10/3/2015

DangersoftheGreenIndiaMission

DangersoftheGreenIndiaMission

Aformulaformorelandandresourcegrabbing
AFormulaforMoreLandandResourceGrabbing:DangersoftheGreenIndiaMission
ForestMovements'JointStatement

As national platforms of forest dwellers' movements and struggle organisations, we strongly oppose the Green
India Mission recently announced by the Ministry of Environment and as part of the National Action Plan for
ClimateChange.ThisMission,initscurrentform,willleadtoincreasedlandgrabbing,violationof
people's rights, environmental destruction, and loss of common lands and livelihoods based on
them,withoutinanywaygenuinelyrespondingtotheburningproblemofclimatechange.

India'sforestsandforestlandsarethehomelandsofmillionsofpeople,theadivasisandother
forest dwellers. Huge areas of land officially classified as forest are in fact being lived in, cultivated or
otherwiseusedanddependeduponbyforestdwellers.DespitetheForestRightsActof2006,however,their
communityrightstocommonforests,landsetc.arestillbeingtrampleduponandignored.

The Forest Department's main green activity is tree plantations. Such afforestation programmes often
takeplaceoncultivatedlands(includingshiftingcultivationfallows),villagecommons,communitypasture
lands etc. that actually belong to people they also destroy biodiversity rich natural open forests and
grasslands, reducing people's access to forest produce and animal fodder. In October 2008, the Standing
1

CommitteeonEnvironmentandForestssharplycriticisedsuchprograms ,sayingafforestation...deprives
forestdwellersandadivasisofsomeoralloftheirlandsandimpactstheirlivelihoodsandbasicneedsfor
whichtheyareneitherinformed,norconsulted,norcompensated.

ThisiswhattheGreenIndiaMissionseekstopromote,despitelipservicetothecontrary.Thetrueimpactofany
policyisshapednotbyitsrhetoricbutbyitsinstitutionalstructure:
1.Despitemuchtalkofgramsabhaandvillagebasedmanagement,alltheMission'sbodiesabovethevillage

theDivisionandStateForestDevelopmentAgenciesetc.arecontrolledbytheForestDepartment(Paragraph
E).Howisthegramsabhatomanageanythingiffunds,policiesandcoordinationarecontrolledbytheForest
Department?
2.Withinthevillage,thenonstatutoryJointForestManagementCommitteeisslippedinasasubcommitteeof
thegramsabha,whenitis,onceagain,controlledbytheForestDepartmentandnotaccountabletothevillage.
There is even talk of twisting the Forest Rights Act which explicitly provides for gram sabha control over
forests to legitimise JFM Committees and vest them with legal status (Paragraph 5.4.1.(b)). Thus, the
undermining of local control begins in the policy text itself. Instead of replacing Joint Forest Management, the
documentispromotingit.
3.Socalledcommunityagentsaretobehiredandtrained,butonceagainwefindthattheyaretobeunderthe
Forest Department, and the document even says they can be used to augment Forest Department staff
(i.e. presumably serve as departmental contract labour). This appears to be a further extension of Forest
Departmentcontrolovervillagedecisionmaking,therebyunderminingthedecisionmakingauthorityofthegram
sabha.
4.The Forest Department has neither the expertise nor the skill to implement restoration of ecosystems and
habitat diversity, nor is there space for such expertise. Within the document itself, the old Department line
showsthrough:forestrestorationisalmostequatedwithplantations(Para5.2.2)andgrasslandrestorationwith
grazingreduction(5.2.3).Thedocumenttotallyignoresindigenousandlocalknowledgeaboutecosystemsand
ecorestoration.
5.Theonlyreallymeasurabletargetsgivenareforplantationsandsomeschemessuchasstovedistribution.As
fundingislargelytargetdriveninthegovernmentsystem,thisindicateswherethemoneywillgo.Thedrafttalks
of20millionhectaresbeingafforested,butthisiseffectivelyimpossible,assuchahugeareaoflandwillhave
myriadexistingusesandrights.Thedraftalsorefersto44,000croresbeingspent.Suchenormoustargets,with
suchaninstitutionalstructure,willonlyresultinmorelandgrabbingandcorruption.
data:text/htmlcharset=utf8,%3Ch2%20class%3D%22artPostHeaderIconwrapper%22%20style%3D%22fontweight%3A%20bold%3B%20fontstyle%3A%20

1/2

10/3/2015

DangersoftheGreenIndiaMission

suchaninstitutionalstructure,willonlyresultinmorelandgrabbingandcorruption.

Whatwillthisactuallyleadto?Wecanexpectthefollowingconsequences:
1.Industrialmonoculturesasaresultofplantationprogramswhileexpressingthepointthatmonoculturesare

more vulnerable, the draft document nowhere rules them out, and they would be the natural result of this
process. These would be harmful to the environment and dangerous for people's rights and livelihoods (lip
serviceontheseissuesnotwithstanding).
2.A commoditisation of forests, converting people's homelands and livelihood resources, without even
consultingthem,intotradablecommoditiesthroughthesystemofcarbontrading.Thiswilllikelyinvolveprivate
companies as well, triggering even more land grabbing. The carbon storage figuresthat are given are clearly
aimed at establishing a basis for such a system. In reality, such figures are usually hogwash.Forests do not
consist of just standing trees trees grow, fires and other disasters take place, people and wildlife consume
nontimber forest produce, etc. Forests are constantly changing. An obsession with carbon storage and
incentives in the form of trading will lead companies and the government to shut off forests from all use by
people,ontheonehand,andontheotherwillencouragefictionalcarbonstoragefigures.
3.Conversion of areas such as pastures, grazing areas, shifting cultivation fallows, and other common lands
intoplantationsforthepurposeofmeetingtargetsandearningprofitsthroughcarbontrading.

The true threats to the climate and India's environment arise from resource grabbing, unequal resource use and
expropriationbycorporatesandelites.Thesearenotbeingaddressedatall,andinsteadsuchshamprograms
whose benefits are grossly exaggerated and almost impossible to actually calculate are being proposed as an
eyewash.TheGreenIndiaMissionislikelyonlytoresultinconflict,resistance,impoverishmentand
displacement,whileitselfcausingenvironmentaldamage.

AnysuchMissionhastobeginwithademocraticframeworkthat,inparticular,disempowersthe
ForestDepartmentandcreatesthespaceforgenuinepeople'sempowerment.Thisdocumentdoes
theopposite.Hence,weopposethisprogramandcallinsteadfortheEnvironmentMinistryandthe
Centralgovernmenttorespectpeople'srights,indigenousknowledgeanddemocraticcontrolover
forest and land resources, which will do far more to tackle climate change than such dangerous
programs.

data:text/htmlcharset=utf8,%3Ch2%20class%3D%22artPostHeaderIconwrapper%22%20style%3D%22fontweight%3A%20bold%3B%20fontstyle%3A%20

2/2