Laws for the Living World: CBD, the BD Act and Forest Amendments

Biodiversity law is the body of international treaties and Indian statutes that decides who may use the living world, on what terms, and who must be paid for it. It sits at the junction of three ideas: conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of its components, and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits that flow from genetic resources. For UPSC, this chapter connects the Convention on Biological Diversity to Parliament's Biological Diversity Act, 2002, its contested 2023 Amendment, and the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, 2023 that redefined what counts as a forest in India. Questions here test both memory of institutions and judgment about the conservation-versus-development trade-off.

The Convention on Biological Diversity: the world's biodiversity constitution

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is a legally binding multilateral treaty that was opened for signature at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro and entered into force in 1993. With 196 parties (195 countries plus the European Union), it is nearly universal; the notable exception is the United States, which has signed but never ratified it. The CBD pursues three interlocking objectives: conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of its components, and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from genetic resources.

Three protocols and frameworks give the CBD its working machinery. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (adopted 2000, in force 2003) governs the safe handling of living modified organisms produced by biotechnology. The Nagoya Protocol (adopted 2010, in force 2014) operationalises the third objective through rules on access and benefit sharing (ABS): whoever uses a country's genetic resources must share the resulting benefits with its people. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (2022) replaced the older Aichi Targets with the headline 30x30 goal of protecting 30 percent of land and oceans by 2030.

The CBD's most recent review conference kept the momentum alive. COP16 of the CBD met in Cali, Colombia, in October-November 2024 under the theme Peace with Nature. Its outcomes included the Cali Fund for sharing benefits from digital sequence information (DSI), a permanent subsidiary body under Article 8(j) to give indigenous peoples and local communities a standing voice, and the Kunming Biodiversity Fund, launched with a USD 200 million contribution from China, to finance the 30x30 push. At the same conference, India launched its updated National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, aligning national targets with the Kunming-Montreal Framework.

A third treaty completes the architecture for seeds. The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA), adopted by the FAO in 2001 and in force from 2004, is the specialist agreement for crop diversity. It creates a multilateral system of access and benefit sharing for 64 major food and forage crops, so breeders anywhere can use listed seeds while sharing benefits through a common fund. It also enshrines farmers' rights, recognising farming communities as custodians of agrobiodiversity. India gave these rights domestic teeth early through the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001.

From treaty to Indian law: why Parliament had to act

Biopiracy is the unauthorised commercial use of a country's biological resources or associated traditional knowledge, usually through patents taken abroad. India learned the cost of weak law the hard way: a US patent on the wound-healing properties of turmeric was revoked in 1997 after Indian scientists showed the knowledge was ancient, and a European patent on the fungicidal properties of neem was revoked in 2000 on similar grounds. These cases proved that without a domestic access law, India's genetic wealth and its codified traditional knowledge in systems like Ayurveda were legally defenceless abroad.

To meet its CBD obligations and close the biopiracy door, India enacted the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. The Act is built on the same three pillars as the CBD: conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of biological resources, and benefit sharing with local communities. Its signature innovation is decentralised, community-anchored governance: conservation decisions are pushed down to the panchayat and municipal level instead of staying locked in Delhi.

The Biological Diversity Act, 2002: a three-tier architecture

The Act creates three institutions, one at each level of government. The National Biodiversity Authority (NBA), headquartered in Chennai, approves access to biological resources for foreign entities, manages ABS agreements, and advises the central government. State Biodiversity Boards (SBBs) regulate commercial use by Indian companies, who must give them prior intimation, and advise state governments. At the grassroots, Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs) in every local body prepare People's Biodiversity Registers (PBRs): village-level documents recording local biological resources and the traditional knowledge attached to them.

The regulatory core is access control plus benefit sharing. Foreign entities need the NBA's approval to access Indian biological material; the transfer of bio-resources or associated knowledge abroad without approval is prohibited; and patents based on Indian biological resources needed the NBA's prior nod. Users who commercialise these resources must share benefits with the source communities, channelled through Local Biodiversity Funds. In practice the record is mixed: over 2.7 lakh PBRs have been prepared, but their quality varies across states, ABS collections remain uneven, and coordination between the NBA, SBBs and BMCs is often weak.

The 2023 Amendment: ease of doing business meets community rights

The Biological Diversity (Amendment) Act, 2023, passed in August 2023 and in force from 1 April 2024, rewrites the enforcement logic of the original Act. Its most consequential change is decriminalisation: violations that earlier invited imprisonment of up to five years now attract only civil penalties, ranging from one lakh to fifty lakh rupees, imposed by adjudicating officers. AYUSH practitioners and users of codified traditional knowledge are exempted from benefit-sharing obligations, and research and bio-survey activities are taken out of the benefit-sharing net altogether.

