The Five Drivers of Biodiversity Loss
Chapter Twelve
Syllabus topic 1, "Bio-diversity"
Pages 35 to 37 of 818
In one line
Five things destroy biodiversity, and Indian law has an answer of some kind to four of them and almost nothing for the fifth.
In exam wording: the recognised drivers of biodiversity loss are habitat loss and fragmentation, over-exploitation, invasive alien species, pollution, and climate change; Indian law addresses habitat loss through the protected area and forest diversion statutes, over-exploitation through the hunting and trade prohibitions of the Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972 and the access controls of the Biological Diversity Act 2002, invasive alien species through section 62A inserted in 2022, and pollution through the Environment (Protection) Act 1986 and the pollution statutes, while climate change is addressed only through general constitutional reasoning.
Why the law has this at all
An examiner who asks how development projects destroy biodiversity is asking for mechanisms. A student who answers "pollution and cutting trees" has given two of five and no law. Each driver has a different mechanism and a different legal answer, and the answer to a question about destruction is a driver-by-driver account.
The five drivers, broken down
1. Habitat loss and fragmentation. The largest driver. Land is converted to farmland, industry, mining, housing or infrastructure. Fragmentation is the second half of it: a road or a canal that divides a habitat leaves two populations too small to survive even though the total area is unchanged.
The legal answer. Sections 18, 26A and 35 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972 create protected areas. Section 2 of the Van Adhiniyam 1980 requires prior Central approval before forest land is used for a non-forest purpose. Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act 1986 carries the Environmental Impact Assessment Notification 2006 and the eco-sensitive zone notifications.
2. Over-exploitation. Taking more than the population can replace. Hunting, fishing, logging, and the collection of medicinal plants.
The legal answer. Section 9 of the 1972 Act prohibits hunting; Chapters V, VA and VB regulate and in some cases prohibit trade; sections 3 and 7 of the Biological Diversity Act 2002 control access to a biological resource for commercial utilisation. For wild medicinal plants that are not specified plants there is no harvest control at all.
3. Invasive alien species. A species introduced outside its natural range that spreads and displaces native species. Article 8(h) of the Convention on Biological Diversity 1992 requires each Party to prevent the introduction of, control or eradicate alien species which threaten ecosystems, habitats or species.
The legal answer. Section 62A of the Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972, inserted by the Amendment Act of 2022, empowers the Central Government by notification to regulate or prohibit the import, trade, possession or proliferation of an invasive alien species, and section 2(16A) defines the term as a species of animal or plant not native to India whose introduction or spread may threaten or adversely impact wildlife or its habitat. Before 2022 there was no such provision.
The Five Drivers of Biodiversity Loss
4. Pollution. Effluent, waste, pesticides, nutrient enrichment and noise.
The legal answer. The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974, the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, and the Environment (Protection) Act 1986 with the rules made under it. In Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India (1996) 3 SCC 212 the Supreme Court applied the polluter pays principle to industries at Bichhri whose sludge had contaminated the aquifer and rendered the soil unfit for cultivation.
5. Climate change. Shifting ranges, changed seasons, coral bleaching, sea level rise.
The legal answer. There is no Indian biodiversity statute that addresses it. What exists is constitutional reasoning: in M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India, decided on 21 March 2024, the Supreme Court held that Articles 14 and 21 yield a right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change, and did so in proceedings about a bird killed by transmission lines built for renewable energy.
The interaction, which is what makes it hard
The drivers are not independent. Fragmentation makes a population small; a small population is destroyed by a single disease or a single fire; climate change shifts the habitat and the fragmented population cannot follow it because there is a road in the way. A legal system that addresses each driver by a separate statute administered by a separate authority is poorly designed for interaction, and that is a fair criticism to make in an answer.
Worked example
A highway is widened through a forest corridor between two tiger reserves. Trace the drivers in order.
Habitat loss is small in area. Perhaps sixty hectares of forest. On its own, negligible.
Fragmentation is the real harm. The corridor was the only link between two populations. Once it is cut, each population is genetically isolated, and a small isolated population loses genetic diversity and becomes vulnerable to disease.
Invasive species follow the road: disturbed verges are colonised by Lantana and Prosopis, which spread into the forest and suppress native regeneration.
Over-exploitation increases because access improves. A road makes poaching and illicit felling cheaper.
Pollution and climate effects are slower and diffuse.
The legal path. The forest diversion requires prior approval under section 2 of the Van Adhiniyam 1980, and if either reserve is affected, the National Board for Wild Life must recommend under section 5C read with sections 29 and 35 of the 1972 Act. Under section 38V the tiger conservation plan for each reserve must provide for the corridor, and section 38W bars the alteration or de-notification of a tiger reserve without the recommendation of the National Tiger Conservation Authority and the approval of the National Board for Wild Life.
The Five Drivers of Biodiversity Loss
Where the law is weak. Nothing requires the highway authority to pay for the loss of connectivity as such. Net present value is charged for the area diverted, not for the corridor function. That mismatch is the answer to a question about how unplanned development destroys biodiversity.
Quick revision
- Five drivers: habitat loss and fragmentation, over-exploitation, invasive alien species, pollution, climate change.
- Section 62A and section 2(16A) of the 1972 Act, inserted in 2022, are the first Indian statutory answer to invasive alien species.
- Article 8(h) of the Convention of 1992 is the treaty obligation behind them.
- Section 38W of the 1972 Act protects a tiger reserve against de-notification.
- Climate change has no biodiversity statute; M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India (2024) is the constitutional answer.
- The drivers interact, and the statutes do not.
Test yourself
1. What is fragmentation and why is it worse than the area suggests? Dividing a habitat so that populations are isolated from each other. The total area lost may be small, but each resulting population is smaller than the original, loses genetic diversity, and is more likely to be wiped out by a single event.
2. Which provision now deals with invasive alien species in India, and when was it introduced? Section 62A of the Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972, inserted by the Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act 2022, with the definition in section 2(16A). It empowers the Central Government to regulate or prohibit the import, trade, possession or proliferation of such a species.
3. Which driver has no dedicated Indian biodiversity statute, and what fills the gap? Climate change. What fills the gap is constitutional reasoning: M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India, decided 21 March 2024, held that Articles 14 and 21 yield a right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change.
The rest of this subject
These notes are cut from the University's printed syllabus. Open the syllabus itself, or the past papers, for the same subject.