As per the PTI report, records from a high-level meeting led by the state’s Chief Secretary on May 30 reveal Odisha’s intention to revise Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) notifications, particularly the provisions that ban construction and commercial activities near protected areas. The state plans to seek central government authorization for the rerouting of forest land for non-site-specific tourism projects and to reevaluate Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) classifications to facilitate further development along its coastline.
ESZs serve as buffer zones around national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, and forests, created to reduce the detrimental effects of human activities on vulnerable ecosystems. While activities like agriculture, eco-tourism, and renewable energy are allowed under stringent regulations, construction and industrial operations are generally prohibited.
Nevertheless, the Odisha government seems to be pursuing a more lenient interpretation of these regulations. The minutes indicate that the “no construction/no commercial activity” clause within current ESZ notifications “does not accurately reflect the enabling spirit” of the Centre’s 2011 guidelines. Officials have suggested aligning ESZ notifications with the state’s tourism master plan and engaging in discussions with the Department of Tourism.
Also read | Odisha aiming to transform the state into an adventure tourism hub to attract young travellers
The Odisha Coastal Zone Management Authority has been tasked with reassessing CRZ classifications in regions identified as having “extremely high tourism potential”.
To support these aims, the state government has announced the establishment of an empowered committee, chaired by the Additional Chief Secretary of the Forest and Environment Department, to oversee tourism-related projects and clearances in forest and ESZ regions. However, the committee does not include independent ecologists, wildlife scientists, or representatives from tribal communities, which has raised concerns among experts, according to the PTI report.
“This initiative is certainly not in the interest of conservation and will likely result in increased human-wildlife conflict, as evidenced by the situation in Dhenkanal, where human-elephant conflicts have escalated over the years,” PTI quoted BK Singh, a retired Indian Forest Service officer.
Also read | Debrigarh wildlife sanctuary in Odisha recognized as the premier ecotourism destination in India, states Amitabh Kant
Prakriti Srivastava, another retired officer from the Indian Forest Service and one of the architects of India’s ESZ guidelines, remarked that the proposed amendments could severely compromise the aims of these zones. “In a state like Odisha, where 149 people lost their lives in elephant encounters in 2023–24, the drive to limit ESZs and promote commercial activities demonstrates a double standard and endangers both human lives and wildlife,” she stated.
Legal experts argue that these proposals conflict with both national and judicial mandates. “The state is the constitutional caretaker of forests and wildlife, charged with protecting these natural resources,” noted Debadityo Sinha, Lead – Climate and Ecosystems at the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy.
“A directive instructing states to merely ‘consider’ the tourism master plan while notifying ESZs raises significant concerns. It suggests that economic factors may take precedence over environmental considerations,” he added.
Sinha emphasized that the initiative to relax construction rules in ESZs contradicts the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling, which mandates a minimum one-kilometre buffer around all protected areas. Furthermore, the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 restricts commercial ventures inside sanctuaries unless they directly contribute to conservation or low-impact tourism. Any diversion of forest land would necessitate approval under the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980, along with consent from local Gram Sabhas as outlined in the Forest Rights Act, 2006.
Critics have highlighted that the May 30 meeting may have overlooked crucial environmental safeguards, such as assessments of carrying capacity, environmental impact studies, and scientific analyses of tourism’s ecological consequences.
“These ambiguous and arbitrary administrative directives not only violate statutory mandates under forest and wildlife laws but also risk establishing a perilous precedent,” Sinha cautioned. “They threaten Odisha’s rich biodiversity and undermine both national and international commitments.”
