K. Kasturirangan

The death of K. Kasturirangan, former chairman of the High-Level Working Group (HLWG) on the Western Ghats, has rekindled memories of the panel’s report that shaped conservation policy in the region.

Released in 2013, the Kasturirangan report remains one of the most contested documents in Kerala’s environmental history, continuing to stir discussions about balancing ecological protection with the rights of local communities.

The Kasturirangan report was commissioned by the Central government, following the uproar caused by the 2011 report by the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel (WGEEP) led by environmentalist Madhav Gadgil, which recommended that the entire Western Ghats be declared an Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA).

The Gadgil committee’s stringent recommendations sparked fierce opposition, particularly in Kerala’s Western Ghats, where local farmers and residents feared displacement and the loss of their livelihoods.

Oommen V. Oommen, eminent ecologist and former Kerala State Biodiversity Board chairperson, who chaired a three-member expert panel set up by the Kerala government to study the impacts of the HLWG report, recalls a tense moment when he was asked to present the Gadgil committee’s recommendations to a crowd of local populace in Idukki at the insistence of the then MP P.T. Thomas.

“The meeting turned chaotic. People were deeply concerned, fearing that they will be forced to leave their ancestral lands under the recommendations. The police had to intervene to escort us from the meeting,” Prof. Oommen says.

The HLWG, on the other hand, proposed dividing the Ghats into two: 37% of the area would be classified as a ‘natural landscape’ subject to ESA protection, while the remaining areas would be designated as a ‘cultural landscape’ to ensure local communities could continue their way of life.

Dr. Oommen, who had presented a detailed analysis of the Gadgil report to Kasturirangan, said the HLWG chairperson’s approach was much more inclusive. “He realised that the Western Ghats were not just a wilderness, but also a cultural landscape with deep ties to the people who lived there for generations.”

While this recognition of the human element in conservation was expected to become more palatable to the local communities, the Kasturirangan report too was also met with fierce opposition. Protests erupted across the Western Ghats, particularly in the 123 villages recommended for ESA designation, where the people feared that even the modified recommendations would threaten their livelihoods.

Environmentalists such as C.R. Neelakandan criticised the HLWG for what he saw as an undemocratic process. “While Kasturirangan was a respected space scientist, the committee’s recommendations lacked grassroots level consultation,” Mr. Neelakandan said.

He argued that the report had excluded several ecologically fragile areas, while including others with less ecological value. “This was due to political pressure rather than scientific rationale,” he claimed.

As Kerala continues to grapple with the complex issue of Western Ghats conservation, the Kasturirangan report stands as both a landmark attempt at compromise and a symbol of the ongoing tension between ecological preservation and the rights of local communities. While the report was intended to offer a balanced solution, its legacy remains controversial.