Conservation vs. Development: The Rights Against Climate Change and India’s Climate Commitments

Relevance to the UPSC Exam –

Prelims:

• GS Paper 1 (Environment and Ecology): Biodiversity (GIB conservation) and climate change commitments (Kyoto Protocol, Paris Agreement).

Mains:

• GS Paper 2:
  • Governance: Article 21 (right to life) and judicial activism (Article 32 writ).
  • Policies and Interventions: Renewable energy targets, UNFCCC.
• GS Paper 3:
  • Environment: Endangered species conservation and climate change.
  • Infrastructure: Renewable energy and sustainable development.
• Essay Paper: Topics like “Conservation vs. Development.”
• Ethics Paper: Environmental ethics, sustainable development.

Background and Overview

On March 21, 2024, the Supreme Court of India delivered a landmark judgment on climate change and human rights in M.K. Ranjitsinh and Others v. Union of India and Others (hereinafter “M.K. Ranjitsinh”), formulating a new constitutional right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change. A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud anchored this new right in Articles 21 (right to life and personal liberty) and 14 (right to equality) of the Indian Constitution. The judgment represents a remarkable development in constitutional climate litigation in India and worldwide.

Despite the challenges in addressing the immediate issue at hand (threats posed by overhead power transmission lines to two critically endangered bird species), the final judgment provides a strong constitutional foundation for climate change-related human rights in India. It declares a new fundamental human right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change, connects it to the right to a clean and healthy environment established in earlier judicial decisions, and traces its origins to the right to life and the right to equality. Moreover, the court embraced a recognition-based approach to climate justice, noting that certain groups, including indigenous, tribal, and forest-dwelling communities, women, low-income households, and specific geographical areas like the Lakshadweep Islands, are particularly vulnerable to climate change impacts.

Section 1: The Great Indian Bustard – An Endangered Avian Giant

1. Background and Ecological Significance
   • The Great Indian Bustard (GIB), scientifically known as Ardeotis nigriceps, is a critically endangered bird native to India. Standing at almost one meter tall, this bird is known for its distinctive black cap, pale neck, and robust body. Once found in substantial numbers across the Indian subcontinent, its population has dwindled to alarming levels, making it one of the world’s rarest birds today.
2. Distribution and Habitat:
   • Historically distributed throughout India and parts of Pakistan, its current habitat is restricted to small patches in Rajasthan and Gujarat.
   • Prefers dry grasslands, arid landscapes, and scrublands.
   • Typically nests on open ground or shallow soil cavities, making its eggs highly vulnerable to predation.
3. Conservation Status and Decline:
   • 1988: Classified as ‘threatened’ by the IUCN.
   • 1994-2008: Reclassified as ‘endangered’.
   • 2011-present: Listed as ‘critically endangered’.
4. The population decline has been steep:
   • 1960s: Estimated at 1,260 individuals.
   • 2013: Estimated at approximately 125 individuals by the Rajasthan government.
   • 2018: IUCN estimated fewer than 150 mature individuals remain.
5. Key Threats to the GIB:
   • Habitat Loss and Fragmentation: Agricultural expansion, mining, road infrastructure, and settlements have significantly reduced and fragmented GIB habitats.
   • Power Line Collisions: Overhead transmission lines crossing the bird’s flying path have resulted in high collision mortality rates.
   • Predation and Low Reproduction Rates: Predators like mongooses, monitor lizards, and stray dogs, coupled with low reproductive rates (typically a single egg laid per clutch), hinder population recovery.
   • Human Disturbances: Livestock grazing and trampling, pesticide use, and hunting contribute to their decline.
6. Conservation Efforts to Date:
   • Listed in Schedule I of the Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972, affording it the highest level of legal protection.
   • A national project initiated in 2016 for the conservation breeding of the GIB.
   • Habitat restoration and the installation of predator-proof enclosures in critical breeding habitats.
7. The Legal Battle for Survival:

In response to the rapid decline in the GIB population, a writ petition was filed invoking the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution. The petition (Writ Petition [Civil] No. 838 of 2019) sought comprehensive conservation measures, including:

• Installing bird diverters on existing power lines.
• Imposing an embargo on new and existing projects in critical habitats.
• Implementing a population control program for stray dogs.
• Protecting grasslands from further degradation and encroachment.
• Establishing predator-proof enclosures in breeding habitats.

