India’s forests—spread across more than one-fifth of its landmass—are not mere stretches of green. They are the lungs that filter the air we breathe, the water towers that feed our rivers, the granaries of biodiversity, and the quiet cathedrals of our cultural soul. Yet, their governance has often been like sailing a vast ship without a compass—policy blowing one way, law drifting another, and practice somewhere in between.
Since Independence in 1947, India’s forest management has travelled a long road—from the timber-led arithmetic of sustained yield forestry to the more nuanced, people-and planet-oriented idea of Sustainable Forest Management (SFM). Along the way came community participation, climate commitments, and the recognition of forests as providers of ecosystem services. But the path has been strewn with delays, half-measures, and a chronic mismatch between aspiration and action.
From timber mines to ecological sentinels
At the birth of the republic, India inherited a forestry regime designed for an empire. The Indian Forest Act of 1927, the backbone of forest governance even today, was essentially an instrument of control—crafted to extract timber and limit local rights. Forests were treated like a warehouse with an accountant’s ledger: remove a fixed quantity of wood each year and the “capital” would remain intact. This sustained yield model was efficient for revenue, but blind to ecology.
The National Forest Policy of 1952 was India’s first attempt to define a sovereign approach. It acknowledged the protective role of forests but still privileged commercial forestry and industrial plantations. One-third of the country’s land was to be kept under forest, but the policy made no serious provision for local stewardship. Forest-dependent communities were viewed as intruders to be kept at bay.
The 1988 policy: A breath of fresh air
A turning point came with the National Forest Policy of 1988, which replaced the timber first lens with an ecology-first vision. For the first time, biodiversity conservation, ecological security, and the needs of local communities were put at the heart of the policy. Forests were re-imagined not as timber mines but as living systems whose health was integral to the nation’s future. The policy seeded the idea of Joint Forest Management (JFM)—a participatory approach in which village communities would help protect and regenerate forests in return for a share of benefits. In states like West Bengal and Madhya Pradesh, JFM initially worked wonders. Forests regenerated, conflicts eased, and village committees took pride in their green assets.
But over time, JFM suffered the fate of many other reforms being implemented half-heartedly. The forest department retained tight control; benefit-sharing was often arbitrary; women’s participation was tokenistic; and once donor funding ebbed, many committees withered. Participation remained a slogan more than a reality.
Policy in limbo, law in chains
One peculiarity of India’s forest governance is that policy has always run ahead of law— a colonial habit where grand visions are declared but the legal tools remain frozen in time. After 1988, no new forest law was enacted to give teeth to the policy. The 1927 Act—with its industrial and exclusionary mindset—continued to govern a 21st-century forest estate. Attempts to draft a new National Forest Policy have repeatedly stalled. A 2018 draft that tilted heavily towards private sector participation drew sharp criticism for diluting community rights and got shelved. Meanwhile, the Forest Rights Act of 2006 sought to undo colonial injustices by recognising the rights of tribal and forest-dwelling communities. Yet, its rollout has been uneven, contested, and often resisted by state forest departments.
The SFM Era: From Yield to Management
Globally, forestry thinking evolved in the 1990s and 2000s. Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) emerged as the gold standard—moving beyond timber to embrace soil health, biodiversity, carbon sequestration, water regulation, and livelihoods. SFM treats forests as complex ecosystems providing multiple, interlinked services.
India has endorsed SFM in principle, sprinkling the term across policy speeches and planning documents. But on the ground, forest working plans still focus heavily on timber yields and plantation targets. Landscape-level planning—essential for ecological connectivity—remains rare. Tools for valuing ecosystem services are rudimentary, and cross-sectoral coordination between forestry, agriculture, water, and climate ministries is minimal.
Forests in the climate spotlight
The rise of the climate crisis has thrust forests into a new role: that of carbon warriors. Under its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to the Paris Agreement, India pledged to create an additional carbon sink of 2.5 to 3 billion tonnes of CO₂ equivalent by 2030 through afforestation and tree cover. Forestry was included as a Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) activity under the Kyoto Protocol, allowing projects to earn carbon credits. But in practice, only a handful of projects have materialised—hampered by complex procedures, limited technical capacity, and weak market linkages. REDD+ commitments have seen some pilot projects but little scaling.
The Green India Mission, meant to ensure convergence within conservation, livelihood, and climate goals, has struggled with chronic underfunding and patchy implementation.
From patches to patterns: The case for landscape management
Forests are not islands; they are threads in the vast fabric of landscapes. Rivers, wildlife corridors, agro-forestry belts, and even urban green spaces are part of their ecological reach. The emerging global best practice is landscape-level management, which integrates forests with surrounding land uses and governance systems.
In India, however, administrative boundaries still dominate. District lines cut across watersheds; state borders slice through wildlife ranges. Ministries operate in silos, and local governance bodies are rarely integrated into planning. The valuation of ecosystem services—clean water, soil fertility, pollination, and cultural heritage—remains absent from most budgets and project appraisals.
Way forward: giving forests a clear compass
If India’s forests are to serve as biodiversity vaults, climate buffers, and livelihood anchors in the decades ahead, policy and practice must finally align. A credible way forward requires a mix of legal reform, institutional innovation, and community empowerment:
1. Enact a New National Forest Law – Replace the 1927 Act with legislation that reflects ecological priorities, recognises community stewardship, and provides legal backing for SFM, ecosystem services valuation, and climate commitments.
2. Operationalise SFM Standards – Develop national SFM criteria and indicators aligned with global benchmarks; embed them in all forest working plans and link them to monitoring systems.
3. Institutionalise Landscape Planning – Mandate integrated plans at the river basin or eco-region scale, cutting across administrative boundaries, with coordination between forest, water, agriculture, and infrastructure agencies.
4. Mainstream Ecosystem Services Valuation – Incorporate the economic value of forests’ non-timber services into national accounts and project appraisals; levy compensatory payments where ecosystem services are degraded.
5. Deepen Community Governance – Transform JFM committees into statutory forest governance bodies with decision-making powers and transparent benefit-sharing; ensure at least 50% representation of women.
6. Climate-Responsive Forestry – Expand afforestation under native species; scale up REDD+ and carbon credit projects with simplified processes; integrate forest carbon into India’s emissions trading schemes.
7. Secure Sustainable Finance – Create a dedicated Green Forest Fund pooling domestic and international resources, with clear performance-linked disbursement tied to SFM outcomes.
India cannot afford to manage over 20 percent of its territory with outdated laws, stalled policies, and fragmented programmes. Forests are not just assets to be guarded; they are living systems to be cultivated, respected, and renewed. The next chapter of India’s forest story must be written not in the ink of aspiration but with the pen of enforceable commitment. The time has come to replace the compass without a map with a charted course—one that ensures our forests remain, for generations ahead, both the nation’s green shield and its beating ecological heart.
Padam Parkash Bhojvaid has over 40 years of experience in forestry field activities and research across India. He retired as the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests in Haryana, India, in November 2017