Keralam asks govt. to accept State’s revised ESA proposal

1. At a Glance

• Topic: On 15 Oct 2026, the Keralam Legislative Assembly unanimously passed a resolution asking the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) to accept the State's revised Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA) proposal for the Western Ghats [1].
• The demand: The Union government should issue the final ESA notification only after it has considered the State's amendment proposal, so that "the interests of the people of the State" are protected [1].
• UPSC relevance: The issue brings together ecological conservation and livelihoods/settlements, Centre–State federal friction, disaster risk (the Wayanad landslides, 2024) and the long Gadgil–Kasturirangan debate [1][5][8].
• Status: Several draft notifications have been issued over the years. No final notification had come by the time of the Supreme Court's Sept 2022 order [4][6].

2. Why in the News

• 15 Oct 2026 (Thursday): The Keralam Assembly unanimously adopted a resolution urging MoEFCC to accept the State's revised ESA proposal before the final notification [1].
• Immediate context: The Centre issued its latest draft ESA notification on 31 July 2024, a day after the Wayanad landslides, which killed more than 300 people [5].
• Political pressure: The Opposition (Congress) argued that the Centre's delay in giving ESA status contributed to the Wayanad disaster. It also said the 2024 draft gives less protection than the Madhav Gadgil Working Group (2011) recommended [8].

3. Background & Evolution

• 2011: Gadgil panel. The Madhav Gadgil-led Working Group submitted its recommendations on Western Ghats protection. It is widely seen as the most conservation-heavy model [8].
• Kasturirangan panel. It recommended 59,940 sq km as ESA [6].
• 2013: MoEFCC excluded some area from the ESA at Kerala's request [6].
• Mar 2014: The proposed ESA was reduced to 56,825 sq km [7].
• Kerala's approach: The State proposed marking only protected forests as ESA and leaving out inhabited and plantation areas [9].
• June 2018: Kerala submitted revised recommendations on the Western Ghats report [10].
• Jan 2022: There was uncertainty because a fresh Kasturirangan-based draft was delayed [2].
• 12 Sept 2022: The Supreme Court dismissed a PIL by Krashak Shabdam, a Kerala farmers' non-profit, against the Gadgil and Kasturirangan reports. The Court noted that the final notification was still pending [4].
• 31 July 2024: A fresh draft notification covering more than 56,800 sq km across six States was issued, with 60 days for objections [5].
• Oct 2026: The Assembly resolution sought acceptance of the State's amendment proposal [1].

4. Core Static Facts

• Mananthavady taluk villages: Periya, Thirunelli, Thondernad, Thrissilery, Kidanganad, Noolpuzha [5].
• Vythiri taluk villages: Achooranam, Chundel, Kottappadi, Kunnathidavaka, Pozhuthana, Thariyod, Vellarimala [5].
• Legal basis (not in the retrieved sources; verify): ESA notifications are generally issued under Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.

5. Multi-Dimensional Analysis

Environmental

• The Western Ghats are a fragile, landslide-prone mountain chain. The Centre issued the 2024 draft right after the Wayanad landslides killed more than 300 people [5].
• Cutting the ESA from 59,940 to about 56,825 sq km reduces the protected area [6][7]. Critics say the 2024 draft falls short of the Gadgil level of protection [8].

Economic / Social

• The 2024 draft covers inhabited revenue villages, such as 13 villages in Wayanad [5]. This raises livelihood concerns for farmers and settlers.
• Farmers' groups such as Krashak Shabdam took the reports to the Supreme Court [4]. This shows how much resistance there is on the ground.

Federal / Governance

• Kerala has repeatedly asked for its own changes: exclusions in 2013, keeping only protected forests in the ESA, and the 2018 revisions [6][9][10]. The 2026 resolution continues this pattern [1].
• Because the Assembly passed the resolution unanimously, the State's position has cross-party support [1].
• PIB has reported that the States wanted the ESA notified early [3]. Yet the final notification remains stuck because States and the Centre disagree on boundaries.