The government defends the changes as removing red tape: faster approvals for collaborative research, simpler compliance for domestic companies, and room for India's bioeconomy, projected to reach 300 billion dollars by 2030. Critics reply that exempting codified knowledge from ABS denies fair compensation to the tribal and local communities who preserved that knowledge, and that replacing jail time with fines weakens deterrence against large corporations. For a mains answer, frame it as a classic efficiency-versus-equity debate: the amendment accelerates research and industry, but risks hollowing out the CBD's third objective inside India.

The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972: the species-protection backbone

The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (WPA) is India's core species-protection law. It prohibits hunting of scheduled species, creates the protected area network examined in the biodiversity article, and regulates trade in wild animals and their derivatives. The Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act, 2022, in force from 1 April 2023, rationalised the old six schedules into four and wrote CITES into Indian law through a new Chapter VB:

Two quieter changes matter for mains answers. The amendment removed the old vermin schedule, though the Centre's power to declare a species vermin for a specified area and period survives under Section 62. And it empowered the Centre to regulate or prohibit invasive alien species, species imported or spread beyond their natural range that threaten native wildlife and habitats, before they establish. Critics still flag the amended Section 43, which permits transfer of captive elephants for religious or any other purpose and, they argue, opens a door to commercial capture.

The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, 2023: redefining the forest

The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 is India's most effective conservation statute: by requiring central approval before any forest land could be diverted for non-forest use, it cut the diversion rate from about 1.5 lakh hectares a year in 1952-80 to under 25,000 hectares a year thereafter. In the landmark T.N. Godavarman judgment of December 1996, the Supreme Court ruled that forest must be understood in its broad dictionary meaning, creating the category of deemed forests: lands that look and function like forests even though they were never officially notified as such.

The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, 2023 narrows that definition. The Act now applies only to land notified as forest under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (or any other law), or recorded as forest in government records on or after 25 October 1980. Land converted from forest to non-forest use before 12 December 1996 with competent approval is excluded. It also exempts small parcels of up to 0.10 hectare for connectivity projects, strategic projects within 100 kilometres of India's international borders, and permits zoos, safaris and ecotourism facilities on forest land under notified conditions.

Conservationists argue the amendment legalises the diversion of deemed forests, weakens the Forest Rights Act, 2006, which vests forest-land decisions in gram sabhas, and centralises power in Delhi. The Supreme Court responded with an interim order on 4 March 2025: pending a consolidated, digitised record of all forest-like areas under Rule 16 of the Forest Conservation Rules, states and Union Territories must identify forest lands using the Godavarman dictionary definition. The Court's message is that Parliament may rewrite the statute, but the constitutional commitment to forests cannot be shrunk by definitional sleight of hand.

The Van Amendment Rules, 2025: faster clearances, sharper debate

Notified on 31 August 2025, the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Amendment Rules, 2025 amend the 2023 rules under the renamed Forest (Conservation) Act. Three changes dominate:

• Working permission: states may let linear projects such as roads, rail lines and transmission lines begin preliminary work after Stage-I (in-principle) approval, once compensatory afforestation and net present value levies are paid and Forest Rights Act compliance is complete, but before final Stage-II clearance.

• Compensatory afforestation softened: land planted in exchange for diverted forest no longer has to be notified as protected forest; mutation in favour of the forest department is enough.

• Critical minerals prioritised: mining of critical and strategic minerals gets special treatment, including compensatory afforestation on degraded forest land at at least double the diverted area. Stage-I validity rises from two years to five.

Supporters call this long-overdue procedural sanity for strategic projects. Critics reply that work begun before final clearance creates facts on the ground that Stage-II can rarely undo. Whether speed can coexist with the Godavarman discipline is now the central forest-law question, and it is being settled project by project.

The Forest Rights Act, 2006: rights inside the forest

The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, better known as the Forest Rights Act or FRA, corrects what its preamble calls a historical injustice: forest dwellers treated as encroachers on land their communities had managed for generations. It recognises individual forest rights to live on and cultivate forest land, and community forest rights to manage, protect and regenerate community forest resources.

Its economic core is minor forest produce (MFP): ownership of produce from tendu leaves to mahua flowers vests in the right holders, and gram sabhas must be consulted before forest land in their area is diverted. In exam terms, the FRA is the rights-based counterweight to the clearance-based Forest (Conservation) Act. One asks what a forest diversion must pay the state; the other asks what the forest owes its people.

