methods[24]. Accordingly, the methods of questionnaire, interview, and direct observation were applied for collecting data in the present study. All respondents were inhabitants of the study area which was in close vicinity of the SHP region.

2.2.1 Questionnaire development

Questionnaires were used for this research to determine the socio-economic implications and to make notes of the societal perception ofthe Serlui B SHP. The questionnaire was created to gather data about the construction history of the SHP, its effects on the surrounding environment, the river water quality, and the livelihood of the rural people belonging to Bilkhawthlir, a nearby village. The questionnaire was also structured to enquire the residents of the rural area about their observations on the SHP in terms of detrimental and advantageous effects on the environment and economy. The research layout is carefully considered to collect useful and pertinent information as per the method devised by Roopa and Rani [25].

2.2.3Data collection and analysis

A total of 13 questionnaires were collected from the local people settled near the Serlui B River and Bilkhawthlir area. The size of respondents was restricted as the small interactive human population was located near the SHP,andthemajority of the rural people were shifted to remote locations. Table 2 shows the demographic profile related to the present socio-economic survey to assess societal perception. The respondents were selected from the study areas based on the knowledge that he/she has come across the SHP. The responses of the individuals were recorded and noted down on the questionnaire. In addition, the data recorded were summarized and processed for references or literary interpretation.

Out of the 13 respondents, 85% were already residents of Bilkhawthlir when the construction of the SHP was initiated and 15% of them moved into the village after the construction was over. Table 3 shows the overall opinions of the respondents on the changes brought about by the Serlui B SHP in the context of the environment and socio-economy or livelihood of the rural people.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Impacts of Serlui B small hydropower plant on agricultural activities

In the questionnaire survey, none of the respondents used the river water for agriculture. Among the respondents, 62% benefit from the SHP due to the employment benefits. Whereas, 38% of the respondents were not directly benefitted in terms of economic gains, and were recipients of energy supply only. In this respect, 92.3% of the respondents utilized the energy produced for their daily household use. In the present study, only one respondent (8 %) claimed that their family relies on solar energy. None of the informants utilize the river water or energy from SHP for the plantation and management of ethnomedicinal plants. The findings of our survey were similar to the study of Harlan et al. [26] which noted that there are three main societal repercussions of SHP. These repercussions were listed as decreased availability of irrigation water, modifications to agricultural activities, and negative impacts on river health. In a community study conducted in Bolivia and the Philippines, the improved power supply is the most significant contribution of SHP as it allowed the communities to stay active innightlife after dusk [27].

3.2 Impacts of a small hydropower plant on the Serlui River

In the present study, 54% of the respondents stated that the quality of the river water had deteriorated after the construction of the SHP. This may be attributed to an increase in decomposed litter of the depleted forest and living organisms. They also mentioned that the water has an intolerably bad odor, especially in the region where SHP effluent is discharged (Table 4). In a recent study by Zhang et al. [28], a quantitative decrease in water levels was observed due to the extensive and disorganized SHP construction, which has reduced water supply for domestic and agricultural purposes. In the survey, 15% of the informants claimed that before the construction of the SHP locals utilized the river water for washing clothes and bathing but they have stopped such activities due to the deterioration of water quality. The rest of the remaining respondents stated that they did not visit the river or utilize the river water for any domestic activities.

3.3Impacts of small hydropower plant (Serlui B dam) on aquatic organisms

In the questionnaire survey, 77% of the respondents observed that the fish present in the river after the construction of the SHP have become much larger in size and quantity. However, the rest 23% of the respondents stated that many fish species such as Tor putitora (local name – Nghahrah) and Labeocalbasu (local name – Tunzen) disappeared or underwent extirpation due to the construction of SHP. The loss of fish species was well supported by the observation of Arantes et al. [29], who recorded the loss of migratory fish species after the establishment of a hydropower dam. It has been observed that SHP disturbs the equilibrium of the aquatic environment and has the potential to change its temperature, thereby resulting in thermal pollution [30]. Temperature changes can harm aquatic ecosystems as living organisms and wildlife populations require optimum temperature for normal metabolism [30]. A similar case was observed by Merona et al. [31] in Brazil, where fish diversity declined in the reservoir as a result of the Tucurui hydropower dam. Also, the reservoir’s transition to a lotic environment eliminated or drastically reduced populations of rheophilic fish species [32]. In certain cases, warm water can be favorable for the growth and culturing of some commercial fish species such as trout [33].

