Date : 15/11/2023

Relevance:GS Paper 3 – Environment and Ecology

Keywords:FRA amendment 2023, Compensatory Afforestation, JPC

Context-

The Forest Conservation Amendment Act of 2023, representing the latest addition to a series of laws spanning back to the colonial era, has stirred controversy with its potential implications for forests and indigenous communities. Initially positioned as a response to climate change and deforestation, the amendment raises concerns about the exclusion of indigenous rights in favor of economic interests. This comprehensive analysis will delve into the key provisions, the background leading to the amendment, the role of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC), changes to the stipulation of 'prior consent,' compensatory afforestation, and the impact on the Forest Rights Act (FRA). It will also scrutinize the challenges and implications of implementing the amendment, emphasizing the need for a balanced approach.

Overview of the Amendment:

The Forest Conservation Amendment Act of 2023 primarily targets climate change and deforestation, emphasizing effective management and afforestation. The central theme involves shifting forests away from legal jurisdiction, allowing various forms of economic exploitation. The amendment narrows the application of forest laws to specific areas, excluding those converted for non-forest use after 1996 and lands within 100 kilometers of the China and Pakistan border for potential linear projects. Notably, security infrastructure can be established in designated areas, prompting concerns from indigenous communities and human rights activists. Initiatives like ecotourism and safari are proposed to enhance livelihoods, sparking criticism from tribal communities.

Genesis of the Amendment:

The roots of this amendment trace back to the Godavarman Thirumulkpad case in 1996, which interpreted forest land based on its 'dictionary meaning.' This interpretation led to the inclusion of all private forests under the 1980 law, triggering debates over restrictions on forest land use for non-forest purposes, including industrial development. The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill, introduced in response to these concerns, underwent examination by a 31-member Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) with only six opposition members. Despite extensive discussions, the Bill passed both houses of Parliament without substantial debates or consultations with southern states.

JPC Recommendations and Parliamentary Approval:

The JPC's report, submitted within three months, seemingly disregarded critical comments, resulting in reduced dissenting notes. The lack of collaborative discussions with southern states raised concerns about regional considerations. Following parliamentary approval, the Odisha government's attempt to revoke the "deemed forest" status faced public outrage, emphasizing the need for detailed rules and guidelines from the Central Ministry. The amendment's passage without substantial debate underscores the limited engagement with stakeholders, particularly indigenous communities.

Erosion of 'Prior Consent' Stipulation:

The Forest Conservation Act underwent amendments in 2016 and 2017, mandating prior consent from tribal grama sabhas for any non-forest alterations. However, the recent amendment removed this requirement, allowing state governments to engage grama sabhas proactively. Despite this provision, concerns persist about preconceived notions of Adivasi grama sabhas being 'anti-development,' hindering decisions that could affect economically lucrative initiatives.

Compensatory Afforestation Challenges:

Compensatory afforestation, a key component of the amendment, includes projects by private individuals and organizations for afforestation or reforestation. While the goal is to streamline the process, concerns linger about potential environmental implications. The law mandates afforestation elsewhere for every parcel lost, but the absence of tree-type specifications raises questions about environmental impact and sustainability.

Impact on Forest Rights Act (FRA):

The Forest Rights Act (FRA) has played a pivotal role in empowering communities, yet its implementation faces challenges. State governments, perceiving the FRA as a hindrance to converting forest land, opt to limit Adivasi claims by reducing or diluting forest areas rather than amending the FRA. The amendment falls short in addressing human-animal conflicts in Adivasi hamlets, jeopardizing both livelihoods and wildlife.

Challenges and Implications:

1. Indigenous Rights Erosion:
   The amendment, by excluding indigenous communities from crucial decision-making processes, undermines their historical connection to forest lands. This erosion of rights raises concerns about cultural preservation, community livelihoods, and the potential exploitation of indigenous territories.
2. Prior Consent and Stakeholder Participation:
   The removal of the 'prior consent' stipulation weakens the participatory role of tribal grama sabhas, raising questions about the inclusivity of decision-making. This shift may exacerbate existing tensions between state governments, perceived as pro-development, and Adivasi communities, labeled 'anti-development.'
3. Compensatory Afforestation Ambiguities:
   Despite efforts to streamline compensatory afforestation, the lack of specificity regarding tree types and environmental impact assessment introduces ambiguities. This ambiguity may lead to afforestation initiatives that prioritize economic gains over ecological sustainability, potentially exacerbating deforestation issues.
4. Forest Rights Act (FRA) Implementation Challenges:
   The reluctance of both Central and State governments to fully embrace the Forest Rights Act (FRA) hampers its intended impact. State governments, viewing the FRA as a hindrance to development, may choose to dilute forest areas rather than address the underlying issues, limiting the empowerment of Adivasi communities.
5. Human-Animal Conflict and Livelihood Threats:
   The lack of provisions addressing human-animal conflicts in Adivasi hamlets, particularly in the Western Ghats region, poses threats to both community livelihoods and wildlife conservation. Balancing the needs of Adivasi communities and wildlife protection requires a more nuanced and region-specific approach.
6. Decentralized Forest Governance Challenges:
   The clash between the economic incentives of afforestation initiatives and the principles of decentralized forest governance challenges the spirit of federal norms. Balancing economic interests with local governance practices under the concurrent list poses complexities that need careful consideration.
7. Environmental Security Prioritization:
   The amendment's focus on economic gains and security measures raises questions about the prioritization of internal environmental security. While external threats are acknowledged, internal environmental concerns, such as natural disasters, require more explicit attention and prioritization in the legislative framework.
8. Potential for Unequal Economic Impact:
   Initiatives like ecotourism and safari, while aimed at improving livelihoods, may lead to unequal economic impacts. Ensuring that economic benefits are distributed equitably among local communities, rather than concentrating wealth in specific areas, is essential for sustainable development.
9. Lack of Consultation with Southern States:
   The absence of collaborative discussions with southern states regarding their specific geographical considerations highlights a potential disconnect in the legislative process. Regional variations in ecological and socio-economic contexts need to be adequately addressed to ensure fair and effective implementation.
10. Public Outcry and Governance Issues:
    Instances like the Odisha government's attempt to revoke the "deemed forest" status, followed by public outrage, underline potential governance issues and the importance of transparent communication. Public engagement and consultation are crucial to building trust and ensuring effective implementation at the grassroots level.

Conclusion:

The Forest Conservation Amendment Act of 2023, though ostensibly targeting climate change and deforestation, raises significant concerns about indigenous rights and environmental sustainability. The exclusion of indigenous communities from crucial decision-making processes, erosion of prior consent stipulations, and potential environmental implications of compensatory afforestation underscore the need for a more nuanced approach. The amendment's impact on the Forest Rights Act and human-animal conflicts further emphasizes the importance of striking a balance between economic interests and environmental conservation. Moving forward, a comprehensive and inclusive dialogue involving all stakeholders, especially indigenous communities, is essential to ensure sustainable and equitable forest management in the face of evolving environmental challenges.

Source- The Hindu