Eco-Sensitive Zones (ESZs) are ecologically important and fragile areas around protected areas designated to be protected from industrial pollution and unregulated development under the Environment Protection Act (EPA), 1986. As per the National Wildlife Action Plan (2002-2016), land within 10 km of the boundaries of national parks and wildlife sanctuaries is to be notified as Eco- Sensitive Zones (ESZs).
Need for creation of ESZS:

• They are created as “shock absorbers” for the protected areas, to minimize the negative impact on the “fragile ecosystems” by certain human activities taking place nearby.
• They act as transition zones from areas requiring higher protection to those requiring lesser protection and help in refining the environment around them.
• They enable in-situ conservation of an endangered species in their natural habitat as well as reducing man-animal conflict.

Issues related to the creation of ESZs:

• Several states like Kerala, Karnataka, etc. have been lobbying for a reduction in areas demarcated as ESZs due to the impact on habitation, developmental activities and revenue. For example, the total extent of the wildlife sanctuaries in Kerala is eight lakh acres. If one-km of ESZ is demarcated from their boundaries, around 4 lakh acres of human settlements, including farmlands, would come within that purview.
• There is a lack of participatory planning exercise while implementing the ESZs. This coupled with lack of awareness regarding conservation techniques and the adverse impact of overexploitation of resources in these areas pose challenges to the local communities.
• There is also a lack of ground investigation for proposals with areas being randomly marked on topographic sheets. Moreover, to cater to the increasing demand for eco-tourism, the government is developing new sites and gateways to the ESZs leading to an increase in plastic and carbon footprint of the area.
• There have been demands that human settlements located close to the forest boundary must be exempted from ESZs as it restricts land-use change, affecting livelihood prospects of local residents. Also, the density of human population around the forest lands is high in some regions, making implementation of ESZ regulations tough.

Recently, the Supreme Court (SC) has directed that every protected forest, national park and wildlife sanctuary in the country should mandatorily have a minimum 1 km ESZ, from its demarcated boundary. Further, mining within a national wildlife sanctuary or national park cannot be permitted. According to the SC, no new permanent structure will be allowed within the ESZ. Because of this, protests erupted across the high ranges of Kerala in response to the Apex Court’s directions. Due to the high density of human population near the notified protected areas, farmers’ groups and political parties have been demanding that human settlements be exempt from the ESZ ruling. Thus, certain measures need to be undertaken to avoid such reactions in the future and enable smooth implementation of ESZs. Some of these include undertaking participatory planning of ESZs to balance needs of indigenous people, conducting on-ground investigations to verify environmentally fragile zones, promoting eco-friendly livelihood practices, and building consensus among states. This would require collaboration between the government, civil society and other stakeholders to balance sustainable development with economic growth in the long-run.