In News:

More than one in three tree species threatened with extinction, finds IUCN’s first Global Tree Assessment

Key Highlights:

Global Tree Extinction Risk:

• 38% of the world’s tree species are now facing the risk of extinction — over one in three tree species is at risk.
• This means 16,425 out of 47,282 tree speciesanalyzed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) are under threat.
• Threatened tree species outnumber all threatened birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians combined, highlighting the urgent need for conservation action.

Key Drivers of Threat:

• Deforestation: The primary threat to trees is deforestation, driven by agriculture, livestock rearing, and urban development, especially in tropical regions.
• Climate Change: Rising sea levels and increasingly frequent storms exacerbate the threats, particularly in tropical regions and islands.
• Invasive Species & Pests: Non-native species, pests, and diseases are adding pressure to vulnerable tree populations.

Geographic Vulnerabilities:

• Islands are particularly vulnerable, with a high proportion of threatened species due to habitat destruction and urbanization.
• South America, which boasts the highest tree diversity, faces significant threats, with 3,356 out of 13,668 species at risk, mainly due to deforestation for agriculture.

Ecological and Economic Importance of Trees:

• Trees play a fundamental role in carbon, water, and nutrient cycles, and are critical for soil formation and climate regulation.
• The loss of trees poses a growing threat to thousands of other species of plants, fungi, and animals.
• Trees are essential for local communities, providing resources such as timber, medicines, food, and fuel. Over 5,000 species of trees are used for timber and construction, while more than 2,000 species are vital for food, fuel, and medicine.

Conservation Status:

• Tree species are threatened across 192 countries.
• The assessment is the first global analysis of the conservation status of trees, enabling better-informed conservation decisions.

Positive Actions and Strategies:

• Successful community-driven conservation efforts have had positive outcomes in places like the Juan Fernández Islands, Cuba, Madagascar, and Fiji.
• Some countries, including Ghana, Colombia, Chile, and Kenya, already have national strategies for tree conservation.
• Ex-situ conservation, such as seed banks and botanical gardens, is also crucial to safeguard species that may not survive in the wild.

Urgent Call for Action:

The IUCN Global Tree Assessment underlines the urgent need for enhanced conservation efforts, including:

• Habitat protection and restoration.
• Ex-situ conservation through seed banks and botanical gardens.
• Diversified and species-focused reforestation strategies.
• Supporting community-led conservation initiatives to safeguard vulnerable tree species.

In News:

Centre for Science and Environment release a report on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for Plastic Packaging

Key Findings:

• EPR Guidelines (2022) were a step towards enforcing the "polluter pays" principle, but the system faces significant issues in its implementation and registration processes.
• Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) report, released on October 29, 2024, highlights gaps in the EPR system for plastic packaging and suggests corrective actions.

EPR Guidelines Overview:

• Issued by: Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC).
• Objective: Hold producers, importers, brand owners (PIBOs), and plastic waste processors (PWPs) responsible for managing plastic packaging waste.
• Key Requirements:
  • PIBOs must register on a centralized portal and set targets for collection, recycling, and reuse of plastic packaging.
  • Registration involves compliance with targets on end-of-life recycling and recycled content usage.

Problems Identified in the Current EPR System:

• Low Registration and Enrollment:
  • 41,577 registrations on the EPR portal, but a significant discrepancy in the type of stakeholders registered.
  • 83% of registered entities are importers, 11% are producers, and only 6% are brand owners.
  • Producers contribute 65% of the plastic packaging in the market but have low registration.
• Absence of Key Polluters:
  • Manufacturers of virgin plastics are notably absent from the portal, despite being required to register.
• Fraudulent Practices:
  • 700,000 fake certificates were generated by plastic recyclers, far exceeding the actual certificate generation capacity.
  • The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) found that such fraudulent activities are undermining the integrity of the system.
  • For example, end-of-life co-processing units (e.g., cement plants) claimed to have processed 335.4 million tonnes per annum of plastic waste, while their actual capacity is just 11.4 million tonnes per annum.
• Underreporting and Mismanagement:
  • Despite 23.9 million tonnes of plastic packaging being introduced into the market, the CPCB’s estimation of plastic waste generation (4.1 MT annually) is underestimated.
• Lack of Stakeholder Representation:
  • Urban local bodies and informal waste collectors—key contributors to plastic waste management—are not included in the EPR framework, which limits their incentives and support.

