Green India Mission Audit Findings

Performance Audit of the Green India Mission (GIM)

Overview and Findings:

• A performance audit conducted by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) revealed inadequate outcomes from the Green India Mission (GIM) over a decade.
  • Target: To improve forest quality over 1.4 million hectares.
  • Actual achieved: Only 0.11 million hectares (approximately 7.86% of the target).
  • Contribution to expanding forest cover was merely 4%.

Government Schemes Involved:

• Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA): Manages funds collected for afforestation in response to forest land diversion.
• Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), now known as VB-GRAM: Aims to provide rural wage labour for plantation and land-restoration works; however, integration with GIM was ineffective.

Contextual Significance:

• GIM was one of the eight pillars of the National Action Plan on Climate Change, launched in 2008.
• Intended to support India's commitment under the Paris Agreement to create an additional carbon sink of 2.5 to 3 billion tonnes by 2030.

Current Developments:

• The focus has shifted to the initiative ‘Ek Ped Maa Ke Naam,’ launched in 2024, with claims of planting 140 crore saplings, although this effort highlights the difference between mere tree planting and effective forest restoration.
• The India State of Forest Report 2023 indicates:
  • Gain of 1,445 square kilometers in green cover.
  • Only 156 square kilometers categorized as true forest; 1,289 square kilometers classified as ‘tree cover outside recorded forests.’

Restoration Challenges:

• Notable sites like the Aravallis face significant degradation, with invasive species overtaking native flora.
• The proposed 'Green Wall' of newly planted trees cannot reclaim historical ecosystems or counteract the extensive damage from mining activities.

Implications:

• The CAG audit serves as a critical reflection on the effectiveness of the GIM and raises questions on actual forest recovery efforts versus superficial tree plantation initiatives.
• Restoration cannot be equated with the counting of trees; it requires a deep ecological approach to restore living forest systems.

Conclusion:

• The findings emphasize a disconnect between aims and outcomes, highlighting that while tree planting efforts may have numerical success, they do not effectively translate into restoring India's forests or their complex ecosystems.