29-05-2025
India needs to embed biodiversity as a key consideration in every decision
Written by Asmita Sengupta and Vinod B Mathur
The unprecedented loss of nature over the past few decades has induced a call for transformative change towards socially-just biodiversity conservation across the world. Transforming biodiversity safeguarding is not just about conservation, though — it is a systemic shift that integrates biodiversity and social justice into every facet of human life, ensuring ecological balance, economic stability, and long-term sustainability for all living beings.
The recently adopted Summary for Policymakers (SPM) of the Transformative Change Assessment (TCA) undertaken by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) defines 'transformative change' as 'fundamental, system-wide shifts in views, structures and practices' that address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss and nature's decline. Transformative change is crucial as past and existing attempts at addressing the drivers of biodiversity loss have failed to make a difference. And India has a critical role in bringing it about, not only as the most populous country but also as one of the fastest-growing global economies.
So, how does one bring about transformative change? Acknowledging the linkage between equity and sustainability at the very outset, the IPBES assessment identifies three key causes underlying the drivers of biodiversity loss: Disconnection from and domination over nature and (marginalised) people, concentration of wealth and power, and prioritisation of short-term, individual and material gains. Shifting worldviews, practices, and institutional and/or governance structures are essential for addressing these causes. Further, the assessment recognises four key principles that can bring about this shift: Equity and justice, pluralism and inclusion, respectful and reciprocal human-nature relationships, and adaptive learning and action.
The assessment, however, warns that transformative change can be impeded by five overarching challenges that are systemic, pervasive, and persistent. Relations of domination over nature and people, especially those that emerged in colonial eras and have persisted since; economic and political inequalities; inadequate policies and unfit institutions; unsustainable consumption and production patterns; and limited access to clean technologies alongside uncoordinated knowledge and innovation systems.
The assessment finally provides five strategies in this regard: Conserving and regenerating places of value to nature and people, driving systemic change in sectors most responsible for biodiversity decline, transforming economic systems for nature and equity, transforming governance systems, and shifting societal views and values to recognise and prioritise fundamental interconnections between humans and nature.
India has seen transformative change in the realm of biodiversity, safeguarding several times over the past 50 years. A compelling story of communities taking stewardship of natural resources from the country is the Chipko Movement, when villagers, including many women, hugged forest trees in Chamoli, Uttarakhand, to prevent them from being felled by logging companies – one of many such movements that eventually led to the enactment of the Forest Conservation Act (1980). India continues to accord high importance to conserving places of value to nature and people, and has strong governance frameworks in this regard, including laws and regulations for forest management, biodiversity conservation, wildlife protection, environment protection, and recognising indigenous rights.
The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act (FRA) 2006 that legally recognises the land rights of communities and authorises them to utilise, manage, and safeguard forests and forest resources through the Community Forest Resource (CFR) rights legitimises community ownership of forest lands for residing and cultivation, apart from giving decision-making authority to the Gram Sabha regarding land parcel management.
Nevertheless, not all is rosy in India. Just as the tiger population has seen a boost thanks to Project Tiger, the Great Indian Bustard has experienced a massive population decline. Wildlife conservation success stories have often compromised the well-being of forest-dwelling communities. Many protected areas have been degraded, downsized and degazetted for activities at loggerheads with biodiversity safeguarding. And infrastructure developments, particularly in the form of roads, railways and canals, continue to occur in and around biodiversity-rich landscapes.
The aspiration for being 'developed' comes at a very high cost, and India needs to embed biodiversity, one of its greatest assets, as a key consideration in every decision. The IPBES TCA SPM is a tool that India could make use of to this end. And the same holds for the other assessments that the IPBES has produced since its establishment in 2012 and the ones that are being undertaken as we speak. The IPBES brings together experts with a vast variety of disciplinary backgrounds who synthesise existing knowledge over two-three years and yet effective uptake of these assessments remains a pipe-dream. It is paramount that this wealth of resources is tapped into for informed decision-making as India moves ahead on the trajectory of Viksit Bharat.
Sengupta is Fellow, Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment, Bengaluru, India; Fellow, TCA, IPBES. Mathur is Former Chairperson, National Biodiversity Authority of India and Regional Vice Chair (Asia-Pacific) IPBES Bureau