3.4Role of power plant-produced energy and aquaculture in socio-economic/livelihood prospects

In the context of livelihood, 62% of the respondents opined that SHP is beneficial for livelihood as it has created job opportunities for the people of their village. The creation of SHP provided a constant and sufficient power supply to villagers.  In this respect, other studies also supported the present observation on the social impact that the establishment of SHP creates job opportunities for local people [34]. Although the majority of the respondents and locals have benefitted from the SHP, some inhabitants along the Serlui B River dependent on subsistence plantation/farming were adversely affected due to the establishment of SHP. The government has prohibited such activities in the SHP area and such land uses are often submerged with exceeding water levels of the dam.  This observation followed a recent incident in Lohar Village in Uttarakhand, wherein the Hydropower project of Vyasi submerged the land area assigned for the livelihood [35]. In this context, the villagers whose main sources of livelihood were dependent on farming and raising livestock are now demanding compensatory land [35].

The majority of the respondents (92.3 %) stated that aquaculture does not affect the production of foodstuffs (crops and other edible plants). Whereas, the remaining respondents (7.7 %) reported that the construction of the SHP has provided easy access to lands for the Areca nut plantation. Although owning a plantation in the river area is prohibited by the government. Half of the respondents opined that aquaculture is partly responsible for the deterioration of water quality. More than half of the respondents confirmed that aquaculture has improved their livelihood as it has provided them with economic benefits. In corroboration with the present study, a Russian investigation also observed that the hydropower plant and fish farming were found to be closely related which can further strengthen the livelihood [33]. This study [33] observed that hydropower plants created favorable conditions for the farming of commercial fish species.

In the context of energy and livelihood, the survey obtained positive results from the respondents. This is because 100% of the informants stated that the residents of Bilkhawthlir have received a sufficient and constant energy supply due to the SHP. They also answered that the SHP has provided many families with job opportunities and stable income. Regarding livelihood, many subsistence plantations owned by locals have been ceased as the land is now government-owned. The forced relocation and displacement of the Builum population living near and within SHP sites may be considered as the SHP’s serious implication in terms of social impact. In 2009, 80 families formally accepted the government’s offer of resettlement and compensation. According to the 2011 population census [36], the village still exists, with 44families dispersed around their original property. According to Galipeau et al. [37], it was observed that the availability of jobs for the local people was one of the major benefits of the dam project. On the contrary, research conducted in China by Huang et al. [38] found that the Dam project had detrimental effects on the host community’s employment rate, income level, source of income, and general human well-being.

3.5Societal Perception of a hydropower project on environment and employment opportunities

In the present study, 92.3 %  of the respondents perceived the negative effects of SHP on the environment. This is due to the excessive deforestation for the establishment of SHP and the submergence of flora and fauna caused by the dam. However, 7.7% of the respondents claimed that the impacts are positive as the area is not easily accessible for the locals which offers safety to wildlife. In the survey, 77% of the respondents did not opt to reside near the SHP and the remaining 23% of marginal inhabitants feel anxious about living near the SHP giventhe possible occurrence of natural calamities like regional floods. However, they reported that they are gradually adapted to live near the SHP reservoir area. All of the respondents opined that the SHP is beneficial for their village not only because it has provided them with jobs but also because it has made the transportation of wood and other goods easier.

In the survey, 30% of the respondents think that the adverse effects of SHP on the environment undermine its installed energy production. While the remaining 70% of respondents were satisfied with the amount of energy distributed from the SHP. One respondent opined that the construction of the SHP has deterioratedtheaesthetic or scenic value of their village which is further exacerbated by the deterioration of the water quality. The rest of the respondents (92.3%) claimed that the changes are positive as it has benefitted the villagers with job opportunities and a constant energy supply.

3.6Effect of the Hydropower plant on flora, ethnomedicinal plants, and fauna present in the area

Among the respondents, 46% opined that the rising level of water due to the construction of SHP has caused the submergence and disappearance of several species of flora and ethnomedicinal plants. The rest i.e., 54% of respondents observed no changes or impact on the flora and ethnomedicinal plants (Table 5).  In a study conducted in Western Himalaya, a total of 165 plant species, including several medicinal plants were not included for conservation priority in the submergence zone [39]. In the context of fauna, 61% of the respondents have observed that the rising water levels and submergence of forest land have threatened wildlife habitats. A study conducted in the Himalayas proved that construction activities for hydropower projects have an impact on the animal habitat due to disturbed forest biodiversity and land fragmentation [40].

