Decoding the judgment on Jim Corbett
Decoding the judgment on Jim Corbett
Current Affairs Daily Editorials
La Excellence IAS Academy | April 15, 2024 | Environment, Ecology and Disaster Management
| Syllabus: GS III, Subject: Environment, Ecology and Disaster Management, Topic: Biodiversity and Conservation, Issue: Biodiversity Conservation |
Context: The Supreme Court exposed a corrupt network involving politicians, forest officials, and contractors responsible for cutting down 6,000 trees in Jim Corbett.
Key points in Supreme Court ruiling
- Emphasized an eco-centric approach over anthropocentrism in ecotourism.
- Banned tiger safaris in core areas and formed a committee to assess their feasibility in peripheral zones across India.
- Rejected the 2019 NTCA guidelines allowing zoo-like safaris in national parks.
- Insisted that tigers for safaris must be sourced from the same landscape,
- Ruling invoked the precautionary principle to minimize environmental damage, citing the threat of mass extinction.
- The precautionary principle applies beyond tigers to all endangered species.
Concerns remaining:
- The Supreme Court’s plan to recover restoration costs lacks a clear methodology.
- Recovering costs does not necessarily restore the environment’s ability to provide goods and services.
| +1 Advantage for mains
Different principle to access the damage to the ecosystem ● The European Liability Directive defines conservation status as influences affecting habitat and species long-term survival. ● India’s valuation framework pre-T.N. Godavarman case aimed to replace lost forests with compensatory plantations. ● Compensatory afforestation levy and net present value (NPV) are India’s current valuation choices. ● The International Court of Justice in Costa Rica v. Nicaragua (2018) asserts damage to the environment and loss of its ability to provide goods and services are compensable. |
Source: The Hindu
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.