Conservation practices in the Global South undermine rights: researchers

Web search is blocked for the permitted domains. I will proceed using the article content as the Tier 4 primary source, supplemented by established facts from international frameworks within my training knowledge, which are grounded in Tier 2 institutions (UN, UNEP, IUCN, CBD).

Conservation Practices in the Global South Undermine Rights: Researchers

UPSC Prelims + Mains Study Note

1. At a Glance

• A group of researchers — many of them Indian — published an article in Nature (January 2026) arguing that dominant conservation models in the Global South systematically marginalise indigenous and local communities. [S1]
• The debate centres on "fortress conservation" — a colonial-era paradigm that privileges individual wildlife species over human well-being and community rights.
• Directly relevant to UPSC syllabus: Forest Rights Act 2006, biodiversity governance, tribal rights, GS-II (governance/rights) and GS-III (environment); also mirrors India-specific tensions between conservation and Scheduled Tribe rights.
• The 30×30 target (Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, 2022) has intensified this debate globally, as expanding Protected Areas risks displacing millions of forest-dependent communities. [S2]

2. Why in the News

• January 12, 2026: The Hindu reported on a Nature journal article co-authored by multiple Indian researchers calling for greater rights, agency, and education for forest communities in the Global South. [S1]
• The article resurfaced scrutiny of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) following a BuzzFeed News investigation (2019) which revealed that WWF had lobbied for charges against rangers in Chitwan National Park, Nepal to be dropped — rangers who had waterboarded and killed farmer Shikharam Chaudhary (who died in custody; no stolen rhino horn was ever found). [S1]
• The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (adopted December 2022, COP-15, Montreal) pledged to protect 30% of land and ocean by 2030 ("30×30"), raising concerns among indigenous-rights advocates about forced evictions. [S2]

3. Background & Evolution

4. Core Static Facts

Key Terminologies

• Fortress Conservation: Model that treats protected areas as "fortresses" from which humans are excluded; treats wildlife protection and human habitation as mutually exclusive.
• "Othering": Sociological concept used in the Nature article — treating local communities as "different" or adversarial; creating an "us vs. them" narrative between conservationists and communities.
• Free, Prior, Informed Consent (FPIC): Right of indigenous peoples to approve or reject projects affecting their lands, enshrined in UNDRIP (2007) and ILO Convention 169.
• Critical Wildlife Habitat (CWH): Designation under India's FRA 2006 where communities can be relocated only with their consent — India's legal safeguard against fortress conservation.
• Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM): Alternative paradigm giving communities stewardship over local resources.
• Green Grabbing: Land-grab justified on environmental/conservation grounds, displacing communities.
• 30×30 Target: Kunming-Montreal GBF (2022) commitment to protect 30% of Earth's land and water by 2030.

Key Instruments & Bodies

India-Specific Numbers (FRA 2006)

• Over 4.4 million individual forest rights claims filed (as of recent data)
• ~1.99 million titles distributed
• Implementing ministry: Ministry of Tribal Affairs (nodal); Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) is secondary stakeholder
• Chitwan National Park, Nepal: UNESCO World Heritage Site; site of the Shikharam Chaudhary killing [S1]
• Nilgiris (Tamil Nadu): Mentioned in the Nature article; indigenous communities managed these landscapes ~200 years ago but are now "marginalised on virtually every count" [S1]

5. Multi-Dimensional Analysis

Environmental

• Protected Areas (PAs) cover ~15–16% of the Earth's land surface (pre-30×30); expansion without community consent risks converting sustainably managed indigenous landscapes into "paper parks." [S2]
• Evidence increasingly shows community-managed territories have biodiversity outcomes equal to or better than state-run PAs in many regions of Latin America, Africa, and Asia.
• Monoculture of conservation — focusing on flagship species (tiger, rhinoceros) — often ignores ecosystem services that indigenous communities have stewarded for centuries.
• Nilgiris example: Indigenous-managed landscapes 200 years ago now have "almost no voice" in governance — biodiversity governance gap created by displacement. [S1]

Social / Equity

• Shikharam Chaudhary case (Nepal, ~2006): Farmer died in custody of Chitwan National Park rangers after alleged waterboarding over a suspected rhino horn; WWF lobbied for rangers' charges to be dropped. [S1]
• Tribal communities in India (Scheduled Tribes = ~8.6% of population) are disproportionately displaced by conservation projects — "conservation refugees."
• Nature article calls for "greater rights, agency, and education" for local communities as the cornerstone of sustainable conservation. [S1]
• Intersectionality: Women in indigenous communities face double marginalisation — from both conservation authorities and patriarchal community structures.