Legal

• The Supreme Court declined to strike down the Gadgil and Kasturirangan reports. It noted that the final notification was still awaited [4].
• Under the draft process, objections can be filed within 60 days [5].

Disaster Management

• The timing of the draft, a day after the Wayanad landslides, links the ESA directly to reducing disaster risk [5][8].

6. Recent Developments (last 12–18 months)

• 15 Oct 2026: The Keralam Assembly unanimously passed a resolution asking MoEFCC to accept the State's revised ESA proposal before the final notification [1].
• Pending: None of the retrieved sources confirms a final notification. The latest draft found is the one dated 31 July 2024 [5].
• The retrieved sources do not show any other dated development from Apr 2025 to Oct 2026.

7. Prelims Hooks

• The Kasturirangan panel recommended 59,940 sq km of the Western Ghats as ESA [6].
• Successive draft notifications have covered 56,824.7 sq km [6].
• The 3,114.3 sq km excluded from the ESA lies entirely in Kerala [6].
• Some exclusion was made in 2013 at Kerala's request [6].
• The 2024 draft ESA notification is dated 31 July 2024, a day after the Wayanad landslides [5].
• The 2024 draft covers six States and invited objections within 60 days [5].
• The 2024 draft proposes 9,993.7 sq km of Kerala as ESA [5].
• 13 Wayanad villages in the Mananthavady and Vythiri taluks are in the draft ESA [5].
• Thirunelli and Vellarimala are Wayanad villages in the draft ESA list [5].
• The Madhav Gadgil Working Group reported in 2011 [8].
• On 12 Sept 2022, the SC dismissed the PIL of Krashak Shabdam, a Kerala farmers' NGO [4].
• The nodal body for the ESA is the Union MoEFCC [1].
• The Keralam Assembly passed the ESA resolution unanimously in Oct 2026 [1].

8. What Keralam Is Actually Asking For, in Numbers

• The resolution responds to a new draft, the seventh, not the 2024 one
• The Centre issued a seventh draft notification on 27 July 2026, under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 [11].
• It covers 56,825.7 sq km in six States: Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu [11].

• Six earlier drafts never became a final notification [11].

• Kerala wants about 1,400 sq km more taken out

• The draft marks 9,993.7 sq km of Kerala as ESA. Kerala wants that cut to 8,590.69 sq km [11].
• That is a cut of about 14%. It would come on top of the 3,114.3 sq km already removed for Kerala after the Kasturirangan report [6].

• What Kerala wants removed: inhabited areas, farmland and plantations [11].

• Kerala is not the only State pushing back

• On 22 September 2026, the Karnataka legislature unanimously rejected the draft as it stands. It wants one year for physical surveys (officials checking the land on foot) and a fresh look at the boundaries [11].
• Maharashtra and Goa have asked for changes. Tamil Nadu has questioned boundaries and local land use [11].
• The expert committee checking objections now has until July 2027 [11]. So a final notification cannot come before then.

9. Why Fifteen Years Have Produced Seven Drafts but No Final Rule

• The Centre issues the rule, but the States control the land
• Only MoEFCC can notify an ESA under the EP Act. But every draft goes back to the States for objections [5][11].
• Each State then asks for its own exclusions. Kerala did this in 2013, in 2018, and again in 2026 [6][10][1].

• Each round shrinks or redraws the map, and the next draft starts the cycle again.

• The maps cannot tell a forest from a plantation

• The ESA lines were drawn using satellite images.
• Karnataka says these images do not clearly separate forest from plantations, farms, homes and public buildings [11].
• It also points to land grants, deemed forests (land treated as forest by law even if not recorded as forest) and pending Forest Rights Act claims that the map ignores [11].

• So a State can always say the map is wrong, and the Centre has no village-level ground check to answer with.

• The village is the unit, so one forest patch pulls in a whole village

• The Kasturirangan group (HLWG, High Level Working Group) used the village as the unit of protection [18].
• Under its rule, if 20% or more of a village is ecologically sensitive, the whole village is marked ESA [18].

• This is why houses and farms end up inside the ESA. It is also why States keep asking for village-by-village exclusions.

