Forest Policy-2018
Grabbing Forest Lands for Private Capital
When the government
announces a new policy one would
expect a revision on the basis of
failures of old policy or changes in
the situation since then. The new
draft Forest Policy 2018 released
by the BJP-led NDA government
not only belies this expectation, but
also goes back to colonial policy
The British colonial rulers
first formulated the forest policy in
1894 which gave sole authority to
the state over the forest and its
resources with the aim of
maximizing the revenue. After the
transfer of power, the forest policy
of 1952 stressed the same
maximization of production and
revenue from forests.
After more than three decades
and a half, a new forest policy was
adopted in 1988. This policy, for
the first time, recognized the
multiple roles played by the forests
– providing livelihoods to millions
of people, maintenance of
ecological balance, conservation
of biodiversity and sustenance of
many forms of life – as well as the
role of forest communities in
conserving the forests. Though
adopted as a guideline policy and
hailed as a landmark in the policy
making, it was never implemented
in its letter and spirit. On the
contrary, the successive central
governments have tried to water
down the orientation of forest act
1988.
The forest policy 1988,
coupled with Panchayat raj
extension to scheduled areas act
makes it imperative on the part of
the government to devolve powers
to Gram Sabhas so that they
should be in charge of forest, its
produce and its regeneration.
Instead of devolution of powers to
gram sabhas, the government
created a parallel mechanism in the
May - 2018
name of Joint Forest Management,
which can only survive from the
funds provided by the government
and without any right over the
produce.
The BJP government at the
centre wanted to pass on the forest
lands to private capital. In August
2015, the environment ministry
sent guidelines to the states for
“participation of private sector in
aforestation on degraded lands”.
It argued that the government
investment in forestry was not
enough to improve the productivity
and quality of India’s forest and that
was why attracting private
investment was important. The
guidelines laid out a process of
leasing out degraded forest lands
to private parties for aforestation
and extracting timber through open
competitive
bidding.
The
government had planned to first
lease out patches of forests with
less than 10 per cent canopy cover
and then extend the scheme to
forests up to 40 per cent canopy
cover. These guidelines were put
in abeyance as they fac ed serious
opposition and criticism.
Is the draft forest policy 2018
meant to set right these failures?
The answer is emphatic no. It
piously declares that “all efforts to
ensure synergy between Gram
Sabhas
and
joint
forest
management committee will be
taken up” (4.1.1.h) and continues
to deny powers to the gram
sabhas.
Secondly, it talks about
“production forestry” and planta-
tions as “new thrust area”. The
draft policy says in 4.1.1 (h) that
“Productivity of the forest
plantations is poor in most of the
States. This will be addressed by
intensive scientific management of
forest plantations of commercially
important species like teak, sal,
sisham, poplar, Melina, eucalyptus,
casuarinas, bamboo etc. The lands
available with the forest
corporations which are degraded
& underutilized will be managed to
produce quality timber with
scientific interventions. Public-
private participation models will be
developed for undertaking A
forestation and reforestation
activities in degraded forest areas
and forest areas available with
Forest Development Corporations
and outside forests.”(Emphasis
added)
Degraded forests are green
lands that have less than 40 per
cent canopy cover, according to the
government definition. According
to latest forest survey of India
report, India has more than 34
million hectares – more than 40 per
cent of its green cover – of
degraded forests. So nearly half
of the forest land go to private
capital to raise plantations with
commercial interests.
Experts remind us that in the
past, production forestry led to
replacing natural oak forests with
pine monoculture in the Himalayas,
natural sal forests with teak
plantations in central India and wet
green forests with eucalyptus and
acacia in the Western Ghats. All
this has decimated diversity, dried
up streams and undermined
livelihoods of local communities.
The proposed Private Public
Participation (PPP) will lead again
to such a destruction while
corporates line up their pockets
with huge profits.
More than 300 million adivasis
and other forest dwellers in India
either directly or indirectly depend
upon forest lands for their
livelihoods. Now their lives are in
peril. With the specious argument
that “new challenges have
contd in page 23
21