Legal / Constitutional (India)

• Article 21 (Right to Life): SC has held that forcible eviction of tribals without rehabilitation violates Article 21.
• Forest Rights Act, 2006: Corrects "historical injustice" to forest dwellers; grants individual titles (up to 4 hectares) and community rights.
• Godavarman Case (1996–ongoing): Supreme Court's forest orders have sometimes been used to justify evictions, creating tension with FRA.
• Critical Wildlife Habitat provisions under FRA require gram sabha consent before relocation — legally mandated FPIC in India.
• PESA Act, 1996: Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) — gram sabha consent required for land acquisition in Schedule V areas.

Geopolitical / Strategic

• The "30×30" pledge is backed by rich Global North nations (EU, USA, Canada) that historically had low biodiversity but high financial leverage in international conservation.
• "Green Colonialism" critique: Global South nations argue conservation finance flows come with conditionalities that bypass local sovereignty.
• WWF controversy (2019) exposed structural impunity in international conservation NGOs operating in sovereign developing nations.
• India has adopted a "development and conservation" balance approach in its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under Paris Agreement. [S2]

Ethical / Governance

• WWF's lobbying to drop charges against rangers responsible for Chaudhary's death is cited in the article as emblematic of institutional impunity in conservation organisations. [S1]
• Quote attributed to the late Madhav Gadgil (renowned Indian ecologist, 1942–2024): "Talk of many things, not just air and water and the bird that sings, but of men and money and economic reforms…" — encapsulates the rights-centred critique. [S1]
• Tarsh Thekaekara (The Shola Trust) cited: Barely 200 years ago Nilgiris were "completely managed by indigenous communities who today have almost no voice." [S1]
• Lack of Free, Prior, Informed Consent (FPIC) in PA creation violates both UNDRIP and the CBD's own guidelines.

Historical

• Colonial game reserves in India — e.g., Project Tiger reserves displaced Gujjars (Rajaji), Chenchus (Nagarjunasagar-Srisailam) and others.
• Indian Forest Act, 1927 (British): Criminalised traditional forest use — precursor to fortress conservation in India.
• Wildlife Protection Act, 1972: Created sanctuary/national park framework; community rights not adequately addressed — FRA 2006 partly corrects this.

6. Recent Developments (last 12–18 months)

• December 2022 (Kunming-Montreal GBF, COP-15): 30×30 target adopted; indigenous-rights groups including Indigenous Peoples' caucus at CBD warned the target could trigger mass evictions if implemented without FPIC safeguards. [S2]
• 2024: Madhav Gadgil, one of India's most influential ecologists and pioneer of rights-based conservation discourse, passed away — the Nature article (Jan 2026) invokes his legacy. [S1]
• January 12, 2026: Nature article published, co-authored by Indian and Global South researchers; covered in The Hindu international edition; argues colonial conservation paradigm persists and must be reformed through rights, agency, and education. [S1]
• Ongoing (India): MoEFCC and Ministry of Tribal Affairs remain in tension over forest diversion vs. FRA implementation; SC monitoring of FRA compliance continues.

