The government of India had made an election promise that it will ensure speed and effectiveness for issuing environmental clearances. Why do you think that project nods for such green belts need more scrutiny?

The government’s promise to expedite environmental clearances, especially in forest areas, needs careful evaluation. While economic development is crucial, preserving eco-sensitive regions and protecting tribal rights is equally vital. Increased scrutiny is warranted for several reasons.

• First, compensatory afforestation through paperwork is not the same as preserving biodiverse native forests that host indigenous flora and fauna. Planting monoculture tree plantations cannot adequately compensate for felling old-growth forests.
• Second, conflicts around land acquisition and displacement of forest-dwelling communities frequently erupt when companies secure forest clearances. Proper social impact assessments, public consultations and fair compensation as per tribal rights legislation are often lacking. This leads to resistance and unrest.
• Third, monitoring of compliance with conditions like afforestation and waste management is weak after permits are granted. This results in environmental violations. Tighter follow-up protocols are essential.

While the CAMPA fund can finance compensatory afforestation, utilizing these funds more transparently and expanding forest cover responsibly is vital. Ultimately, economic goals must align with social and ecological imperatives. Rather than fast-tracking permits, the government should strengthen environment regulation and enforce accountability on all stakeholders. Balanced development – which protects people, wildlife and ecosystems while enabling sustainable business – must be the goal.

Topics: GS-III: Conservation Environmental Pollution Degradation