The Supreme Court responded with a comprehensive judgment on April 19, 2021, directing urgent measures to protect the GIB.

Section 2: The Judgment Dated 19 April 2021 and Subsequent Developments

1. Initial Judgment Highlights (April 19, 2021):
   • Restricting overhead transmission lines in priority habitats (~99,000 sq. km).
   • All low-voltage lines in priority habitats to be laid underground.
   • High-voltage lines to be evaluated for feasibility on a case-by-case basis.
   • Existing overhead lines to be retrofitted with bird diverters.

2. Key Directives Issued:
   • Installation of Bird Diverters: Mandatory installation on existing overhead lines.
   • Feasibility Study for Underground Cables: Appointed a committee to assess the feasibility of laying high-voltage lines underground.
   • Committee Recommendations: Conversion of low-voltage lines to underground in priority habitats.

3. Challenges to the Judgment:

The Ministries of Environment, Power, and Renewable Energy filed an application (IA No. 149293 of 2021) seeking modification of the judgment due to:

• Impacts on Renewable Energy Development: The order affected significant renewable energy potential areas in Gujarat and Rajasthan.
• Technical Feasibility Issues: High costs and technical challenges with underground cabling.
• Contradiction with International Climate Commitments: Potential hindrance to India’s commitments to shift towards non-fossil fuel energy under the Paris Agreement.

4. Revised Orders (January 19, 2024):

• • The Supreme Court ordered a comprehensive status report balancing GIB conservation and renewable energy development.
  • Directed the Chief Secretaries of Gujarat and Rajasthan and the earlier-appointed committee to file updated reports.

5. Union Government’s Additional Affidavit:

• • The Union Government filed an additional affidavit emphasizing:
  • Historic Decline of GIB Population: Started in the 1960s, well before the electrification of the area.
  • Impact of Various Threats: Including habitat destruction, predation, and pesticide use.
  • Ongoing Conservation Efforts: Detailed measures under the GIB National Project, including ex-situ and in-situ conservation, predator-proof enclosures, and collaboration with the Wildlife Institute of India.

6. Reconstitution of the Committee:

• • A new committee of experts was appointed to evaluate the feasibility of the April 2021 judgment and recommend suitable modifications.

Section 3: The Mission to Combat Climate Change

1.     India’s Commitment under International Conventions

The Kyoto Protocol (2005):

• India committed to emission reduction targets under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

Paris Agreement (2015):

• India pledged to reduce its carbon emissions intensity by 33-35% from 2005 levels by 2030.
• Targeted increasing non-fossil fuel energy capacity to 50% by 2030.

India’s Updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs):

• Increase non-fossil fuel-based energy capacity to 50% by 2030.
• Enhance investments in agriculture, water resources, and coastal areas to adapt to climate change.
• Develop frameworks for rapid dissemination of climate technology.

2.     The Right to a Healthy Environment and the Right to be Free from Adverse Effects of Climate Change

Constitutional Provisions:

• Article 21: Right to life and personal liberty, encompassing the right to a healthy environment.
• Article 48A: The State’s duty to protect and improve the environment.
• Article 51A(g): The duty of every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment.

Judicial Recognition of the Right:

• C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath: Articles 48A and 51A(g) to be read in light of Article 21.
• Virender Gaur v. State of Haryana: Right to a clean environment as integral to the right to life.
• Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board v. C. Kenchappa: Recognized climate change’s adverse effects.

In M.K. Ranjitsinh, the Supreme Court extended the right to a clean environment to include the right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change, noting that both rights are “two sides of the same coin” (Paragraph 24). This new right directly addresses the disproportionate impacts of climate change on vulnerable communities and geographic areas. The court recognized that climate change could affect different communities differently, violating the right to equality under Article 14.

3.     Importance of Solar Power as a Source of Renewable Energy

India’s Solar Energy Potential:

• Receives 5,000 trillion kWh of solar energy annually, with 4-7 kWh/sqm/day across most regions.
• Large expanses of arid terrain in Gujarat and Rajasthan ideal for solar power generation.

Key Solar Initiatives:

• National Solar Mission (2010): Aim to establish India as a global leader in solar energy.
• International Solar Alliance (2015): Collaboration with 94 member countries to promote solar power.
• One Sun One World One Grid (OSOWOG): Initiative to connect regional grids globally.

Solar Power in India’s Climate Strategy:

• Part of India’s target to achieve 500 GW of non-fossil-based electricity generation by 2030.