7. Prelims Hooks

1. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework was adopted at COP-15 in December 2022 in Montreal. [S2]
2. The "30×30" target under KMGBF aims to protect 30% of Earth's land and inland waters by 2030. [S2]
3. UNDRIP (UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples) was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2007; it is non-binding but normative. [S2]
4. Free, Prior, Informed Consent (FPIC) of indigenous communities is mandated under ILO Convention 169 (binding) and UNDRIP (non-binding). [S2]
5. India's Forest Rights Act, 2006 is administered by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (nodal ministry). [S3]
6. Critical Wildlife Habitat designation under FRA 2006 requires gram sabha consent before any community relocation. [S3]
7. Chitwan National Park (Nepal) is a UNESCO World Heritage Site and the location of the Shikharam Chaudhary custodial death case (~2006). [S1]
8. The BuzzFeed News investigation (2019) exposed WWF's role in lobbying for rangers accused of human-rights abuses in conservation areas. [S1]
9. Madhav Gadgil chaired the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (2011) and is associated with rights-centred conservation in India. [S1]
10. PESA Act, 1996 mandates gram sabha consent for land acquisition in Schedule V areas of India. [S3]
11. The term "fortress conservation" refers to the model of excluding human communities from protected areas, originating from colonial-era game reserves. [S1]
12. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was opened for signature at the Rio Earth Summit, 1992; it has 196 parties. [S2]
13. The Nagoya Protocol (2010) under CBD governs access and benefit-sharing (ABS) of genetic resources. [S2]
14. Nature article (Jan 2026) was authored by researchers including many from India and called for "greater rights, agency, and education" for communities. [S1]
15. "Green grabbing" = land appropriation justified by environmental/conservation rationale, displacing indigenous communities. [S2]

8. Mains Relevance

Plausible Mains Question Stems:

1. "Conservation in the Global South is often a continuation of colonial dispossession by other means." Critically examine this statement with reference to international conservation frameworks and the Forest Rights Act, 2006.

2. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework's 30×30 target has been hailed as an environmental milestone but critiqued as a threat to indigenous rights. Discuss the tensions between biodiversity conservation and community rights, and suggest a rights-compatible path forward.

3. Examine the role of international conservation NGOs in perpetuating human rights violations in protected areas of developing countries. What regulatory and governance reforms are needed to ensure accountability?

9. Related Topics to Study Next

10. Common Errors / Trap Areas

1. Confusing ministries: FRA 2006 is nodal to Ministry of Tribal Affairs, NOT MoEFCC — a common MCQ trap; MoEFCC handles Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.
2. Conflating CBD's Kunming-Montreal GBF (2022) with the Aichi Targets: Aichi Targets were under the Nagoya, 2010 Strategic Plan (2011–2020); KMGBF is the successor framework — different targets, different baseline years.
3. UNDRIP is non-binding: Aspirants often treat it as a binding treaty; it is a UN General Assembly Declaration, not a convention — ILO 169 is the binding treaty.
4. Chitwan National Park location: Nepal, not India — aspirants sometimes confuse it with Kaziranga or Corbett in Indian rhino context.
5. Madhav Gadgil vs. K. Kasturirangan: Gadgil committee (2011) recommended stronger protections including community rights; Kasturirangan committee (2013) gave a diluted report — these two are frequently confused in ecology questions.

11. Sources

• [S1] "Conservation practices in the Global South undermine rights: researchers" — The Hindu, January 12, 2026, International Print Edition, p. 7 — Article by Divya Gandhi, citing researchers' Nature article and quotes from Tarsh Thekaekara (The Shola Trust) — https://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/2026-01-12/th_international/articleGFFFE8BIJ-13083698.ece — (Tier 4 — primary source for this note)

• [S2] Convention on Biological Diversity / Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework; UNDRIP (UN General Assembly, 2007); Nagoya Protocol (2010); ILO Convention 169 — Referenced from institutional knowledge of UN/UNEP/CBD frameworks — https://www.un.org / https://www.cbd.int — (Tier 2 — UN/international institutions)

• [S3] Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006; PESA Act, 1996 — Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India — https://tribal.gov.in / https://moef.gov.in — (Tier 1 — Indian government)

Note: WebSearch retrieval was blocked for all permitted domains during preparation of this note. The study note is grounded in (a) the Tier 4 primary article [S1], (b) Tier 2 international frameworks [S2], and (c) Tier 1 Indian legislation [S3], all within the permitted source whitelist.