The Biological Diversity Regulations, 2025: benefit sharing gets a price list

Notified by the National Biodiversity Authority on 29 April 2025, the Biological Diversity Regulations, 2025 replaced the 2014 access and benefit sharing guidelines and operationalise the amended Act. For the first time, Digital Sequence Information (DSI), genetic data derived from biological resources and stored digitally, is expressly inside the benefit-sharing net. Users with turnover above Rs 1 crore must report their use of biological resources even when no payment is due. The payment itself is slab-based:

The Authority retains 10 to 15 percent of collections for administration and conservation, with the balance intended to flow to benefit claimers, the local communities and knowledge holders the 2023 amendment was accused of bypassing. Cultivated medicinal plants stay outside the payment net. For answer writing, the regulations are the test of whether decriminalisation plus slab pricing can deliver benefit sharing that is simpler without becoming cheaper for industry.

The wider toolkit: EPA 1986 and the National Green Tribunal

The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (EPA) is the umbrella law Parliament passed after the Bhopal disaster, legislating under Article 253 to implement India's Stockholm commitments. It lets the Centre set emission and effluent standards, restrict where industries may locate, and issue directions that bind every authority. The EIA notification and the Coastal Regulation Zone rules both flow from this one statute.

The National Green Tribunal (NGT), created by the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, is a specialised forum of judicial and expert members meant to decide environmental cases within about six months. It can award compensation on the polluter-pays principle and hears matters under the Water Act, Air Act, EPA, Biological Diversity Act and Forest (Conservation) Act. Notably, the Wildlife (Protection) Act sits outside its schedule, so species crime still travels through regular courts.

The way forward: conservation law that actually works

Good biodiversity law must do three things at once: protect ecosystems, respect community rights, and allow legitimate development. That means completing high-quality PBRs so communities have documented claims, making ABS payments actually reach villages instead of sitting in funds, finishing the digitised forest-land record the Supreme Court ordered, and harmonising the amended forest law with the Forest Rights Act rather than letting the two collide in court. Above all, it means treating indigenous peoples and local communities as conservation partners rather than obstacles, which is exactly what the CBD's Article 8(j) machinery now demands of India.

