DAW 5th November 2025, Mains Answer Writting 2026

DAW 5th November 2025, Mains Answer Writting 2026

Question

Despite strong legal frameworks and financial pools, India struggles with on-ground implementation of forest restoration programmes. Discuss (250 Words, 15 Marks). 

Model Answer

Approach: Introduction: 

  • India, with 25.17% forest and tree cover, prioritizes forest restoration through initiatives like GIM and CAMPA to restore 25 million ha by 2030. 

  • Yet, despite strong laws and funding, implementation remains uneven. 

Body: 

  • Legal & Financial Strengths: 

  • FCA 1980, FRA 2006, NFP 1988, SC (Godavarman) 

  • CAMPA ₹95,000cr, GIM, MNREGA, CSR, Bonn Challenge 

  • Implementation Challenges: 

  • Weak community participation (FRA bypass) 

  • Monocultures, poor native species focus 

  • Centralized governance, weak JFM 

  • Low CAMPA utilization (<30%) 

  • Lack of mapping, AI monitoring 

  • Way Forward: 

  • Ecological restoration over afforestation 

  • Community empowerment, eco-tourism, carbon credits 

  • Smart, outcome-based financing 

  • GIS, AI, research hubs 

Conclusion: 

  • Challenge: implementation & integration, not intent or funds. 

  • Need community ownership, scientific & inclusive restoration for ecological security and Viksit Bharat 2047. 

        Introduction: 

  • India, with over 25.17% forest and tree cover (ISFR 2023), has positioned forest restoration at the centre of its climate and development vision. Programmes such as the Green India Mission (GIM) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund (CAMPA) aim to restore 25 million hectares of degraded land by 2030, aligning with India’s NDC commitment to create a carbon sink of 2.5–3 billion tonnes CO₂ equivalent.  Yet, despite strong laws and ample funding, on-ground progress remains uneven. 

 Body: Legal and Financial Strengths: 

  • Legal Frameworks: 

  • Forest Conservation Act (1980) and its amendments regulate diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes. It promotes compensatory afforestation (CA) to offset loss of forest cover. It forms the legal basis for the establishment of Compensatory Afforestation Fund (CAF). 

  • Forest Rights Act (2006) ensures community participation. The act also empowers the Gram Sabha as the primary authority for initiating and verifying forest rights claims. 

  • National Forest Policy (1988) emphasizes ecological stability and people’s involvement. 

  • Supreme Court Judgments (e.g., T.N. Godavarman case) expanded the legal definition of forests and reinforced conservation mandates. 

  • Financial Mechanisms: 

  • The Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, 2016 (CAF Act) provides the legal framework for compensating the loss of forest. CAMPA Fund holds over ₹95,000 crore for afforestation. 

  • National Mission for a Green India (GIM) is one of the eight Missions under the National Action Plan on Climate Change. The target under the Mission is 10 m ha on forest and non-forest lands for increasing the forest/tree cover and to improve the quality of existing forest. 

  • Other than Green India Mission (GIM), funds like MNREGA, CSR funds, and the Bonn Challenge commitments provide multiple funding streams. 

 Persistent Implementation Challenges: 

  • Weak Community Integration: 

  • Though FRA (2006) empowers Gram Sabhas, many plantation projects bypass local consent. 

  • Lack of livelihood integration reduces ownership- e.g., monoculture plantations fail to support forest dwellers’ needs. 

  • Ecological Design Flaws: 

  • Dependence on monocultures (Eucalyptus, Acacia) has degraded soil and groundwater. 

  • Limited expertise in native, climate-resilient species and natural regeneration hampers ecosystem recovery. 

  • Studies (IIT Kharagpur, 2025) show a 12% decline in photosynthetic efficiency due to heat and soil stress, challenging “tree count” as a proxy for success. 

  • Bureaucratic and Institutional Bottlenecks: 

  • Centralized governance limits community participation; Joint Forest Management (JFM) remains weak. 

  • Overlap between multiple schemes (CAMPA, GIM, State projects) causes duplication and poor accountability. 

  • Financial Utilization Gaps: 

  • Despite huge corpus, CAMPA fund utilization averages below 30% in many states due to procedural delays and limited project capacity. 

  • Delhi, for example, spent only 23% of its approved funds between 2019 and 2024. 

  • Scientific and Data Deficits: 

  • Lack of ecological zoning, baseline mapping, and scientific benchmarks for degraded land selection. 

  • Inadequate use of remote sensing, AI-based monitoring, and ground validation for tracking forest health. 

  • Socio-economic Pressures: 

  • Grazing, encroachment, shifting cultivation, and poverty affect over 75% of forest area. 

  • Restoration efforts often clash with livelihood needs, leading to recurring degradation. 

The Way Forward: 

  • From Afforestation to Ecological Restoration: 

  • Shift from “tree planting” to forest and landscape restoration (FLR) integrating soil, water, and biodiversity functions. 

  • Prioritize native species and site-specific restoration models (e.g., mangrove revival in Tamil Nadu). 

  • Empowering Communities: 

  • Strengthen Gram Sabha role under FRA and Joint Forest Management Committees (JFMCs) for participatory planning. 

  • Provide livelihood incentives — e.g., NTFP(Non-Timber Forest Products) value chains, eco-tourism, carbon credit sharing. 

  • Smart Financing: 

  • Integrate CAMPA with carbon markets, CSR green funds, and biochar projects (e.g., Himachal model). 

  • For example: In Odisha, Joint Forest Management Committees are integrated into planning and revenue-sharing 

  • Reward states and communities for ecological outcomes (survival rate, biodiversity gain) rather than mere plantation targets. 

  • Science and Technology Integration: 

  • Use satellite monitoring, GIS, and AI tools for real-time tracking of forest health and fund utilization. 

  • Establish ecological restoration research hubs (leveraging institutes in Dehradun, Coimbatore, Byrnihat). 

  • Policy Alignment and Convergence: 

  • Converge GIM with MNREGA, Agroforestry Policy, and watershed programmes for landscape-level impact. 

  • Adopt public dashboards for transparency and accountability in fund use and project outcomes. 

 Conclusion: 

  • India’s forest restoration challenge is not of intent or investment, but of implementation and integration. Bridging the gap between legal frameworks and local realities, ensuring community ownership, and adopting scientific, landscape-based restoration can make forests the cornerstone of both ecological security and rural development. 

As India moves toward Viksit Bharat 2047, restoring its forests with inclusivity and foresight will define its sustainable growth trajectory.