THE CONTEXT: The Green Credit Program, introduced by India’s Environment Ministry, incentivizes environmental restoration through market-based mechanisms. Critics argue it may bypass existing conservation laws, focusing narrowly on tree planting without considering broader ecosystem impacts. The program aims to restore degraded forest land but raises concerns about promoting monocultures and overlooking the complexity of forest ecosystems.
ISSUES:
- Incentive Structure and Implementation: The Green Credit Program is a market-based incentive mechanism to promote environmental restoration, including afforestation and water conservation. However, the effectiveness of these incentives depends significantly on how they are implemented on the ground and whether the implementers have a deep understanding of local ecological challenges.
- Potential for Negative Ecological Impacts: There is a concern that the program could lead to ecological damage, such as promoting monocultures or inappropriate vegetation, which might not suit the local environment. This could potentially harm biodiversity and disrupt local ecosystems.
- Complexity in Measuring Environmental Impact: The program aims to quantify environmental benefits, such as carbon sequestration or biodiversity improvement, which are inherently complex to measure. This complexity could lead to challenges in accurately assessing the impact of green credits and ensuring that they contribute positively to environmental goals.
- Integration with Existing Environmental Laws: The Green Credit Program might conflict with environmental regulations, particularly the Forest Conservation Act. The program might bypass some of the stringent requirements of forest conservation, thus weakening overall ecological governance.
- Market Dynamics and Fungibility Issues: The market-based approach raises issues about the fungibility of green credits. Different environmental credits (e.g., for water conservation, biodiversity, or carbon sequestration) may not be readily comparable or tradable on a single platform, complicating the market dynamics.
- Impact on Mandatory Compliance and Environmental Laws: The program could influence how industries comply with mandatory environmental regulations. Allowing industries to use green credits to expedite the forest clearance process might undermine the thorough assessment and mitigation strategies required under environmental law.
THE WAY FORWARD:
- Incentivizing Biodiversity and Local Species Conservation: Establish guidelines prioritizing planting native and diverse species over monocultures. This would help maintain the ecological balance and support local wildlife. Set up robust monitoring systems to ensure that the green credits are awarded for actions that genuinely contribute to biodiversity conservation.
- Engage Local Communities: Involve local communities in the planning and implementing afforestation projects to leverage their traditional ecological knowledge and ensure the selection of appropriate species.
- Conduct Ecological Assessments: Before any plantation activity, conduct thorough ecological assessments to understand the specific needs of the area and to plan plantations that enhance, rather than disrupt, local ecosystems.
- Adopt Ecological Restoration Practices: Encourage ecological restoration practices that focus on allowing natural regeneration, which can be more effective and less invasive than planting trees.
- Standardize Measurement Methods: Develop standardized methods for measuring the environmental impact of various actions to ensure that credits reflect real, quantifiable benefits.
- Ensure Fungibility: Work towards creating a system where different environmental credits (e.g., biodiversity, water conservation) can be traded on a common platform, possibly by establishing conversion factors that reflect their relative ecological value.
- Harmonize with Existing Laws: Amend the Green Credit Program guidelines to ensure they complement rather than conflict with existing environmental regulations. Clearly define terms such as “forest” and “degraded forest” within the program to prevent misclassification and ensure that the program supports the objectives of existing laws.
THE CONCLUSION:
The Green Credit Program’s market-based approach to forest restoration is challenged by fungibility issues and compliance with environmental laws. Experts fear it may conflict with the Forest Conservation Act and simplify complex ecological considerations to facilitate industrial growth. The program’s success hinges on balancing economic incentives with the preservation of biodiversity and adherence to environmental principles.
UPSC PAST YEAR QUESTIONS:
Q.1 Should the pursuit of carbon credit and clean development mechanisms set up under UNFCCC be maintained even though there has been a massive slide in the value of carbon credit? Discuss India’s energy needs for economic growth. 2014
Q.2 How does the draft Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2020, differ from EIA Notification, 2006? 2020
MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:
Q.1 Critically analyze the effectiveness of the Green Credit Program as a tool for environmental and ecological restoration in India. Discuss the potential benefits and drawbacks of implementing such a market-based incentive mechanism, particularly in forest conservation and biodiversity.
SOURCE:
https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/can-green-credits-benefit-indias-forests/article68106159.ece
Spread the Word