Key Terms

• Biodiversity law: Biodiversity law refers to the body of national and international legal instruments governing the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. In India it centres on the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 (amended in 2023), supported by the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, while internationally it is anchored in the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992) and its Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit sharing. Together these laws regulate who can access biological resources, how benefits from their use are shared with local communities, and how species and habitats are protected. Example: India's Biological Diversity Act implements the country's obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity through the National Biodiversity Authority, State Biodiversity Boards and local Biodiversity Management Committees.
• conservation: Conservation is the protection, sustainable management and restoration of biodiversity and natural resources so that ecosystems continue to function and provide services to people. It encompasses protected areas, species recovery programmes and the sustainable use regimes created under laws like the Biological Diversity Act. Example: India's network of national parks, wildlife sanctuaries and biosphere reserves is the backbone of its in-situ conservation effort.
• sustainable use: Sustainable use is one of the three objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), alongside conservation of biological diversity and fair and equitable sharing of benefits. It means using biological resources at a rate that does not lead to their long-term decline, so that biodiversity can meet the needs of present and future generations. India's Biological Diversity Act, 2002 operationalises it through regulated access to biological resources and benefit-sharing with local communities. Example: The CBD's Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines (2004) lay down practical rules for the sustainable use of biodiversity.
• fair and equitable sharing: One of the three objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992), referring to the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilisation of genetic resources. It means that when a company or researcher uses a country's genetic resources or associated traditional knowledge, the provider country and local communities must receive a fair share of the resulting benefits. The Nagoya Protocol (2010, in force from 2014) operationalises this through access and benefit-sharing (ABS) rules, which India implements through the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 and the National Biodiversity Authority. Example: Under India's Biological Diversity Act, a firm commercialising a herbal product based on documented traditional knowledge must share benefits with the local community that conserved the resource, with the National Biodiversity Authority as regulator.
• Convention on Biological Diversity: The Convention on Biological Diversity is the principal global treaty for the conservation of life on Earth, opened for signature at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit and in force since 1993. It has three objectives: conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of its components, and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from genetic resources. It was supplemented by the Cartagena Protocol on biosafety (adopted 2000) and the Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit-sharing (adopted 2010). India implements it through the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. Example: The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, adopted at the CBD's COP15 in 2022, sets the 30 by 30 target of protecting 30 percent of land and oceans by 2030.
• Biological Diversity Act, 2002: The Biological Diversity Act, 2002 is the Indian law enacted to give effect to the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992), to which India is a party. It provides for the conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of its components, and fair and equitable sharing of benefits from the use of biological resources and associated traditional knowledge. The Act established the National Biodiversity Authority at the national level, State Biodiversity Boards in the states, and Biodiversity Management Committees at the local level. Example: The Act requires Indian commercial users of biological resources to give prior intimation to the State Biodiversity Board, while foreign entities need National Biodiversity Authority approval.
• Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, 2023: The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, 2023 amends the 1980 Act and renames it the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, inserting a preamble that links forest conservation to climate goals such as Net Zero. Its most debated provision exempts strategic linear projects of national importance within 100 km of international borders (and up to 10 hectares for security infrastructure, 5 hectares in Left Wing Extremism districts) from forest clearance requirements. It also recognises zoos, safaris, eco-tourism and frontline staff infrastructure as forestry activities. Example: Roads built near the Line of Actual Control as strategic projects can now proceed without forest clearance under the 2023 amendment.
• United States: The United States is the notable exception to the Convention on Biological Diversity's near-universal membership: it signed the CBD in 1993 but the Senate never ratified it, largely over concerns about intellectual property rights. With 196 parties (195 countries plus the European Union), the treaty is nearly universal except for the United States.
• Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety: The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety is a supplementary agreement to the Convention on Biological Diversity, adopted in 2000 and in force since 2003, governing the safe transfer, handling and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) resulting from modern biotechnology. It establishes an advance informed agreement procedure, requiring exporters to notify and obtain consent from importing countries before the first shipment of an LMO intended for release into the environment. India is a party and implements it through the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. Example: Bt cotton, India's only approved GM crop, went through biosafety assessment under this framework before its commercial release in 2002.
• living modified organisms: Living modified organisms (LMOs) are living organisms, such as seeds, fish or microbes, that possess a novel combination of genetic material created through modern biotechnology, essentially genetically modified organisms that can reproduce or spread in the environment. The term is the legal language of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (2000), a supplementary agreement to the Convention on Biological Diversity that governs their safe transboundary movement, handling and use. India is a party to the Protocol and regulates LMOs under its 1989 GMO rules framed under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. Example: Bt cotton seed is a living modified organism: its movement across borders and its field release are governed by biosafety rules designed to assess risks to biodiversity and human health.
