A team of researchers from the Indian Institute of Forest Management (IIFM), Bhopal, and Technische Universitat-Dresden, Germany, has unveiled a new framework to holistically assess the sustainability of India’s vast forest resources. The study moves beyond the traditional focus on tree cover to include the vital social and economic dimensions. This development is essential for a country that is home to the world’s largest population, where millions of marginalised communities rely directly on forests for their sustenance, and where climate change impacts are increasing pressure on these fragile ecosystems. The proposed framework introduces a comprehensive list of 28 indicators and 64 sub-indicators to create a robust, evidence-based system for monitoring and reporting.
For decades, forest management worldwide has primarily focused on timber and other resource production. Still, the concept of sustainability has evolved to emphasise the integration of ecological, social, and economic aspects to ensure the needs of future generations are not compromised. In India, however, the existing monitoring and reporting systems have fallen short of this holistic vision.
The new framework is rooted in a detailed, comparative literature review. The researchers critically examined India’s two main existing monitoring systems: the biennial India State of Forest Report (ISFR), published by the Forest Survey of India (FSI), and the National Working Plan Code (NWPC), which guides forest management at the local division level. They compared these national frameworks against established global standards, such as the Montreal Process, the Forest Europe Process, and the ITTO Criteria and Indicators (C&I) for Sustainable Forest Management.
The analysis revealed a significant imbalance. India’s current frameworks are largely confined to ecological indicators, overlooking the crucial social and economic contributions of forests. For instance, the FSI reports on forest cover, carbon stock, biodiversity, and areas affected by fire. But the scope for measuring overall sustainability is limited because the social and economic dimensions are not comprehensively captured. Even the latest revision of the NWPC, while incorporating some social and limited economic indicators, lacks the detailed mechanisms and methods for their consistent assessment.
The new framework improves upon this by compiling a list of indicators across all three dimensions. For the ecological dimension, the researchers refined and merged existing indicators, proposing ten key areas. While much of this data is already collected by the FSI and NWPC, the new approach calls for consolidating this information onto a common platform and strengthening data collection at the finer, local range level to enable better attribution of conservation interventions.
Significant improvements to the assessment come in the social and economic dimensions, which were previously the weakest links. The ten proposed social indicators include critical metrics like the livelihood enhancement of local communities through forests, the occupational health and safety of people working in the forestry sector, and the status of tenure and ownership rights of local communities over forest resources. These are vital for assessing the social dynamics of forest ecosystems and supporting the livelihoods of millions of rural and tribal people. The framework also includes indicators to assess the status of people’s participation in management and benefit-sharing processes, as well as the application of indigenous knowledge in forest planning.
In the economic dimension, the eight new indicators go beyond the NWPC’s limited focus on income generation and employment. The latest list includes metrics to assess costs incurred in forests (like administrative and protection costs), financial flows from forests (gross revenue from timber and non-timber forest products), the economic value of standing timber, and profits from value-added enterprises, such as those run by Farmer-Producer Organisations. This is essential for measuring the economic efficiency and overall contribution of the forestry sector, which has historically been undermined by incomplete accounting.
The researchers acknowledge that implementing this robust framework will face practical challenges. A major limitation is that Forest Departments often lack efficient human capital and sufficient resources, and the current data collection is inconsistent. To overcome this, the study recommends a structured format for data collection, specific training for concerned officials, and improved coordination between the nodal organizations within and across departments.
The study provides a pathway for informed decision-making and the development of enhanced management plans. By integrating social and economic dimensions, the framework will augment the valuation of forest-based ecosystem services and contribute to natural capital accounting for the forestry sector. Furthermore, a holistic framework will promote equitable benefit-sharing mechanisms, help India monitor and report on its progress toward global climate and biodiversity commitments (such as the NDCs and SDGs), and facilitate the design of context-specific interventions to strengthen forest management and enhance livelihoods for forest-dependent communities.
Source: https://researchmatters.in/
