Events
& Issues
New Delhi, 18 April 2018
New Forest Policy
ECOSYSTEMS APPROACH VITAL
By Dhurjati Mukherjee
Forests have assumed critical
value in recent times across the globe due to ever-increasing pollution and
climate change. The earth’s largest ecosystem is the forest and there is no
alternative but to defend it. Importantly, in India the forest cover happens to
be the second largest land use, next to agriculture. It is assessed at around
67-68 million hectares, which constitutes 20.64% of the country's geographical
area, ranging from the Himalayan Temperate to dry zone forests.
In such a situation,
the recently announced draft National Forest Policy 2018, that seeks to replace
the country’s 30-year old policy, outlined the need to tackle fresh challenges
of climate change, human-wildlife conflict, intensifying water crisis,
pollution etc. but focussed only on enhancing tree cover and wood production
rather than on preserving forest ecosystems.
However, the policy
has come in for criticism from the nature conservation community. Sections of
the draft have left many experts befuddled. For example, how does one “enrich”
natural ecosystems teeming with wildlife? Why create forest cover on semi-arid
and desert ecosystems? Or “enhance nature’s ecosystem services through new
technological advancements?” Or contradicting statements like “however the low
quality and low productivity of our natural forests…issues of serious concern,”
viz natural forests which are rich repositories of biodiversity in the country.
Independent experts
have rightly expressed concern that the Policy fails to address current threats
to diverse forest ecosystems. It sets a goal of maintaining a minimum of
one-third of India’s land area under forest or tree cover-- outlined in post
independence forest policy of 1952 -- underscores the need to protect natural
forests, proposes strategies to increase forest productivity and recommend
steps to increase the area under plantation. Thus, productivity has been the focus
and not comprehensive forest management.
Meanwhile, the CPM
has demanded the withdrawal of the Policy, saying it is a blueprint to
commercialise and privatise forests, promote plantations, eliminate tribals and
traditional forest dwellers in ownership and control of non-timber forest
produce. In a note to Union Environment Ministry, the party pointed that the
Policy threatens to change the character of natural forests to plantation
forests and undermines ecological and social services such as water recharge,
erosion checking, fuels and fodder that forests provide.
While the Forest
Rights Act allows forest dwellers a say in forest-related decision, the note of
the party further stated, the draft policy “snatches away” the rights of gram
sabhas (village panchayats) for management of forests and instead hands it over
to proposed centrally controlled entities. This subordination to a government
and forest department controlled body, either at the Centre or in State
capitals, is another example of centralisation of powers and excluding local
communities.
The dilution of gram
sabha powers has been evident and this is about to happen in case of forests as
well. Though political leaders give sermons about the need for decentralisation
and involvement of the people and the community in decision-making process,
this is unfortunately not the reality.
The Policy, however,
reiterated the ‘Nationally Determined Targets under the Paris Agreement’, where
India promised to rapidly increase its forest cover so that an additional
carbon sink of 2.5 to 3 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent is created
by the year 2030. However, the strategy
to be adopted in this regard has not been clearly outlined.
As is well known,
trees and forests help by removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and
converting it during photosynthesis to carbon, which they store in the form of
wood and vegetation, a process referred to as “carbon sequestration”. Trees are
generally about 20% carbon by weight.
The overall biomass
of forests also acts as a carbon sink with the organic matter in forest soils
-- such as the humus produced by the decomposition of dead plants. The trees
and soils of the world’s forests storing more than a quarter of the world’s
carbon emissions and India having over 100 million hectares of wasteland and
degraded forests, mitigation through the forest sector and afforestation seems
like an attractive solution.
However, using
forests as carbon sinks has been a contentious issue. Fear is that it legitimises
the continued destruction of old-growth and pristine forests which are rich
ecosystem and have an established biodiversity base that naturally maintains
the environment. Creating new forest areas would require the creation of entire
ecosystems, which may not seem possible in most countries, including India.
The concept of
Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) was first
discussed in COP 11. India proposed the concept of ‘compensated conservation’
which is intended to compensate the countries for maintaining and increasing
their forests as carbon pools.
At present it is
necessary to evolve a strategy that primarily helps the people who are forest
dwellers as forests are not just about flora and fauna. In India, they meet the
demands of around 950 million people and around 450 million cattle with nearly
200,000 of India‘s villages located in or near forests. Out of the 15,000
species of plants 3,000 species provide non-timber forest produce (NTFP) like
fruits, nuts, edible flowers, medicines. These communities, dependent on forest
resources for their sustenance, are very much likely to be at the receiving end
of the anticipated adverse effects of climate change.
With the Clean
Development Mechanism and voluntary carbon offsets, payments for environmental
services schemes and increasing prices for commodities such as agro-fuels, palm
oil or soya, there is little reason for optimism. Moreover, as demand for land
increases, people are being pushed off their existing territories to make way
for infrastructure projects, parks etc. In such a situation the present
policy’s call for public-private participation has rightly been criticised by
environmentalists and some political parties.
Saving our forests is
vital for the country at a time when climate change has been affecting a large
section of the population. It is doubtful whether the realisation of protecting
our forests and turning them as reserves of our ecosystem is understood by the
bureaucrats and politicians in the country, who are in charge of framing
policies, which most often tend to be anti-people.
It is difficult to
agree with the Policy’s observation that “there has been an increase in forest
and tree cover and reduction in the diversion of forest land…
despite…increasing population, industrialisation and rapid economic growth.”
Deep forests have remained more or less the same while diversion has been on
the increase. In 2013, an RTI application filed by environmental lawyers,
Ritwich Dutta and Rahul Choudhary revealed that the country, on an average, loses
135 hectares of natural forest land per day to development schemes. As of 2017,
the government passed about 10,000 approvals related to forest diversions.
Finally, while
support for industrial forestry within the country cannot be doubted, it is
best done by benefitting all stakeholders. A forest is after all not a mere
stand of over-mature timber but a home to forest-dwelling communities as also
wildlife. The ecosystem services from forests, both financially tangible and
otherwise, provide sustainability to the national economy and resilience to
climate change.
Thus, what is
required is actually an ecosystems approach with focus on climate justice and
the rights and role of local communities. It should also address biodiversity
and poverty effectively and challenge the underlying causes of deforestation
directly, resolving governance, poverty and land tenure issues.---INFA
(Copyright, India
News & Feature Alliance)
|