• Stop-gap orders hold things in place, but they are not a solution

• In 2018, the NGT (National Green Tribunal) stopped six States from giving environmental clearance to activities that harm ESAs while the notification was pending [17].
• Interim orders like this keep things on hold. They do not settle the boundary.

10. The Best Case for Keralam's Revision, and Where It Falls Short

• The strongest argument for Kerala
• Kerala is densely settled, even on the hill slopes. A boundary drawn from satellite images can wrongly put homes and farms inside the ESA [11].
• Farmers fear their land will lose value. Alex Ozhukayil of the Kerala Independent Farmers Association says, "our land is our wealth" [11].
• The resolution passed unanimously, so it reflects the whole Assembly and not just one party [1].

• What is right about it: the mapping complaint is real. Karnataka raises the same problem on its own [11].

• The answer: the draft does not do what people fear

• The draft does not take over private land. It does not evict anyone. It does not ban farming [11].
• Existing homes can be repaired and renovated [11].
• What it does ban: new mining, quarrying and sand mining; new thermal power plants; red-category industries (the most polluting kind); and very large buildings and townships [11].

• So for an ordinary farmer, being in the ESA changes little. The people who lose most are quarry and construction businesses.

• Removing all plantations removes the slopes where people are at risk

• Kerala wants plantations left out of the ESA [9][11].
• The GSI's first report on the 2024 Wayanad landslide says the affected zone had tea plantations and mixed crops, while the upper slopes were under thick forest [13].

• So the land Kerala wants left out is the kind of land where the 2024 debris landed.

• Gadgil's objection: local people are not being asked

• Madhav Gadgil criticised the Kasturirangan approach because, under it, the gram panchayat cannot object to a quarry. He called this "unconstitutional" [12].
• Kerala's revision is decided by the State government and the Assembly. Gram sabhas (village assemblies) have not voted on it.

11. Who Is Blamed for Wayanad, and What the Evidence Shows

• Everyone blames someone else
• The Congress said the Centre's delay in notifying the ESA contributed to the disaster [8].
• Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav called it the result of illegal human habitat expansion [15].

• Madhav Gadgil called the tragedy "man-made" and blamed the State government [16].

• The trigger was rain

• The GSI's first report says the landslide was triggered by water pressure building up in the soil after nonstop rain [13].
• A climate attribution study found the rainfall was about 10.8% heavier because of global warming [14].

• Note: an ESA cannot stop rain. Saying that a notified ESA would have prevented Wayanad overstates the case.

• Land use may have made the slopes weaker, but the link is not proven

• The same study said quarrying and a 62% loss of forest cover may have made the slopes more prone to sliding [14].
• But it also said past research on land use and landslide risk is mixed [14].
• How to use this in an answer: the ESA is a long-term way to lower risk, mainly by banning new quarries. It does not replace early warning and evacuation.

12. What Should Happen Before the Final Notification

• MoEFCC's expert committee should check the map on the ground before July 2027
• The committee already has time until July 2027 [11].
• It should check disputed villages on the ground, as Karnataka has asked. Then it should publish village-level maps so people can see exactly what is inside the ESA [11].

• This answers the mapping complaint without simply cutting area.

• Gram sabhas should get a real role in what happens in their area

• The Gadgil panel wanted local communities to have a say in decisions such as quarry approvals [12].

• MoEFCC could require gram sabhas to be consulted before a quarry or a large building project is allowed in an ESA village.

• States should settle land claims first, and then argue about boundaries

• Kerala and Karnataka should first settle pending Forest Rights Act claims and land-grant records [11].

• Until those records are settled, every boundary can be challenged.

• Landslide-risk maps should count when choosing what to exclude

• The GSI already studies and reports on landslide sites, as it did for Wayanad [13].

• When a State asks to exclude a village, MoEFCC should check it against GSI landslide data. A village on a high-risk slope should not be excluded just because people live there.