Recommendations for Improvement:

• Incorporate the Informal Sector:
  • Recognize informal waste collectors and waste management agencies in the EPR framework to improve traceability and ensure better waste management.
• Eliminate Fraudulent Practices:
  • Strict actions need to be taken against fraudulent recyclers and fake certificate issuers to restore credibility to the EPR system.
• Establish Fair Pricing for EPR Certificates:
  • Undertake baseline cost studies to determine the true costs of plastic waste management, ensuring fair pricing for recycling certificates and preventing undervaluation.
• Standardize Packaging:
  • Focus on product standardization to ensure that packaging materials are uniform and easily recyclable.
• Strengthen Monitoring:
  • Improve oversight on the registration process and ensure that all polluters (producers, importers, brand owners) comply with the system’s guidelines.

EPR and Plastic Waste Management: Context and Importance

• Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is a policy approach where the responsibility of managing the entire lifecycle of plastic products (from production to disposal) lies with the producer.
• It is an essential part of India’s Plastic Waste Management Rules (2016), which mandate the recycling and proper disposal of plastic packaging waste.

Key Elements of EPR:

• Producer Accountability: Producers are responsible for the take-back, recycling, and final disposal of plastic packaging.
• Waste Minimization: Encourages reducing waste at the source by promoting sustainable packaging designs.
• Lifecycle Approach: Considers the entire lifecycle of the product, focusing on sustainability from production to disposal.
• Polluter Pays Principle: Ensures that the cost of waste management is borne by those responsible for generating the waste.

In News:

The updated NBSAP was released by India at the 16th Conference of Parties (COP16) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

Overview of the NBSAP (2024-30):

• Title:Updated National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plan: A Roadmap for Conservation of India’s Biodiversity.
• Objective: To provide a comprehensive roadmap for biodiversity conservation, aligning with global frameworks like the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF).

Key Features of the Updated NBSAP:

• Alignment with Global Frameworks:
  • The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF) adopted in 2022 aims to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030.
  • India’s updated NBSAP aligns with KMGBF’s goals, focusing on biodiversity conservation, sustainable resource use, and ensuring fair benefit-sharing.
• 23 National Biodiversity Targets:
  • The targets are focused on three key themes:
    • Reducing threats to biodiversity
    • Ensuring sustainable use of biodiversity
    • Enhancing tools for biodiversity implementation
• Key Domains of Focus:
  • Area-based conservation: Protecting ecosystems and habitats.
  • Ecosystem resilience: Enhancing the ability of ecosystems to withstand environmental stressors.
  • Recovery and conservation of threatened species.
  • Conservation of agrobiodiversity: Ensuring the sustainability of agricultural biodiversity.
  • Sustainable management of biodiversity.
  • Enabling tools and solutions: Including financial and technical support for implementation.
• Financial Plan and Expenditure:
  • Biodiversity Expenditure Review (BER) estimated an average annual expenditure of Rs 32,20,713 crore (FY 2017-2022) for biodiversity conservation.
  • Future funding requirements (FY 2024-2030) estimated at Rs 81,664.88 crore annually at the central government level.
  • Biodiversity Finance Plan suggests financing solutions, including public finance, corporate social responsibility (CSR), Ecological Fiscal Transfer (EFT), and Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) mechanisms.
• Capacity Building:
  • The NBSAP stresses the need for capacity building across various levels—national, state, and local.
  • Focus on skills acquisition for biodiversity management and enhancing knowledge to implement conservation strategies.