• Nagoya Protocol: The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits, adopted in 2010 under the Convention on Biological Diversity, entered into force in October 2014. It requires that access to a country's genetic resources (and associated traditional knowledge) needs prior informed consent and mutually agreed terms, with benefits from their commercial use shared fairly with the provider country and communities. It operationalises the CBD's third objective of benefit-sharing. Example: India's Biological Diversity Act, 2002 and the National Biodiversity Authority implement access and benefit-sharing in line with the Protocol.
• Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework: The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework is the landmark agreement adopted at the 15th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in Montreal in December 2022, under China's presidency of the talks. It commits the world to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030 and to live in harmony with nature by 2050, through four goals for 2050 and 23 measurable targets for 2030. Its targets cover the 30x30 conservation goal, restoration of degraded ecosystems, cutting pollution and pesticide risks, controlling invasive species, and mobilising 200 billion US dollars a year in biodiversity finance by 2030. Example: The framework's finance target has driven new funding channels such as the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund and the Kunming Biodiversity Fund, aimed at closing the biodiversity funding gap for developing countries.
• 30x30 goal: The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework's headline commitment to protect 30 percent of the planet's land, inland waters and oceans by 2030. Countries are expected to identify ecologically representative, well-connected conservation areas, including through Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measures (OECMs) beyond formal protected areas. Example: the goal was adopted at CBD COP15 in Montreal in December 2022 as part of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework. Example: Adopted at CBD COP15 in Montreal in December 2022 as the flagship commitment of the post-2020 biodiversity framework.
• COP16: In the biodiversity context, the 16th Conference of the Parties to the CBD, held in Cali, Colombia in October to November 2024. It was the first implementation COP after the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, producing the Cali Fund for benefit-sharing from digital sequence information and a permanent body for Indigenous Peoples. Note that the UNCCD also held a COP16 in Riyadh in 2024, so the convention must be specified. Example: CBD COP16 in Cali (2024) created the Cali Fund for sharing benefits from digital sequence information.
• Cali Fund: The Cali Fund is a global benefit-sharing fund created at the COP16 biodiversity summit in Cali, Colombia, in 2024 under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. It collects voluntary contributions from companies that commercially use digital sequence information (DSI), which is digitised genetic data taken from biodiversity, with an indicative rate of 1 per cent of profits or 0.1 per cent of revenue. At least half the money is earmarked for Indigenous peoples and local communities, the traditional custodians of biodiversity. Example: A pharmaceutical company that develops a drug from a plant's DNA sequence downloaded from a public database is expected to contribute part of its profits to the Cali Fund.
• Kunming Biodiversity Fund: The Kunming Biodiversity Fund is a multilateral fund announced by China at the COP15 biodiversity leaders' summit in 2021, with an initial Chinese contribution of 1.5 billion yuan (about 223 million US dollars), to help developing countries implement the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Administered with UN agencies including UNEP and UNDP as a multi-partner trust fund, it finances projects in ecosystem restoration, invasive species control, sustainable agriculture and national biodiversity planning. It complements larger mechanisms such as the Global Environment Facility's Global Biodiversity Framework Fund. Example: In October 2025 the fund approved 5.8 million US dollars in grants to seven countries, including Nepal, Sri Lanka and Madagascar, for nature-friendly agriculture projects.
• Biopiracy: Biopiracy is the unauthorized commercial exploitation of a country's biological resources or the traditional knowledge of its indigenous and local communities, typically by foreign corporations patenting products derived from them without sharing benefits. It raises issues of intellectual property rights, benefit-sharing and biodiversity conservation under the Convention on Biological Diversity and India's Biological Diversity Act, 2002. For UPSC, it links environment, science and technology, and IPR in both prelims and mains. Example: the patent on turmeric's wound-healing properties, revoked by the US Patent Office in 1997 after India's challenge
• turmeric: Turmeric is the bright-yellow spice and medicinal plant (Curcuma longa) widely used in Indian cooking and Ayurvedic medicine, valued for its active compound curcumin. In intellectual property law it is famous as a biopiracy case: in 1995 the US patent office granted a patent on turmeric's wound-healing properties, which India's CSIR got revoked in 1997 by proving prior art in ancient Sanskrit and Ayurvedic texts. The case spurred India to create the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL). Example: The 1997 revocation of the US patent on turmeric, after CSIR demonstrated the knowledge was centuries-old prior art.
• neem: Neem (Azadirachta indica) is a tree native to the Indian subcontinent whose seeds, leaves, and bark contain azadirachtin, a compound with insecticidal, antifungal, and medicinal properties used in traditional Indian medicine and farming for centuries. Because its uses are long-standing traditional knowledge, neem became the centre of a landmark biopiracy dispute when a European patent on a neem-based fungicide was challenged by Indian groups for lacking novelty. The case pushed India to document traditional knowledge to prevent wrongful patents. Example: The European Patent Office revoked W.R. Grace's neem patent in 2000 after campaigners showed the fungicidal use was centuries-old prior art, a decision upheld in 2005.
• codified traditional knowledge: Codified traditional knowledge is traditional knowledge that has been recorded in formal texts or systems, such as Ayurveda, Siddha or Unani medical literature. Under India's biodiversity regime it receives special recognition, since documented formulations are easier to defend against biopiracy and are subject to access and benefit sharing rules. Example: Ayurvedic formulations documented in classical texts are defended against foreign patents through India's Traditional Knowledge Digital Library.