 Classification of the impact of a small hydropower project on flora, ethnomedicinal plants, fauna, and the changes observed in the sectors of Water-Energy-Food after the functioning of Serlui B Hydropower Plant.

3.7Contribution of Hydropower Projectto climate change or climatic variables

In the questionnaire survey, 8% of the respondents claimed that the construction of the SHP caused the increment of rainfall and therefore, may have a positive impact on the environment.  Whereas, about 61% of the respondents stated that the presence of the SHP harms the environment and the climatic conditions of their village. The majority of the respondents agreed that the establishment of the SHP has brought deforestation and extreme climate. The rise in water levels due to the dam has caused the submergence of a large area of the forest. Few respondents also observed rising wind speeds, along with an increase in radiation and evaporation. Winter temperatures are lower and summer temperatures are also noticeably higher along with high air humidity and frequent occurrence of fog. However, in other studies such as on SHP in Chukogu, China imposed less effect on the environment [41]. The formation of impoundment can readily be eutrophicated, unlike natural lakes. Other studies also noted that the abrupt shift in the trophic status i.e., oligotrophic to eutrophic can result in the deterioration of water quality, aquaculture, and native aquatic diversity [42].

Furthermore, The SHP is responsible for the low rainfall and high humidity in the built environment, as perceived by 54% of the respondents. In the summer, fog can be found not just alongside the river and SHP area but also in the nearby villages. The respondents believed that the SHP and dam may result in such abnormal weather phenomena. Climate change and hydropower exhibit a dual intricate relationship [43]. Hydropower plants can greatly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help to slow down global warming but it may affect the local climate or climatic variables [44] which may also interact with the chemical ecology of invasive alien plants [44-51].

4. CONCLUSIONS

Present research evidenced that the respondents are aware of the negative impact of the SHP and dam along with its contribution to local climate change. However, the majority of them still prefer hydropower plants over coal-based thermal as they believe that coal-based thermal plants will have more detrimental effects than the Hydropower plant.Fromthe Indian perspective, excessive reliance on thermal power plants for energy production may be the underlying reason for its status of being the 3^rd biggest carbon emitter as thermal power plants can exert more damage to the environment giventhe release of toxic air pollutants and heated effluents enriched with heavy metals. Therefore, the transition from thermal power energy source to SHP can be less detrimental to the environment. Nevertheless, further studies are warranted to explore the effects of SHP on climatic variables, composition of plants (especially, invasive alien plants), socio-economy, and water-energy-food nexus.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors are thankful to the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India for financial assistance in the form of a National Fellowship for ST, Department of Biotechnology (DBT‐BT/PR24917/NER/95/907/2017), and the Department of Science and Technology (DST‐ Nexus Project) vide research project no. DST/TMD/EWO/WTI/2K19/EWFH/2019 (C), for financial assistance.The authors also acknowledged the Department of Environmental Science, Mizoram University for their crucial assistance.

DECLARATION

The authors announce that they have no conflict of interest and follow the ethical norms established by our respective institutions.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

