Western Ghats: Karnataka’s Position on Eco-Sensitive Areas

27 Sep 2026

Tags: Environment   Impact Assessment   Assessment policies

Source: The Hindu

Context: The Karnataka Legislative Assembly unanimously rejected the recommendations of the Kasturirangan Committee Report on declaring Eco-Sensitive Areas (ESAs) in the Western Ghats.

• The central issue is balancing environmental conservation with the livelihoods and development needs of farmers, workers and local communities.
• Karnataka’s opposition has created uncertainty over the final demarcation and notification of ESAs in the Western Ghats.

Kasturirangan Report: Key Features

• The Kasturirangan Report adopted a relatively pro-development approach, allowing human settlements and a range of economic activities across the Western Ghats while identifying ecologically sensitive landscapes for greater protection.
• It used remote-sensing and satellite data from 2012 to distinguish between natural landscapes and human-dominated landscapes.
• A major concern raised by Karnataka is the accuracy and suitability of this satellite-based classification for determining ESAs.

Why Karnataka Opposes the ESA Framework

• Karnataka objects to the recommendation that an entire revenue village could be classified as an ESA when at least 20% of its area falls within an ecologically sensitive zone.
• Such an approach could bring farmlands and human settlements under ESA restrictions even when sensitive ecosystems occupy only a relatively small part of the village.
• Following the Centre's 2013–14 directive to States to undertake ground-truthing of the recommendations, opposition in Karnataka increasingly centred on possible impacts on livelihoods and development.
• Concerns were also amplified by stakeholders associated with activities such as mining, which face restrictions under both the Gadgil and Kasturirangan approaches, creating fears of economic loss and displacement.
• Karnataka has consequently resisted the ESA framework and proposed preparing an alternative map.

Gadgil vs Kasturirangan Approach

• The Gadgil Committee (Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel) proposed a more extensive and graded system of ecological protection across the Western Ghats.
• The Kasturirangan Committee sought to focus protection more narrowly on natural landscapes, while permitting greater scope for human habitation and economic activity.
• Thus, the Kasturirangan approach is generally viewed as less restrictive for development than the Gadgil framework.

Centre’s Interim Approach and the Problem of Uncertainty

• The Centre's 2013 interim directions continue to provide some protection to Western Ghats ecosystems while the final ESA boundaries remain unresolved.
• Prolonged disagreement creates uncertainty for both State governments and businesses regarding which development activities will ultimately be permissible within potential ESAs.
• States may face immediate economic and political costs from conservation, while many benefits of protecting the Western Ghats—such as ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation—accrue nationally, creating an incentive for States to seek a smaller ESA area.

Status Across Western Ghats States

• By mid-2026, States had adopted different positions on the proposed ESA boundaries: Gujarat was reportedly close to an agreement with the Centre, while Tamil Nadu had no substantive disagreement.
• Kerala sought to reduce its already ground-truthed ESA area from 9,993 sq. km to 8,805 sq. km.
• Maharashtra and Goa sought exclusion of 378 villages and 21 villages, respectively, from the proposed ESA framework.
• The progress in other States, combined with the ecological continuity of the Western Ghats across six States, increases pressure on Karnataka to develop a credible alternative rather than reject the framework altogether.

2024 Decision: State-wise Notification

• In 2024, the Centre decided to permit ESA notification on a State-wise basis rather than requiring a single simultaneous notification covering the entire Western Ghats.
• This provides greater administrative flexibility but also means Karnataka is not legally bound to adopt the precise choices made by neighbouring States.
• However, continued rejection becomes difficult to sustain without a scientifically credible and equally comprehensive alternative demarcation framework.

Eco-Sensitive Area (ESA)

• An Eco-Sensitive Area (ESA) is an area notified around protected areas or ecologically important landscapes where certain activities are regulated or prohibited to minimise ecological damage.
• ESAs are notified under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, providing a regulatory mechanism for conserving ecologically fragile areas outside formally protected areas.
• ESA designation does not automatically mean displacement of people; the regulatory framework generally distinguishes between prohibited, regulated and permissible activities.

Why the Western Ghats Matter

• The Western Ghats are a globally significant biodiversity region and an important source of river systems, forests, groundwater recharge and ecosystem services.
• They extend across Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu.
• Their ecological continuity means that conservation decisions in one State can have implications beyond that State's administrative boundaries.

Way Forward

• Karnataka should reconcile the concerns of farmers, workers and local communities with its responsibility to conserve the Western Ghats.
• ESA boundaries should be based on updated scientific data, ground-truthing and local-level ecological mapping, rather than relying exclusively on older remote-sensing datasets.
• A credible alternative map should identify actual ecologically sensitive landscapes while minimising unnecessary inclusion of settlements and productive agricultural areas.
• Greater Centre–State consultation and stakeholder participation can help balance conservation objectives with livelihood and development concerns.