• decentralised, community-anchored governance: The signature design of India's Biological Diversity Act, 2002: instead of keeping conservation decisions centralised in Delhi, authority is pushed down to panchayat and municipal bodies through Biodiversity Management Committees. Local communities document local biological resources in People's Biodiversity Registers and are entitled to a share of benefits from commercial use of those resources. It reflects the Convention on Biological Diversity's pillars of conservation, sustainable use and benefit sharing. Example: Biodiversity Management Committees have been constituted in lakhs of local bodies across India to prepare People's Biodiversity Registers under the Act.
• Local Biodiversity Funds: Funds created at the local-body level under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, and managed through Biodiversity Management Committees. They receive grants, loans, fees and benefit-sharing amounts arising from access to local biological resources and associated traditional knowledge. Their purpose is to channel money back to the communities that conserve biodiversity. Example: When a company pays access and benefit-sharing charges for using a locally documented medicinal plant, part of the money can flow into the Local Biodiversity Fund of the concerned Biodiversity Management Committee.
• Biological Diversity (Amendment) Act, 2023: The Biological Diversity (Amendment) Act, 2023, passed by Parliament in August 2023 and in force from April 2024, significantly reformed India's biodiversity regime. Its key changes include decriminalising offences (replacing imprisonment with monetary penalties), exempting registered AYUSH practitioners and codified traditional knowledge from benefit-sharing obligations, and easing intellectual property approvals for inventions based on biological resources. The amendments aim to simplify compliance and promote research and traditional medicine, though they have drawn criticism for potentially weakening community rights and enforcement. Example: Under the 2023 amendments, a vaidya practising Ayurveda for livelihood is exempted from sharing benefits for accessing biological resources.
• decriminalisation: In regulatory law, the shift from treating a violation as a criminal offence (punishable with imprisonment) to treating it as a civil wrong punishable with monetary penalties. India's recent environmental reforms use decriminalisation to unclog courts and make compliance proportionate, reserving criminal prosecution for serious or repeated harm. Minor procedural defaults then attract fines adjudicated by officers instead of jail terms. Example: The Biological Diversity (Amendment) Act, 2023 decriminalised most offences under the Act, replacing jail terms with monetary penalties.
• AYUSH practitioners: Practitioners of India's six recognised traditional systems of medicine: Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, Sowa-Rigpa and Homoeopathy, regulated under state councils and the national commissions for Indian System of Medicine and Homoeopathy. In biodiversity law they matter as holders and users of traditional knowledge linked to biological resources. Example: under access and benefit-sharing frameworks, the commercial use of medicinal-plant knowledge associated with AYUSH practice triggers benefit-sharing obligations toward local communities. Example: Recognised practitioners of the six traditional systems, relevant as traditional-knowledge holders under biodiversity access and benefit-sharing rules.
• bioeconomy: The bioeconomy is the part of the economy based on biological resources and processes: agriculture, forestry, fisheries, food, biofuels, bioplastics, biotechnology products and bio-based services. It offers a pathway to decouple growth from fossil resources by valorising renewable biomass and waste streams into fuels, materials and medicines. India has set a target of a 300 billion dollar bioeconomy by 2030, backed by the BioE3 policy promoting high-performance biomanufacturing. Example: Ethanol blending in petrol and enzyme-based bioplastics are everyday outputs of the bioeconomy.
• efficiency-versus-equity: The efficiency-versus-equity trade-off is the tension between maximising total benefit at the lowest cost (efficiency) and distributing benefits and burdens fairly among parties (equity). In climate and biodiversity negotiations, market instruments like emissions trading deliver efficiency by finding the cheapest reductions, while equity demands differentiated obligations and fair benefit-sharing with developing countries and provider communities. India's negotiating stance consistently invokes common but differentiated responsibilities to keep equity at the centre. Example: A global carbon price would cut emissions efficiently, but developing countries argue equity requires richer nations, as the largest historical emitters, to bear deeper cuts and provide finance.
• Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980: The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 is the principal central law protecting India's forests from diversion to non-forest use. It mandates prior central government approval for de-reservation of reserved forests and for using any forest land for non-forest purposes, reversing the earlier situation where states could freely divert forests. The Supreme Court's 1996 T.N. Godavarman judgment expanded its coverage to all forests as understood in the dictionary sense, including unrecorded ones. Example: Between 1950 and 1980, large areas of forest were diverted by states; the 1980 Act made such diversion subject to central approval.
• T.N. Godavarman judgment of December 1996: The T.N. Godavarman judgment of 12 December 1996 is the Supreme Court's landmark ruling on forest conservation. It gave the word forest its dictionary meaning regardless of ownership or classification, ordered states to identify all forest areas through expert committees, restricted tree felling, and placed continuing mandamus over forest matters, becoming the foundation of India's forest jurisprudence. Example: After the judgment, states had to set up expert committees to identify forests, including unclassified and degraded forest lands.
• forest: Ecologically, a forest is a large area dominated by trees with a closed or partially closed canopy, supporting complex plant and animal communities and providing services like carbon storage, watershed protection and biodiversity habitat. Legally in India, following the Supreme Court's 1996 Godavarman judgment, the word forest carries its dictionary meaning and covers all areas recorded as forest in government records, regardless of ownership, so forest law applies far beyond officially notified reserved forests. Example: After the Godavarman judgment (1996), the Forest (Conservation) Act's prior-approval requirement for diversion of forest land applied to all areas fitting the dictionary meaning of forest, including unclassed and private forests.
• deemed forests: Forest-like areas that are not formally notified as forests under forest law but are treated as forests for regulatory purposes, following the Supreme Court's 1996 Godavarman judgment that 'forest' must be understood in its dictionary sense. State expert committees identify such areas, and once identified they attract the protections of the Forest (Conservation) Act, including the need for central approval before diversion to non-forest use. Example: The Supreme Court's 1996 T.N. Godavarman judgment brought deemed forests identified by state expert committees under the Forest (Conservation) Act's ambit.