• Majid, M. (2020). Renewable energy for sustainable development in India: current status, future prospects, challenges, employment, and investment opportunities. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 10(1), 1-36.
• Rai, P.K. (2021). Heavy metals and arsenic phytoremediation potential of invasive alien wetland plants Phragmiteskarka and Arundodonax: Water-Energy-Food (WEF) Nexus linked sustainability implications. Bioresource Technology Reports, 15, 100741.
• Singh, V.K. and Nath, T. (2021). Energy generation by small hydro power plant under different operating condition. International Journal of Hydromechatronics, 4(4), 331-349.
• International Energy Agency (IEA). (2017). Tracking Clean Energy Progress 2017 – Analysis. [Online] Available at: https://www.iea.org/reports/tracking-clean-energy-progress-2017.
• International Energy Agency (IEA). (2014). FACTSHEET Energy in Sub-Saharan Africa today. Paris: IEA, World Energy Outlook, 2014.
• Faizal, M., Fong, L. J., Chiam, J., and Amirah, A. (2017). Energy, economic and environmental impact of hydropower in Malaysia. International Journal of Advanced Scientific Research and Management, 2(4), 33-42.
• Chhandama, M. V. L., Rai, P. K. andLalawmpuii. (2023). Coupling bioremediation and biorefinery prospects of microalgae for circular economy. Bioresource Technology Reports, 22, 101479.
• Razan, J. I., Islam, R. S., Hasan, R., Hasan, S., and Islam, F. (2012). A Comprehensive Study of Micro‐Hydropower Plant and Its Potential in Bangladesh. International Scholarly Research Notices, 2012(1), 635396.
• Singh, V.K. and Singal, S.K. (2017). Operation of hydro power plants-a review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 69, 610-619.
• Nautiyal, H. and Goel, V. (2020). Sustainability assessment of hydropower projects. Journal of Cleaner Production, 265, 121661.
• Ogino, K., Dash, S.K. and Nakayama, M. (2019). Change to hydropower development in Bhutan and Nepal. Energy for Sustainable Development, 50, 1-17.
• Mishra, M.K., Khare, N. and Agrawal, A.B. (2015). Small hydro power in India: Current status and future perspectives. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 51, 101-115.
• Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRI).https://mnre.gov.in/en/small-hydro-overview/#:~:text=Hydro%20Power%20projects%20are%20classified,are%20classified%20as%20Small%20Hydro.
• Butchers, J., Williamson, S., Booker, J., Tran, A., Karki, P. B., and Gautam, B. (2020). Understanding sustainable operation of micro-hydropower: A field study in Nepal. Energy for Sustainable Development, 57, 12-21.
• Rai, P.K. and Lalramnghinglova, H. (2011). Threatened and less known ethnomedicinal plants of an Indo-Burma hotspot region: conservation implications. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 178, 53-62.
• Rai, P.K. (2015). Paradigm of plant invasion: multifaceted review on sustainable management. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 187, 1-30.
• Rai, P.K. and Singh, J.S. (2021). Plant invasion in protected areas, the Indian Himalayan region, and the North East India: progress and prospects. Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy, 87(1), 19-35.
• Sunar, S. (2018). Impacts of serlui-b hydel Project on water quality and ecology of macrophytes of Serlui River in Kolasib district, Mizoram (Doctoral dissertation, Mizoram University).
• Rai, P.K. (2009). Comparative Assessment of Soil Properties after Bamboo Flowering and Death in a Tropical Forest of Indo-Burma Hot spot. Ambio, 38 (2), 118-120.
• Rai, P.K. (2012). Assessment of multifaceted environmental issues and model development of an Indo-Burma hotspot region. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 184, 113-131.
• Rai, P.K. and Vanlalruati(2022). Societal perception on environmental and socio-economic implications of Tithoniadiversifolia (Hemsl.) A. Gray invasion in an Indo-Burma biodiversity hotspot. Environmental & Socio-economic Studies, 10(3), 59-66.
• Department of Public Health Engineering, Kolasib, Mizoram, 2012
• Chhetri P. (2010). Serlui B a milestone in the Power Sector. Eastern Panorama. http://www.easternpanorama.in/index.php/cover-story/61-2010/september/1130-serlui-b-a-milestone-in-the-power-sector
• Hox, J. J., &Boeije, H. R. (2005). Data collection, primary vs. secondary. Encyclopedia of social measurement, 1(1), 593-599.
• Roopa, S. and Rani, M.S. (2012). Questionnaire designing for a survey. Journal of Indian Orthodontic Society, 46(4_suppl1), 273-277.
• Harlan, T., Xu, R., and He, J. (2021). Is small hydropower beautiful? Social impacts of river fragmentation in China’s Red River Basin. Ambio, 50, 436-447.
• Arnaiz, M., Cochrane, T.A., Hastie, R. and Bellen, C. (2018). Micro-hydropower impact on communities’ livelihood analysed with the capability approach. Energy for Sustainable Development, 45, 206-210.
