To protect Western Ghats, southern states must break impasse

The Western Ghats are recognised globally as one of the eight 'hottest hotspots' of biological diversity, making their conservation critical. The proposed Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA) classification by the Kasturirangan Committee aims to restrict environmentally damaging activities such as mining, polluting industries, thermal power plants, and large-scale constructions. The delay in implementing these protections exacerbates the region's vulnerability to extreme weather events, as seen in the recent Wayanad landslide and Kerala floods. UPSC often tests the understanding of ESAs under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the tension between conservation efforts and local livelihoods. A key analytical concept introduced here is Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES), a system where locals are remunerated for maintaining natural resources (like carbon sequestration and water security), offering a potential solution to align ecological realities with economic aspirations.

Geographically, the Western Ghats are crucial for India's climate and hydrology. They form a continuous mountain chain, broken only by the Palakkad Gap, which significantly influences the Indian monsoon by acting as an orographic barrier to moisture-bearing winds from the Arabian Sea, causing heavy rainfall on the windward (coastal) side. Furthermore, the Ghats are the origin points for major peninsular rivers like the Godavari, Krishna, and Cauvery. Understanding the physical geography of the Western Ghats is essential for GS Paper 1. The editorial contrasts the Western Ghats with the Himalayas, noting the higher population density in the Ghats, which intensifies the conflict between infrastructure development and disaster resilience. The link between landforms, monsoon patterns, river systems, and disaster management is a high-yield area for Mains questions.

The prolonged impasse over the Kasturirangan Committee report highlights the complexities of environmental governance within a federal structure. The reluctance of state governments—driven by local political economy and the fear of alienating agrarian and industrial constituencies—demonstrates the challenge of implementing national environmental mandates. The shift in stance by Gujarat, Maharashtra, and Goa illustrates how negotiated settlements can pave the way for partial implementation. However, the resistance from Karnataka, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu requires a governance strategy that moves beyond mere prohibitions to inclusive policy-making. For UPSC, this represents a classic case study in the 'Environment vs. Development' debate, requiring an understanding of how cooperative federalism and innovative policy tools (like remunerating communities) are necessary to bridge the trust deficit between state governments, local populations, and central conservation mandates.