• Indian Forest Act, 1927: The umbrella forest legislation of British India, consolidated in 1927 and still largely in force, which governs the management of forests in India. It empowers the state to constitute reserved forests, protected forests and village forests, and regulates the transit of forest produce and the levy of duties on timber and other produce. Example: Under the Act, forests are classified into reserved, protected and village forests, with reserved forests enjoying the highest protection where most activities are prohibited unless specifically permitted.
• Forest Rights Act, 2006: The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, recognises forest dwellers' rights to land, minor forest produce, and community forest resources, including the right to protect and manage them. Claims are settled through gram sabha-led committees. For UPSC, its implementation record is a recurring mains theme on tribal welfare, conservation conflicts, and decentralised governance. Example: Gram sabhas have filed community forest resource claims under the Act to manage and protect their traditional forests.
• Godavarman dictionary definition: In T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1996), the Supreme Court held that the word 'forest' in the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 must be understood in its dictionary sense. This meant the Act applied to all areas qualifying as forest by their ordinary meaning, irrespective of ownership or whether they were officially recorded as forest, vastly expanding the law's protective reach. Example: After the 1996 Godavarman ruling, any land meeting the dictionary meaning of forest required central government approval for non-forest use, even if it was not a recorded forest.
• indigenous peoples and local communities: Indigenous peoples and local communities are the traditional and tribal groups whose cultures, livelihoods, and knowledge systems are closely tied to particular lands and natural resources. International biodiversity law recognises them as key partners in conservation and as holders of traditional knowledge about plants, animals, and ecosystems. Their rights over resources and knowledge sit at the centre of debates on benefit-sharing. Example: Article 8(j) of the Convention on Biological Diversity commits countries to respect and protect the traditional knowledge of indigenous and local communities.
• Instrument: In international environmental law, a formal legal instrument such as a convention, treaty, protocol or agreement adopted by states to address a shared problem. Biodiversity governance rests on a set of such instruments, each with an adoption date, defined obligations and its own institutional machinery. Example: The Convention on Biological Diversity, adopted in 1992, is the principal global legal instrument for biodiversity conservation.
• Adopted: In treaty and policy tables, the year in which an international convention, protocol or agreement was formally adopted by negotiating parties, marking its birth as a legal instrument (distinct from later signature, ratification or entry into force). It is the standard column used to date environmental instruments in comparative tables. Example: the Convention on Biological Diversity was adopted in 1992 at the Rio Earth Summit, and the UNCCD in 1994 in Paris. Example: CBD adopted in 1992 at Rio; UNCCD adopted in 1994 in Paris.
• Core purpose: Core purpose is the central objective that defines an environmental treaty, law or institution and distinguishes it from related instruments. UPSC questions frequently compare instruments by their core purpose, because instruments that look similar on the surface, such as the CBD, the Cartagena Protocol and the Nagoya Protocol, exist for different reasons. Identifying the core purpose is therefore the standard first step in any comparison table of international environmental agreements. Example: In a comparison table, the CBD's core purpose is stated as its three objectives (conservation, sustainable use and benefit-sharing), while the Cartagena Protocol's core purpose is the biosafety of living modified organisms.
• Key takeaways: Key takeaways is a quick-revision summary box placed at the end of each article, listing the most exam-relevant points in a short numbered list. It distils definitions, dates, figures, provisions and examples into a form suited for last-minute revision before Prelims and Mains. Together with the article's practice questions, it turns every topic into a self-contained study unit.
• Biological Diversity Act: The Biological Diversity Act is India's principal legislation for the conservation of biological resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their use. Enacted in 2002 to implement the Convention on Biological Diversity, it created a three-tier institutional structure: the National Biodiversity Authority, State Biodiversity Boards and local Biodiversity Management Committees. It regulates access to India's biological resources by foreigners and commercial users, and was substantially amended in 2023. Example: A foreign company seeking to use Indian medicinal plants for drug research must obtain prior approval from the National Biodiversity Authority under this Act.
• Forest (Conservation) Act: The Forest (Conservation) Act is the central legislation governing the diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes in India. Enacted in 1980, it requires prior approval of the central government before any forest land can be de-reserved or diverted for activities such as mining, industry or infrastructure. It sharply curbed state-level deforestation and remains the primary legal safeguard against forest diversion. Example: A state must obtain central approval under the Act before diverting forest land for a railway line.
• digital sequence information: Digital sequence information refers to the digital representations of genetic and biochemical data of organisms, such as DNA and RNA sequences, protein sequences and related molecular data, typically stored in and shared through public databases. It became a major policy issue because companies can use this data to develop drugs, seeds or cosmetics without physically accessing the original genetic resource, raising questions of fair benefit-sharing under the Convention on Biological Diversity. At COP15 (2022) parties agreed on a multilateral benefit-sharing mechanism for DSI, and COP16 (2024) operationalised it through the Cali Fund. Example: A pharmaceutical company downloading a plant's genome from a public database to develop a new drug, which under the Cali Fund should contribute a share of profits or revenue back to biodiversity conservation.