• Tell people clearly what the ESA does not do

• The draft does not evict anyone, take land or ban farming [11].
• The Kerala government should tell farmers this plainly. Much of the opposition comes from fear of rules that are not in the draft [11].

13. Anchors for Answers

• Data: The seventh draft (27 July 2026) proposes 56,825.7 sq km of ESA in six States. Kerala wants its share cut from 9,993.7 to 8,590.69 sq km [11]
• Data: Rainfall at Wayanad was about 10.8% heavier because of global warming; forest cover had fallen 62% [14]
• Report/Committee: Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (Gadgil, 2011); High Level Working Group (Kasturirangan, 2013), which used the village as the unit with a 20% threshold [18]
• Report/Committee: GSI First Information Report on Mundakkai–Chooralmala (2024), which names rain-driven water pressure in the soil as the trigger [13]
• Law/Case: Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, under which the drafts are issued [11]; SC dismissal of the Krashak Shabdam PIL (12 Sept 2022) [4]; NGT order of 2018 stopping six States from giving clearances that harm ESAs [17]
• Comparison: Karnataka's legislature unanimously rejected the 2026 draft (22 Sept 2026) and asked for a one-year physical survey [11]

14. Mains Relevance

• GS-III: Conservation, environmental degradation, environmental impact assessment; Disaster Management (landslides).
• GS-II: Federalism and Centre–State relations; role of State legislatures.
• GS-I: Physical geography (the Western Ghats); geographical features and their changes.
• Possible questions: 1. The repeated delay in finalising the Western Ghats ESA notification reflects the tension between conservation and development. Critically examine with reference to the Gadgil and Kasturirangan reports. 2. Should States have the final say in demarcating Ecologically Sensitive Areas? Discuss in the light of cooperative federalism. 3. The Wayanad landslides (2024) highlight the need for ecologically sensitive land-use planning in the Western Ghats. Analyse.

15. Related Topics to Study Next

• Gadgil (WGEEP) vs Kasturirangan (HLWG) reports: These are the basis of the ESA debate [6][8].
• Environment (Protection) Act, 1986: The statutory power used to notify ESAs.
• Eco-Sensitive Zones around Protected Areas: A related but separate category; candidates often confuse the two.
• Wayanad landslides (2024): The disaster that triggered the 2024 draft [5].
• Landslide risk mapping and NDMA guidelines: The disaster-management angle.
• Western Ghats as a biodiversity hotspot and UNESCO World Heritage Site: Its global conservation status.
• The Kerala-to-Keralam renaming demand: Explains the naming used in the article.

16. NCERT Concepts to Revise

• Western Ghats ecologically sensitive area (Geography): This is the core subject: the Gadgil and Kasturirangan area proposals and the still-pending final notification the Assembly is pushing on.
• Eco-sensitive zone (Geography): Often confused with the Western Ghats ESA; knowing the difference avoids a common exam trap.
• Environment Protection Act 1986 (Geography): This is the law under which ESA notifications are issued, so it explains the Centre's power.
• Centre-state relations (Polity): Kerala keeps seeking its own changes to the Centre's draft, which is the federal friction in the article.
• Wayanad landslides (2024) (Geography): The 2024 draft notification was issued right after this disaster, and the Opposition links delay to it.
• Landslide (Geography): Explains why the fragile, steep Ghats slopes are prone to landslides, which is the disaster-risk case for stronger protection.

17. Common Errors / Trap Areas

• ESA ≠ ESZ: A Western Ghats ESA (a landscape-level notification) is different from an Eco-Sensitive Zone around a national park or sanctuary.
• Mixing up the area figures: 59,940 sq km is the Kasturirangan recommendation. About 56,825 sq km is the area in the drafts. The 3,114.3 sq km gap is the Kerala exclusion [6][7].
• Assuming a final notification exists: Only drafts have been issued. The SC noted in 2022 that the final notification was still pending [4].
• Reading the SC's 2022 order as a ruling on the merits: The Court dismissed a PIL against the reports. It did not order the ESA to be notified [4].
• Counting the States: The 2024 draft covers six States [5], not all the States the Ghats touch in some broader lists.