The Supreme Court has recently directed all states and union territories to identify and define the term “forest” within their jurisdictions. This is crucial because forests ensure ecological security, aid in conservation, and influence land-use planning. However, the lack of a uniform definition has created inconsistencies in regulation and protection across India.
Different global bodies use varying criteria to define forests, often based on tree cover, height, and land size:
UNFCCC: Land with tree crown cover of 10–30% and tree height of at least 2–5 meters.
FAO & CBD: Land greater than 0.5 hectares with at least 10% crown cover and trees capable of reaching 2–5 meters.
United States: Minimum 0.4 hectares with ≥10% crown density.
Germany: Includes cutover areas, fire-prevention strips, clearings, and temporarily unstocked forests.
These definitions show that international approaches are flexible and extend beyond just canopy density.
India’s vast and diverse ecological landscape makes rigid, number-based definitions problematic. Certain ecosystems may not meet strict canopy or tree height criteria but are still vital, such as:
- Degraded catchments
- Grazing lands
- Sacred groves
- Arid and semi-arid scrublands
These areas remain critical for biodiversity, water recharge, soil fertility, and cultural traditions.
A uniform, rigid definition can lead to multiple challenges:
- Exclusion of fragile ecosystems.
- Ignoring region-specific biodiversity.
- Promoting mechanical classification over ecological assessment.
- Narrowing conservation policies and weakening legal protection.
The solution lies in adopting an inclusive and flexible approach:
- Use region-specific definitions that value ecology, culture, and livelihoods.
- Apply scientific mapping tools like satellite imagery and ground surveys.
- Encourage community-based forest governance.
- Balance ecological security with developmental needs.
India’s main challenge is to balance legal clarity with ecological diversity. While global models offer guidance, India must frame its own context-specific definition that safeguards biodiversity, cultural landscapes, and community interests. Relying solely on canopy or land-area benchmarks could exclude ecologically critical regions and weaken conservation efforts.
Kutos : AI Assistant!