• Zhang, L., Pang, M., Bahaj, A. S., Yang, Y., and Wang, C. (2021). Small hydropower development in China: Growing challenges and transition strategy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 137, 110653.
• Arantes, C.C., Fitzgerald, D.B., Hoeinghaus, D.J. and Winemiller, K.O. (2019). Impacts of hydroelectric dams on fishes and fisheries in tropical rivers through the lens of functional traits. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 37, 28-40.
• Bobat, A. (2015). Thermal Pollution Caused by Hydropower Plants. In: Bilge, A., Toy, A., Günay, M. (eds) Energy Systems and Management. Springer Proceedings in Energy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16024-5_2
• Mérona, B., Juras, A.A., Santos, G.M. and Cintra, I.H.A. (2010). Fishes and fisheries in the lower Tocantins River: Twenty years after the Tucuruí hydroelectric dam. Eletrobras/Eletronorte. Brasília.
• Alho, C.J., Reis, R.E. and Aquino, P.P. (2015). Amazonian freshwater habitats experiencing environmental and socioeconomic threats affecting subsistence fisheries. Ambio, 44, 412-425.
• Kalayda, M.L. and Dementiev, D.S. (2019), July. Creation of trout farms on the basis of power plant water cooler reservoirs. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 288, No. 1, 012047). IOP Publishing.
• Galipeau, B. A., Ingman, M., and Tilt, B. (2013). Dam-induced displacement and agricultural livelihoods in China’s Mekong Basin. Human Ecology, 41, 437-446.
• Ty, P. H., Laura, B., Phuong, T. T., & Tan, N. Q. (2023). Impoverishment persistence in hydropower dam-induced resettled communities: a sociological investigation on livelihood and food security in Vietnam. Social Sciences, 12(4), 222.
• Population Census 2011. https://www.census2011.co.in/data/village/271168-builum-mizoram.html
• Galipeau, B.A., Ingman, M. and Tilt, B. (2013). Dam-Induced Displacement and Agricultural Livelihoods in China’s Mekong Basin. Human Ecology, 41, 437–446.
• Huang, Y., Lin, W., Li, S. and Ning, Y. (2018). Social impacts of dam-induced displacement and resettlement: A comparative case study in China. Sustainability, 10(11), 4018.
• Panwar, S., Agrawal, D.K., Negi, G.C., Kanwal, K.S., Sharma, V., Lodhi, M.S., Singh, J. and Bhatt, V. (2010). Impact assessment of a hydroelectric project on the flora in the Western Himalayan region based on vegetation analysis and socio-economic studies. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 53(7), 907-923.
• Asher, M., and Bhandari, P. (2021). Mitigation or myth? Impacts of hydropower development and compensatory afforestation on forest ecosystems in the high Himalayas. Land Use Policy, 100, 105041.
• Mitsumori, Y. (2016). Impact of introduction of renewable energy on local community: small hydro power plants in Chugoku Region. In 2016 5th IIAI International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI) (770-774). IEEE.
• Abbasi, T. and Abbasi, S.A. (2011). Small hydro and the environmental implications of its extensive utilization. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(4), 2134-2143.
• Berga, L. (2016). The role of hydropower in climate change mitigation and adaptation: a review. Engineering, 2(3), 313-318
• Wasti, A., Ray, P., Wi, S., Folch, C., Ubierna, M. and Karki, P. (2022). Climate change and the hydropower sector: A global review. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 13(2), 757.
• Syngkli, R.B., Vanlalruati, Rai, P.K., (2024) Study on the impact of MikaniamicranthaKunthon soil chemistry,crop yields, andforest canopy in an Indo-Burma biodiversity hotspot region. Environmental Reports, DOI:https://doi.org/10.51470/ER.2024.6.2.08
• Syngkli, R.B. and Rai, P.K., (2024). Allelopathic effects of Ageratum conyzoides L. on the germination and growth of Zea mays L., Lactucasativa L. and Solanumlycopersicum L. Allelopathy Journal, 62(2), 193-204.
• Rai, P. K., Lee, S. S., Bhardwaj, N. and Kim, K. H. (2023). The environmental, socio-economic, and health effects of invasive alien plants: Review on Tithoniadiversifolia (Hemsl.) A. Gray in Asteraceae. South African journal of botany, 162, 461-480.
• Rai, P.K., Singh, J.S. (2020). Invasive alien plant species: Their impact on environment, ecosystem services and human health. Ecological indicators, 111, 106020.
• Rai, P.K., Nongtri, E.S., Lalawmpuii, Syngkli, R.B., (2024) Pistia Stratiotes based heavy metals phytoremediation of a Himalayan river impacted by hydroelectric plant in an Indo Burma hotspot region. Chemistry and Ecology 40(7), 796–815.

• Syngkli, R.B., Rai, P. K., Lalnuntluanga (2025). Expanding horizon of invasive alien plants under the interacting effects of global climate change: Multifaceted impacts and management prospects. Climate Change Ecology 9, 100092.
• Rai, P.K., Singh, J.S., (2024). Ecological insights and environmental threats of invasive alien plant Chromolaena odorata: Prospects for sustainable management. Weed Biology and Management 24 (1), 25-37.