Environmental federalism in India requires consultative, bottom-up zoning. Examine in the context of Ecologically Sensitive Areas.
New · District CollectorCan you hold the district for 72 hours?Floods, a heatwave, an outbreak, a grievance queue. Take the decisions, see the consequences.Play →In this answer
Environmental federalism means the Union, States and local bodies share environmental decisions. The Western Ghats Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA) shows why this needs consultative zoning. The Union has issued seven draft notifications since 2014, and none has been made final. In September 2026, Karnataka's Legislature rejected the latest one [1].
Top-down zoning has stalled the ESA
- Maps drawn from satellites: The Kasturirangan-led High Level Working Group (HLWG) used remote sensing to divide the Ghats into "natural" and "cultural" landscapes. It marked about 37% of the Ghats as ESA [3]. Whole villages were counted as units, so homes and farms also fell inside.
- Repeated objections: The draft covers over 56,800 sq km across six States [5]. The States accept that the Ghats need protection. They dispute the "activities and extent of area" [2].
- Loss of legitimacy: People in Karnataka's Malnad region have protested, seeing the rules as imposed from outside [1].
Why consultative, bottom-up zoning is needed
- Constitutional logic: Land and agriculture are State subjects, and forests are on the Concurrent List. The 73rd Amendment and PESA give gram sabhas a role in managing natural resources.
- Checking maps on the ground: Field checks correct mapping errors. MoEFCC's own meetings with States have discussed these checks [4].
- Local knowledge: The Gadgil panel (WGEEP) wanted gram sabhas to help decide zones. The HLWG moved away from that approach [3].
- Compliance: People follow rules they helped design, instead of protesting them.
Limits of pure bottom-up zoning
- Dilution risk: Every State wants its own area changed [2]. If these revisions go unchecked, protection of a global biodiversity hotspot could shrink.
- Cost of delay: A fresh draft was already issued in 2015 [6]. Seven drafts later, nothing is final [1], and the Ghats remain open to mining and quarrying.
- Cross-border spillovers: Watersheds and forest corridors cross State borders, so the Union still needs to set standards.
Way forward
- Notify the undisputed core forest areas now, and check contested villages one at a time.
- Have the Union set a science-based minimum area, with gram sabhas confirming the village lists above it.
- Link the ESA to livelihood support for plantation communities.
Environmental federalism therefore means neither a Union veto nor a State veto. It means cooperative zoning: the Union sets scientific minimums, and States and gram sabhas fix the boundaries. This approach, guided by Articles 48A and 51A(g) and SDG 15, can protect the Western Ghats by consent rather than by decree.
Sources
- 1What is Karnataka's objection to the ESA? — The Hindu explainer, 27 Sept 2026seven drafts since 2014, Karnataka's rejection, Malnad protests
- 2States express desire to expedite early notification of Ecologically Sensitive Area of Western Ghats — PIBStates accept protection but dispute the activities and extent of area
- 3Report of the High Level Working Group on Western Ghats, Vol. I — MoEFCCremote-sensing split into natural and cultural landscapes, ~37% ESA, departure from the WGEEP approach
- 4Minutes of the meeting to discuss the ESA of Western Ghats — MoEFCCUnion–State meetings on checking ESA boundaries on the ground
- 5Centre issues fresh ESA draft notification for Western Ghats across six states — Akashvani Newsover 56,800 sq km across six States
- 6Environment Ministry issues Fresh Draft Notification on Western Ghats — PIBdraft re-issued in 2015, replacing the 2014 notification