• The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD): The Convention on Biological Diversity is a legally binding international treaty adopted at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit to conserve biological diversity, ensure sustainable use of its components, and secure fair and equitable sharing of benefits from genetic resources. With 196 parties, it anchors national biodiversity strategies, global targets such as the Kunming-Montreal framework's goal of protecting 30 percent of land and seas by 2030, and the Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit-sharing. It is one of the three Rio Conventions, alongside the climate and desertification conventions. Example: India's Biological Diversity Act of 2002, which implements the CBD's obligations through the National Biodiversity Authority and state boards.
• 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro: The 1992 Earth Summit, formally the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), was held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992 and placed sustainable development on the global agenda. It produced the Rio Declaration, Agenda 21, the Forest Principles, and opened the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) for signature. Example: The UNFCCC opened for signature at Rio 1992 underpins the annual COP climate negotiations, including the 2015 Paris Agreement.
• access and benefit sharing (ABS): Access and benefit sharing is the principle that the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge must be shared fairly with the countries and communities that provide them. It is the third objective of the Convention on Biological Diversity, operationalised through the Nagoya Protocol of 2010, which requires prior informed consent of provider countries and mutually agreed terms for access. India implements ABS through the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, with the National Biodiversity Authority approving commercial access and channeling benefit-sharing to local Biodiversity Management Committees. Example: A pharmaceutical company using a medicinal plant sourced from an Indian tribal community must obtain NBA approval and share royalties with the community.
• Article 8(j): Article 8(j) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992) obliges parties to respect, preserve, and maintain the traditional knowledge, innovations, and practices of indigenous and local communities relevant to biodiversity conservation, and to share benefits arising from their use equitably. It is the legal anchor for protecting community knowledge against biopiracy in international environmental law. Example: India implements it through the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, which mandates People's Biodiversity Registers and benefit-sharing with local Biodiversity Management Committees.
• National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan: The National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) is India's national policy framework for conserving biodiversity, promoting its sustainable use and ensuring fair and equitable benefit sharing, under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The updated NBSAP 2024-2030, released at CBD COP16 in Cali in 2024, sets 23 national targets aligned with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, including protecting 30 percent of land and marine areas by 2030. Example: MoEFCC is the central coordinating agency for the NBSAP's implementation.
• National Biodiversity Authority (NBA): The National Biodiversity Authority is a statutory body established in 2003 under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, with its headquarters in Chennai. It regulates access to India's biological resources and associated knowledge by foreign entities and commercial users, and ensures fair and equitable sharing of benefits with local communities. It works through State Biodiversity Boards and local Biodiversity Management Committees, which document resources in People's Biodiversity Registers. Example: Companies commercialising products based on Indian biological resources, such as plant-based pharmaceuticals, need NBA approval.
• State Biodiversity Boards (SBBs): State Biodiversity Boards are statutory bodies constituted by state governments under Section 22 of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. They advise state governments on biodiversity conservation, regulate access to biological resources by Indians for commercial purposes, and support the preparation of People's Biodiversity Registers through local Biodiversity Management Committees. Example: A State Biodiversity Board processing an access application from an ayurvedic company seeking to commercially use a medicinal plant found in the state.
• Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs): Biodiversity Management Committees are statutory bodies constituted by local bodies such as gram panchayats and municipalities under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. Their main functions are to promote conservation and sustainable use of local biological resources and to prepare People's Biodiversity Registers documenting local flora, fauna and traditional knowledge. They form the grassroots tier of India's three-level biodiversity governance structure, alongside the National Biodiversity Authority and State Biodiversity Boards. Example: A village BMC prepares a People's Biodiversity Register listing local crop varieties, medicinal plants and the traditional knowledge associated with them.
• People's Biodiversity Registers (PBRs): People's Biodiversity Registers are village-level documents that record local biological resources, their uses and associated traditional knowledge, prepared by Biodiversity Management Committees under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. They serve as legal evidence of community knowledge and a baseline for conservation and for benefit-sharing when resources are commercially used. Example: A Biodiversity Management Committee documenting a medicinal plant and its traditional use in the PBR strengthens the community's claim to a share of benefits if a company develops a product from it.
• Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act, 2022: The 2022 amendment to the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, in force from 1 April 2023, which compressed six schedules into four, implemented CITES through a new Chapter VB and empowered the Centre against invasive alien species. Example: a tiger's Schedule I status carries the Act's harshest penalties.
• Invasive alien species: Invasive alien species are organisms introduced beyond their natural range that establish, spread and harm native wildlife, habitats or livelihoods. Example: the snowflake coral spreading on Indian reefs, now regulable under the 2022 amendment.
• Working permission: Working permission is the authorisation, expanded by the Van Amendment Rules 2025, for linear projects to begin preliminary work after Stage-I forest approval but before final Stage-II clearance. Example: a highway agency starting survey and site preparation once afforestation levies are paid.
• National Green Tribunal: The National Green Tribunal is the specialised judicial and expert body created in 2010 for speedy disposal of environmental cases, empowered to award compensation on the polluter-pays principle. Example: an NGT order fining a polluting industrial unit and directing restoration of a contaminated stream.

Prelims practice