Odisha is seeking to ease environmental restrictions to promote tourism inside and around some of its most ecologically sensitive regions, including tiger reserves and Ramsar wetlands, official records show.
Experts have flagged the move as "dangerous" for conservation efforts and tribal rights.
According to minutes of a high-level meeting chaired by the Odisha chief secretary on May 30, the state plans to revisit and amend Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) notifications to remove clauses prohibiting construction and commercial activities.
It also plans to request the Centre to allow forest land to be used for non-site-specific purposes such as hospitality infrastructure and to re-examine Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) classifications to accommodate more tourism projects along the coast.
ESZs are buffer areas created around protected forests, wildlife sanctuaries and national parks to protect wildlife and biodiversity from harmful human activities such as mining, construction and polluting industries. Activities like farming, eco-tourism and the use of renewable energy are usually allowed with restrictions.
These buffer areas between wildlife habitats and human-dominated regions act as "shock absorbers", said B K Singh, a retired Indian Forest Service (IFS) officer.
"The move is definitely not in the interest of conservation and will lead to a rise in human-wildlife conflict, as seen in the case of Dhenkanal, where human-elephant conflict has increased over the years," he said.
Retd IFS officer and ESZ guidelines author Prakriti Srivastava said the guidelines were designed to limit human impact, reduce human-wildlife conflict and maintain wildlife corridors.
In a state like Odisha, where 149 people died in elephant encounters in 2023–24, the push to restrict ESZs and promote commercial activity reflects "double standards and endangers both people and wildlife", she said.
The minutes of meeting (MoM) note that the current "no commercial/no construction" clause in ESZ notifications "does not accurately reflect the enabling spirit" of the 2011 guidelines issued by the Centre.
"ESZs notified/to be notified should be discussed with the Department of Tourism (DoT) and the tourism master plan should be taken into consideration," the MoM read.
The Odisha Coastal Zone Management Authority has been asked to re-examine CRZ classifications to support tourism in areas having "extremely high potential".
The state has also decided to set up an empowered committee under the chairpersonship of the additional chief secretary, Forest and Environment Department, to discuss issues relating to tourism projects vis-a-vis forest clearance and ESZs.
However, independent ecologists, wildlife scientists or tribal representatives are absent from the panel.
Experts say Odisha's move could allow economic interests to shape regulatory frameworks meant for ecological protection and mark a dangerous departure from India's legal and ecological commitments.
"The State is the constitutional trustee of forests and wildlife, with a mandate to safeguard these natural assets," Debadityo Sinha, Lead - Climate & Ecosystems at the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, said.
"A directive that requires states to merely 'take into consideration' the tourism master plan while notifying ESZs raises serious concerns. It implies that economic interests may override ecological imperatives," he said.
The Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, prohibits commercial construction inside national parks and sanctuaries unless it directly supports conservation or is part of approved low-impact tourism.
Forest land diversion for non-site-specific purposes such as resorts would require forest clearance under the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980, and the consent of local Gram Sabhas under the Forest Rights Act, 2006.
The state's proposal to remove ESZ construction restrictions is also at odds with the June 2022 directions of the Supreme Court mandating a minimum one-kilometre buffer around all protected areas to safeguard wildlife habitats, according to Srivastava.
Sinha said the state's plan also contradicts the National Forest Policy, 1988, which clearly states that the derivation of direct economic benefit must be subordinate to environmental stability and the maintenance of ecological balance.
It appears the meeting did not deliberate on ecological assessments such as carrying capacity studies, environmental impact assessments or any scientific evaluation of the consequences of tourism activities on natural ecosystems and wildlife, he said.
Such vague and arbitrary administrative directions not only violate statutory mandates under forest and wildlife laws, but also risk setting a dangerous precedent. They jeopardise Odisha's rich biodiversity and undermine both national and international obligations, he added.
