Syllabus: GS III & V: Environment, Biodiversity, Conservation and Environmental Governance

Why in the News?

The Assam Government has proposed approaching the Centre to reduce the Eco-Sensitive Zone around Kaziranga National Park and Tiger Reserve, with a proposed range of about 1–3 kilometres, compared with the prevailing default framework. The move has triggered debate over whether a narrower buffer can adequately protect Kaziranga’s wildlife corridors and surrounding ecosystem. 

Importantly, the 10-kilometre default protection continues until a site-specific notification is finalised, according to a 2026 Gauhati High Court proceeding concerning Kaziranga. 

What is an Eco-Sensitive Zone?

An Eco-Sensitive Zone is a regulated area around protected areas intended to act as a “shock absorber” between highly protected ecosystems and areas of greater human activity.

• The idea emerged from the National Wildlife Action Plan and Wildlife Conservation Strategy, 2002. 
• The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change issued detailed ESZ guidelines in 2011. 
• The general guideline envisaged ESZs extending up to 10 kilometres, but the actual extent is intended to be site-specific, depending on ecological sensitivity, corridors and landscape linkages. 
• ESZs are notified under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and associated rules.

What Activities are Regulated?

The ESZ framework broadly classifies activities as:

• Prohibited: Activities such as commercial mining and certain highly polluting industries are restricted.
• Regulated: Activities such as construction, road expansion and commercial tourism may require specified permissions and safeguards.
• Permitted: Environmentally compatible activities such as traditional agriculture, horticulture and rainwater harvesting can generally continue subject to applicable rules.

Thus, an ESZ does not mean that all human activity is prohibited. Its purpose is to regulate activities according to ecological sensitivity.

Why is Kaziranga Particularly Sensitive?

Kaziranga is not an isolated island of biodiversity. Its ecological security is closely linked to the wider Kaziranga–Karbi Anglong landscape.

• The Karbi Anglong hills act as natural highlands where wildlife can take refuge during Assam’s annual floods. Kaziranga is connected to these hills through terrestrial wildlife corridors. 
• The landscape is important for wide-ranging species such as the greater one-horned rhinoceros, tiger and Asian elephant.
• The Kaziranga–Karbi Anglong landscape is recognised by the NTCA as an important tiger landscape, with habitat connectivity crucial for long-term wildlife viability. 

Therefore, ecological boundaries cannot always be understood simply as administrative boundaries.

Why is the Reduction Being Proposed?

The State government has argued that a wider ESZ could constrain urban expansion, civic infrastructure and development of settlements surrounding Kaziranga.

This raises a legitimate governance challenge: communities living around protected areas need roads, housing, livelihoods and public infrastructure.

However, the critical question is whether reducing the geographical buffer is the best solution, or whether scientific zoning and better land-use planning can accommodate development without weakening ecological protection.

Major Concerns

1. Habitat and Corridor Fragmentation

• A narrower ESZ could increase development pressure close to the protected area. Roads, resorts, settlements and other infrastructure can obstruct wildlife movement and habitat connectivity.

2. Mining and Quarrying Pressure

• The Kaziranga–Karbi Anglong landscape has faced concerns relating to stone quarrying, mining and crushing activities. 
• A 2026 Gauhati High Court proceeding records earlier directions concerning mining and the nine identified animal corridors around Kaziranga. 
• The NTCA has also emphasised the importance of preventing ecologically unsustainable land use in wildlife corridors. 

3. Flood and Climate Resilience

• Kaziranga’s annual floods are an important ecological process. Wildlife moves towards higher ground during severe flooding, making surrounding landscapes particularly important.
• Climate variability, extreme rainfall and habitat fragmentation can increase the vulnerability of both wildlife and local communities.

What Does the Supreme Court Say?

The Supreme Court’s position on ESZs has evolved from a uniform approach towards a more site-specific framework.

In T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India, the Court initially directed a minimum one-kilometre ESZ around protected forests. In April 2023, however, it modified the directions, recognising that a uniform one-size-fits-all approach was impractical. Existing notified or proposed site-specific ESZs were to be dealt with according to their applicable framework. 

A subsequent Supreme Court clarification also made clear that where a draft notification or State proposal for an ESZ exists, the proposed area continues to be relevant rather than automatically applying a one-kilometre limit.

Way Forward

• Assam should undertake a scientific landscape-level assessment before finalising any reduction, covering wildlife corridors, flood refuges, wetlands, river systems and habitat connectivity.
• Instead of relying only on a uniform distance, authorities can adopt differentiated zoning, allowing appropriate development in lower-sensitivity areas while providing stronger protection to critical corridors and habitats.
• Cumulative environmental impact assessment should be used for clusters of roads, tourism projects, mining and other infrastructure rather than assessing projects only in isolation.
• Local communities should be treated as partners in conservation, with sustainable tourism, eco-friendly livelihoods and better compensation mechanisms.
• The National Tiger Conservation Authority, Wildlife Institute of India, State Forest Department and local communities should jointly guide landscape-level planning.

Important Terms

• Eco-Sensitive Zone: A regulated area around protected areas intended to reduce harmful human pressures.
• Shock absorber: The role of an ESZ in gradually reducing the intensity of human activities towards the protected area.
• Wildlife corridor: A landscape that allows animals to move between fragmented habitats.
• Habitat fragmentation: The division of a continuous habitat into smaller and isolated patches.
• Landscape-level conservation: Conservation that considers interconnected ecosystems beyond the boundary of a single protected area.
• Site-specific ESZ: An ESZ whose extent and restrictions are determined according to the ecological characteristics and developmental context of a particular protected area.

Key Takeaway

The Kaziranga debate is not simply a question of 10 kilometres versus 1 kilometre. It is a test of whether India can pursue development without severing ecological connectivity. The sustainable approach is to combine scientific zoning, strong corridor protection, community participation and responsible development rather than treating conservation and development as mutually exclusive.

Exam Hook – Mains

“Eco-Sensitive Zones should regulate development, not eliminate it. Discuss in the context of the proposed reduction of Kaziranga’s Eco-Sensitive Zone.”