Decoding the judgment on Jim Corbett

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.

Scroll to Top