The Union Environment Ministry has issued a directive allowing private entities to lease forest land and carry out plantation activities for commercial purposes, triggering a sharp debate among conservation experts, researchers, and forest rights advocates over its long-term ecological and social impact.
The move reclassifies certain plantation activities as “forestry activity,” making it possible for non-government entities to raise plantations on forest land without attracting penalties under India’s forest conservation laws. The ministry says the decision will help restore degraded forests and increase India’s green cover, while critics warn it could blur the line between ecological restoration and commercial exploitation.
Policy Shift Aims to Boost Green Cover and Credits
According to the ministry, the change is intended to encourage partnerships between government agencies and private players to undertake afforestation on degraded forest land. Officials say it also aligns with India’s Green Credit Scheme, which allows entities to earn credits from tree planting to meet legal, environmental, and corporate compliance requirements.
Earlier guidelines treated commercial plantations on forest land as “non-forestry activity,” requiring central approvals and compensation payments. The new interpretation eases these restrictions, arguing that plantations conducted under state forest department supervision should be considered part of forest management rather than land diversion.
The Forest Advisory Committee, which reviewed the issue in December, noted that existing rules discouraged private participation and increased dependence on imported pulp and paper products. It suggested that plantations aimed at restoration, even if they involve harvesting, should not be viewed as purely commercial.
Experts Warn of Biodiversity and Community Risks
Ecologists and policy analysts, however, caution that commercial tree planting is fundamentally different from ecological restoration. Restoration experts argue that silviculture typically focuses on a few fast-growing species, while true restoration seeks to revive entire ecosystems, including biodiversity, soil health, and ecological processes.
Several experts warned that expanding commercial plantations within natural forests could reduce species diversity, disrupt wildlife habitats, and undermine water and climate security. Studies have shown that diverse native plantations store more carbon and support healthier ecosystems than monoculture plantations.
Concerns have also been raised about the lack of clarity on how the policy will protect forest-dwelling communities. Critics say the directive makes no explicit reference to compliance with the Forest Rights Act, which recognises the rights of Adivasi and forest-dependent communities to access and manage forest resources.
Fears of Renewed Social Conflict Over Forest Land
Forest governance experts say similar models in the past have led to social conflict, particularly where Forest Development Corporations leased land for commercial plantations. In several regions, such projects were accused of restricting community access to forests and eroding customary rights.
Activists point to ongoing protests in Karnataka over the renewal of acacia plantations on forest land as an example of how commercial interests can clash with ecological and social priorities. They argue that monoculture plantations have degraded soil fertility, prevented native species regeneration, and failed to support wildlife.
Some experts suggest that involving local communities directly in lease agreements could reduce conflict and improve outcomes. Community-owned forest producer companies, they say, are more likely to balance restoration goals with livelihoods and sustainable forest use.
As India seeks to expand forest cover and meet climate targets, experts warn that equating tree planting with forest restoration could lead to unintended consequences. They stress that protecting natural ecosystems, respecting community rights, and restoring biodiversity must remain central to any forest policy reform.