Green India Mission (GIM)
Why in News?
- On 13–14 August 2026, the CAG’s performance audit report on the Green India Mission (GIM) was tabled in Parliament, flagging a ~98% shortfall in forest-cover targets and serious implementation gaps.
- The report triggered sharp political debate, with opposition parties alleging exaggerated claims about the mission’s success, while the government highlighted eco-restoration of 1.84 lakh hectares since 2015.
- GIM is one of the eight missions under the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC), launched in 2014 by the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEF&CC).
- Objectives:
- Increase forest/tree cover by 5 million hectares (later operational target: 1.4 million hectares by 2025).
- Improve quality of existing forests and non-forest lands.
- Enhance ecosystem services (biodiversity, water, carbon sequestration) and forest-based livelihoods.
- Implemented in 16–18 states/UTs through Annual Plans of Operation (APOs) with central support and state co-funding.
- Target achievement:
- Forest cover increase: 0.034 million ha achieved vs 1.4 million ha target (~97.57% shortfall).
- Quality improvement: 0.11 million ha vs 1.4 million ha target (~92% shortfall).
- Planning & monitoring:
- Only 6 of 68 sampled APOs were submitted on time; delays led to loss of proposed funding support (~₹10,600 crore).
- 8 states/UTs did not maintain annual accounts; many accounts were unaudited or showed discrepancies.
- Site selection & convergence:
- Landscapes with low to moderate climate vulnerability were often prioritised over more vulnerable areas.
- Weak coordination with other schemes (e.g., MGNREGA, CAMPA, NWMP) led to duplication or fragmented efforts.
- Carbon & biodiversity:
- Only Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh assessed carbon sequestration during 2015–2025; most states ignored this core GIM metric.
- GIM is central to India’s climate adaptation & mitigation strategy, linking forest restoration with carbon sinks, water security, and rural livelihoods.
- CAG’s findings expose gaps between policy ambition and field-level execution, crucial for course-correction ahead of 2030 NDC targets and Long-Term Low-Carbon Strategies.
- Inadequate & irregular funding: Many states cited insufficient budgetary support and delayed releases, affecting plantation survival and maintenance.
- Weak institutional mechanisms: Poor inter-departmental coordination, lack of dedicated GIM cells, and inadequate technical capacity at state/forest-division levels.
- Survival & quality: Focus on numbers (plants planted) over survival rates, species diversity, and ecological restoration; ~70% of sampled sites showed no measurable green gains.
- Revise GIM operational guidelines to emphasise landscape-level restoration, native species, and survival-based incentives rather than mere plantation targets.
- Strengthen convergence with MGNREGA, CAMPA, FRA, and watershed programmes to pool resources and avoid duplication.
- Institutionalise annual carbon & biodiversity accounting, third-party audits, and public dashboards for transparency.
- Build capacity of forest departments and local communities in scientific restoration, monitoring, and climate-resilient planning.
