Why in news?

Eminent ecologist Madhav Gadgil passed away at 83 in Pune, leaving behind a lasting environmental legacy.

Among his many contributions, his role as chair of the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP) remains the most influential. Although the panel’s report was rejected by the then government, Gadgil consistently advocated for safeguarding the fragile Western Ghats from unregulated development.

Years on, the report’s warnings and recommendations continue to resurface in public debate, especially after landslides and ecological disasters in the region, underscoring its enduring relevance.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• A Prescription for Protecting the Western Ghats
• Recommendations of the Gadgil Panel
• Political Opposition to the Gadgil Panel Report
• The Kasturirangan Panel and the Scaled-Down Western Ghats Plan

A Prescription for Protecting the Western Ghats

• The Western Ghats stretch from Gujarat to Kerala and Tamil Nadu and act as the water tower of peninsular India.
• Major rivers like the Cauvery, Godavari, Krishna, Periyar and Netravathi originate here.
• The region is a global biodiversity hotspot with high endemism, hosting species found nowhere else.
• Why the WGEEP Was Set Up?
  • In March 2010, the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP) was constituted due to the region’s ecological sensitivity, complex geography and growing threats from climate change and unregulated development.
  • The panel’s formation was triggered by a 2010 meeting of the Save Western Ghats movement in the Nilgiris, attended by then Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh. The deliberations led to the creation of WGEEP.
  • The panel was tasked with:
    • assessing the ecology of the Western Ghats, identifying ecologically sensitive areas,
    • recommending ecologically sensitive zones, and
    • proposing conservation, rejuvenation and governance mechanisms for sustainable development.

Recommendations of the Gadgil Panel

• Entire Western Ghats as Ecologically Sensitive - The Gadgil-led panel designated the entire 1,29,037 sq km of the Western Ghats as an Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA), reflecting the region’s overall ecological fragility.
• Three-Tier Sensitivity Zoning - The Ghats were divided into three categories — ESZ 1, ESZ 2 and ESZ 3 — based on levels of ecological sensitivity, with stricter controls in the more fragile zones.
• Restrictions on Development Activities - The panel proposed banning genetically modified crops, new special economic zones and new hill stations across ESZs.
  • It called for no new mining licences and the phase-out of existing mines within five years in ESZ 1 and 2, and a complete ban on new quarrying in ESZ 1.
• Limits on Infrastructure Expansion - New railway lines and major roads were to be avoided in ESZ 1 and 2, except where absolutely essential, to minimise ecological disruption.
• Creation of a Statutory Authority - The report recommended setting up a 24-member Western Ghats Ecology Authority (WGEA) under the Environment Protection Act to regulate, manage and plan activities across all ecologically sensitive zones in the six Western Ghats States.
• Composition of the Authority - The proposed authority was to include domain and resource experts, along with representatives from key nodal ministries, ensuring coordinated, multi-state environmental governance.

Political Opposition to the Gadgil Panel Report

• The Gadgil panel submitted its draft report in March 2011 and the final version in August 2011.
• The report was not made public and was instead shared with State governments for comments.
  • Environmental groups challenged the secrecy through RTI applications.
  • After intervention by the Chief Information Commissioner and subsequent court proceedings, the report was finally made public in May 2012.
• Gadgil argued that the report promoted inclusive development and recommended placing its proposals before Gram Sabhas to move away from exclusionary models of conservation and growth.
• State-Level Resistance
  • The report faced strong opposition from Kerala and Maharashtra.
  • Maharashtra objected to the proposed Western Ghats Ecology Authority, calling it a parallel structure to existing institutions.
  • Kerala argued that declaring large areas as ecologically sensitive would hurt agriculture and livelihoods in districts such as Idukki and Wayanad.
  • Political leaders and the Catholic Church warned of economic disruption and displacement of local communities.

The Kasturirangan Panel and the Scaled-Down Western Ghats Plan

• After widespread opposition to the Gadgil report, the Environment Ministry set up a High-Level Working Group in 2012 under space scientist K.Kasturirangan to review the recommendations.
• Key Recommendations of the 2013 Report
  • The Kasturirangan panel proposed declaring about 56,825 sq km of the Western Ghats as ecologically sensitive.
  • It supported curbs on mining, polluting industries, thermal power plants, and large townships, but adopted a narrower approach than the Gadgil panel.
  • Unlike the earlier report, the panel identified specific villages as ecologically sensitive and released state-wise lists, making the proposal more targeted and administratively feasible.
• Policy Deadlock Continues
  • Based on the report, the Centre has issued six draft ESA notifications, the latest in August 2024.
  • However, disagreements with States persist, and a committee led by former Director General of Forests Sanjay Kumar is still working to finalise the boundaries.