Implementation Framework:

• Multi-Level Governance:
  • At the national level, the Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change (MoEFCC) will oversee implementation with involvement from 22 other ministries.
  • State-level: Involves State Biodiversity Boards and Union Territory Biodiversity Councils.
  • Local level: Community-driven efforts through Biodiversity Management Committees.
• BIOFIN and Resource Mobilization:
  • India is recognized as a leading country in the implementation of the Biodiversity Finance Initiative (BIOFIN).
  • Encouragement for private entrepreneurs, businesses, and international donors to invest in biodiversity through innovative financial instruments like:
    • Green Bonds
    • Green Funds
    • Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES)
• Incentives for Financial Solutions:
  • India aims to explore funding from corporate social responsibility (CSR), ecological fiscal transfers, and access and benefit sharing mechanisms to meet the financial needs for biodiversity conservation.

Challenges and Strategies:

• Challenges India Faces:
  • Habitat fragmentation
  • Pollution
  • Illegal wildlife trade
  • Adverse effects of climate change
• Strategic Responses:
  • The updated NBSAP provides strategies to address these challenges, ensuring comprehensive conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.

In News:

India with an abysmal score of 45.5 (out of 100) has been ranked 176th in the Global Nature Conservation Index, 2024.

India's Ranking and Score:

• Rank: India ranks 176th out of 180 countries.
• Score: 45.5 out of 100.
• Context: India is listed among the five "worst performers," alongside Kiribati (180), Turkey (179), Iraq (178), and Micronesia (177).

Key Factors Affecting India’s Ranking:

• Inefficient Land Management: The main contributing factor to India's low ranking.
• Threats to Biodiversity: Rising threats due to habitat loss, deforestation, climate change, and pollution.
• Deforestation: Between 2001 and 2019, India lost 23,300 sq. km of tree cover, exacerbating biodiversity loss.

Focus Areas of the Nature Conservation Index (NCI):

• Land Management: Inefficient land use practices, with 53% of land converted for urban, industrial, and agricultural purposes.
• Biodiversity Threats: Habitat loss, fragmentation, and declining populations of marine and terrestrial species.
• Governance and Capacity: Challenges in enforcement of laws and governance structures that support conservation.
• Future Trends: India faces both opportunities and challenges, given its high population density and rapid development.

Key Findings:                                    

• Land Conversion and Urbanization: High rates of land conversion (53%) for development purposes, contributing to habitat loss.
• Soil Pollution: Issues with pesticide use and soil pollution (low nitrogen index of 0.77), affecting soil health.
• Marine Conservation: Only 0.2% of national waterways and none within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) are protected.
• Deforestation Impact: Loss of 23,300 sq. km of forest between 2001-2019.
• Biodiversity Decline: Despite 40% of marine species and 65% of terrestrial species in protected areas, biodiversity continues to decline—67.5% of marine species and 46.9% of terrestrial species face population decreases.

Marine and Terrestrial Conservation:

• Marine Areas: Need for greater investment in marine conservation, as India's marine protected areas (MPAs) are limited.
• Protected Areas: While 7.5% of India’s terrestrial area is protected, significant threats like climate change and habitat fragmentation persist.

Biodiversity and Climate Change:

• Climate Change Risks: Impacts on vulnerable ecosystems, including coral reefs and alpine regions, further threaten biodiversity.
• Population Growth: India’s rapidly growing population (one of the highest in the world) places constant pressure on natural resources and ecosystems.

Illegal Wildlife Trade:

• Global Ranking: India is the fourth-largest illegal wildlife trader globally, with an annual trade worth approximately £15 billion.
• Call for Action: Stronger enforcement of wildlife protection laws and international cooperation are crucial to combat illegal wildlife trade.

SDGs and India’s Conservation Challenges:

• SDG 14 (Life Below Water) and SDG 15 (Life on Land): India faces significant challenges in meeting these Sustainable Development Goals, particularly in protecting marine life and terrestrial ecosystems.

Recommendations for Improvement:

• Stronger Political Will: Political commitment is essential for passing laws that promote sustainable development and biodiversity conservation.
• Enforcement and Funding: Increased funding for environmental initiatives and better enforcement of conservation policies are necessary to address the conservation challenges.
• Sustainable Development: Integrating sustainable land use practices and improving governance structures for conservation are key areas for focus.