In a move that further weakens India\u2019s forest conservation laws, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) is all set to open up forests for commercial plantations by private and government entities without the requirement of a one-time monetary compensation, called net present value (NPV), and compensatory afforestation. Such plantations will now come under forestry activity.<\/p>\n
This has been done through an amendment passed by the ministry on January 2, 2026, to the 2023 guidelines issued under the\u00a0Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, earlier known as the Forest Conservation Act (FCA). Calling the move \u201cdisastrous\u201d, experts say this amendment gives state and private entities a free rein to establish commercial plantations in forest areas without the financial and environmental safeguards previously required.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
As per the amendment, such plantations have to be approved by working and management plans prepared by the respective state forest departments. The state government has been asked to devise a framework for \u201cutilisation\u201d and \u201crevenue sharing\u201d from plantations.<\/p>\n
What triggered this amendment?\u00a0<\/p>\n
The amendment was triggered by India’s \u201cincreased dependence on imported pulp, paper, and paperboard\u201d, following deliberations by a forest advisory committee under the ministry that met on December 2, 2025.\u00a0<\/p>\n
In 2024-25, paper and paperboard imports had reached 2.05 million tonnes \u2013 a nearly two-fold jump from 1.08 million tonnes imported in 2020-21,\u00a0said<\/a>\u00a0the Indian Paper Manufacturers Association (IPMA) in May 2025, citing data from the Ministry of Commerce.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n The MoEFCC had received requests from several government and private entities seeking permission to establish plantations in degraded forest areas. Following these requests, the committee argued that existing restrictions on plantations \u2013 including low-rotation crops such as timber and eucalyptus \u2013 were hindering \u201cforest restoration\u201d efforts.\u00a0<\/p>\n Based on the committee\u2019s recommendation, the ministry issued an amendment to the 2023 guidelines on January 2. The order, reviewed by\u00a0Newslaundry, declared that if a State government agrees to undertake \u201cassisted natural regeneration including afforestation\/plantation\u201d, for purposes mutually agreed upon with public and private entities, and if such activities are undertaken as per an approved \u201cWorking Plan\/Management Plan\u201d and under the supervision of the State forest department, they shall be deemed as forestry activities.<\/p>\n \u201cConsequently, the requirements of Compensatory Afforestation and payment of Net Present Value shall not be applicable to such activities,\u201d the amendment stated.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n By doing this, the government amended sub-para 14 of para 7.2 of the\u00a0<\/a>2023 guidelines<\/a>, which deals with the leasing of forest land for afforestation. Under sub-para 14, commercial plantations were considered \u201cnon-forestry activities\u201d and attracted NPV and compensatory afforestation. Under compensatory afforestation, a user agency (any entity, public or private) has to undertake afforestation in lieu of the diversion of forest. Meanwhile, a user agency pays the NPV (a mandatory payment for diverting forest land for non-forest use) to the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA), a statutory body.\u00a0<\/p>\n Experts issue warnings<\/p>\n Environment lawyer Ritwick Dutta said the amendment to the 2023 guidelines runs counter to biodiversity protection.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThis will open up forest areas, which were earlier used only for compensatory afforestation or other kinds of afforestation, for commercial plantation and silvicultural operations. This is clearly in conflict with the requirement for biodiversity protection,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Former IFS officer Prakriti Srivastava flagged her concerns about such a \u201cnegative\u201d amendment.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cEarlier, leasing out forest land was considered non-forestry activity which invited NPV and compensatory afforestation compliance. Now these two have been done away with. This is further dilution of the rules only to facilitate project proponents and benefit them at the cost of conservation and ecological security of our country,\u201d she said.\u00a0<\/p>\n The amendment allows the government and non-government entities to raise plantations and harvest them commercially. However, the amendment has left it to the state government to devise a method for revenue sharing.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThe state government shall, however, be at liberty to devise an appropriate framework for the utilisation of such plantations and for revenue sharing thereof, on a case-by-case basis,\u201d it said.<\/p>\n An official privy to the government\u2019s conservation efforts expressed concern that the entry of private players would promote monoculture and lead to the loss of wildlife habitat.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cTo maximize \u2018harvest\u2019 and \u2018revenue,\u2019 private entities are likely to plant fast-growing, commercial species \u2013 like eucalyptus, poplar or teak \u2013 rather than slow-growing, diverse native species. A plantation is not a forest. It lacks the understory (layer of vegetation between the main tree canopy and forest floor), the deadwood (part of the tree in the stage of decomposition), and the structural complexity required to support wildlife,\u201d the official said.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cReplacing a degraded natural forest (which might still have root stock and biodiversity) with a commercial plantation effectively destroys the habitat,\u201d they added.<\/p>\n Former Indian Forest Service (IFS) officer RP Balwan put it rather bluntly when he said, \u201cIt\u2019s a disastrous move for forests and is meant to benefit industries. Now, private entities will plant whatever they want without taking into consideration the ecology, flora and fauna of the forest.\u201d<\/p>\n He further explained that industries have been making similar attempts to acquire forest land since 1980. \u201cSince 1980, I have seen such attempts being made by the corporate world to unlock forest land, since land is at a premium for afforestation. With this move, they don\u2019t have to pay even NPV or undertake compensatory afforestation,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n On Wednesday, Congress leader Jairam Ramesh criticised the Modi government for opening \u201cthe door for privatisation of forest management\u201d through amendments since August 2023.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cIn August 2023, the Modi Government had bulldozed amendments to the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 through Parliament. Apart from renaming this law as the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980, these amendments had introduced far-reaching changes in the legal regime for the governance of forests in the country. It had been pointed out at that time itself that the amendments opened the door for the privatisation of forest management. This is exactly what has happened \u2013 as evidenced from the circular issued by the Union Ministry of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change on Jan 2, 2026. This is just the beginning,\u201d\u00a0tweeted\u00a0<\/a>the party general secretary in charge of communications.\u00a0<\/p>\n Section 3C of the Van Adhiniyam empowers the Central government to issue directions, including amendments, for the implementation of the Act without parliamentary oversight.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n Newslaundry\u00a0has sent a questionnaire to MoEFCC seeking its response on the amendment and concerns raised by experts. The ministry is yet to reply to the questionnaire.<\/p>\n