Prime Minister Narendra Modi plants a tree on the occasion of Wold Environment Day, at Buddha Jayanti Park, in New Delhi, Wednesday, June 5, 2024.
Credit: PTI Photo
Now that the coalition of the willing in the form of an apparently benign and emasculated Modi 3.0 dispensation is in place, it is time to press for a green and environment-friendly stand that might not lose way to a policy of egregiously pro-development rapacity.
If manifestos were any indication – they being mere statements of intent – both the BJP and the Congress earlier promised to expand forest cover, protect coastal ecosystems, reduce human-animal conflict and reduce air pollution.
While the BJP manifesto talked about achieving energy independence by 2047, meeting the 500 GW target for installed renewable energy capacity by 2030, promising to set up a Centre of Excellence for clean energy technologies, and establish India as a global manufacturing hub for wind, solar, and green hydrogen technologies, the Congress did not lag behind.
The Congress manifesto, from a party that has always made the right noises, envisaged an ‘independent’ Environment Protection and Climate Change Authority to monitor and enforce environmental standards; it also talked of national and state-level climate change action plans.
On zero carbon emission goals, the Congress stuck to the country’s official commitment of 2070 as the cut-off year. The National Clean Air programme and steps to reduce human-animal conflict were some of the intentions that Congress shared with its rival BJP.
It remains to be seen if the new government – irrespective of the swing turning hither and thither – lives up to its promises.
During the last few phases of the Lok Sabha elections, we encountered an unprecedented heatwave sweeping large parts of northern and central India.
As we were all smarting under the ravages of climate change, suddenly the talk of planting trees was on the agenda once again. No manifesto talked about the need for tree plantation separately or directly as part of their climate change agenda. But the question is: even if a billion citizens rise to plant a tree each, where is the land?
Trees prefer to be markers for a fixed space. The physical and cultural presence of a tropical rainforest in situ is suggestive of a kind of arboreal longevity. But perceiving tree space as fixed in physical and cultural terms is problematic, simply because there is no concept of a public land. Trees planted in private land are impermanent. Is there any public land where one can plant trees?
When one looks at data, sadly, no definitive inventory of public lands seems easily available, though one understands India’s public land holdings lie mostly with the central ministries, state governments, or local bodies.
Public land occupies considerable acreage in high value urban areas and around major ports. Various central government departments and organisations are the largest landowners in the country, and sources indicate that land holdings belonging to them are very large and potentially underutilised.
According to a paper in 2013 seeking to identify, categorise and map public lands owned by the central, state and local governments in the urban developed areas of Ahmedabad, Gujarat, a pilot inventory of public lands in the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation indicated that 32% of all developed and developable land – excluding the road network, water bodies and railway lines – is public land with the corporation.
To make room for trees besides land earmarked for infrastructure and public utilities, the 13th Finance Commission of India has underlined the importance of ensuring proper use of land held by central, state and local governments as well as government-owned Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs), particularly the underutilised prime land of PSUs, port trusts and railways, etc.
It is the State that is held to be the owner of any land that is not privately owned. As such, the State often takes upon itself the power to redistribute land at will, which is often the source of great dispute.
According to an estimate by the Centre for Policy Research’s Land Rights Initiative (CPR-LRI), disputes over common lands constituted 30% of all land litigation in the Supreme Court over the past 70 years.
While the LRI study of land acquisition litigation before the Supreme Court between 1950 and 2016 reveals that all litigation is with respect to privately held land, data from the Land Conflict Watch reveals that the vast majority (three-fourths) of current, on ground, extra-legal conflict over land is with respect to common lands.
These lands act as a resource base for non-cash, non-market economies that provide oils, fish, medicinal herbs, and a wide variety of fruits and vegetables – beside the staple of fodder, fuelwood, water – to local communities.
Apart from common lands contributing substantially to rural household incomes, they serve as rich repositories of biodiversity where trees can be planted. But reports indicate a steady loss of India’s common lands, which are often subject to encroachment, industrialisation, and exploitative land uses like agriculture, infrastructure and extraction.
Given the fact that an estimated 7.7 million people in India are affected by conflict over 2.5 million hectares of land, threatening investments worth more than Rs 14 lakh crore, to make committed space for trees can hardly be on the agenda. And trees always have to make room for infrastructure projects – including road projects and real estate projects – fanning land conflicts across India.
In a country with a long history of contested land ownership over forests between governments that have held legal rights and forest-dwelling communities whose traditional rights have not been recognised, the importance of trees cannot be overemphasised.
But to find a secure place for trees, one needs a secure piece of land. Despite provisos being mooted earlier to create a separate Ministry of Land to serve as the nodal agency for coordinating land policy, necessitating a synergy among the Ministry of Law and Justice, Department of Land Records, Ministry of Environment and Forest, Ministry of Tribal Affairs, state boards of revenue, and the forest departments of each state, little has been done.
One looks to the new government that must rise to the enormity of the crisis.
India has set for itself a forest cover target of 33%, first proposed in the National Forest Policy in 1952. It is also set to restore 26 million hectares of the most degraded and vulnerable land under the 2011 Bonn Challenge by 2030.
A new government always springs hope.
(The writer is a Kolkata-based commentator on geopolitics, development, and culture)