Narrowed posture: On Karnataka and the Kasturirangan Report

The Kasturirangan Report advocates a development-oriented approach for the Western Ghats, permitting human activity and economic pursuits within the region. However, the Karnataka Assembly adamantly rejected its recommendations, citing inaccuracies in the 2012 remote-sensing and satellite data used to differentiate natural from human-dominated landscapes.

Another contentious point was the proposal to designate entire revenue villages within an 'ecologically sensitive area' (ESA) if at least 20% of their area is deemed sensitive. This could potentially bring farmlands and human settlements under the ESA, even when the sensitive areas comprise only a small portion of the village.

In response to the Centre's directive for States to begin verifying the Report's recommendations through ground-truthing, Karnataka faced bipartisan opposition centered on concerns about livelihoods, and vested interests. Stakeholders of activities restricted or banned by both the Gadgil and Kasturirangan Reports, including mining, allegedly fueled fears of displacement. Consequently, the State opted to resist the ESA framework.

Although the Assembly resolution proposes returning to the incomplete task of creating an alternative map, the government's stance also faces broader challenges. The Centre's interim directions in 2013 maintain some level of protection for the ecosystems in Karnataka's stewardship, but the delay may prolong uncertainty regarding permitted forms of development for both the government and businesses within potential ESAs.

In essence, particular States must grapple with the economic and political consequences of local resistance and potential development losses while the country, as a whole, reaps the national benefits of conserving the Ghats. Therefore, States possess a strong incentive to negotiate the extent of ESAs down.

However, as of mid-2026, Gujarat was reportedly nearing an agreement with the Centre, Tamil Nadu had no significant disagreement, Kerala aimed to reduce its already ground-truthed ESA area from 9,993 sq. km to 8,805 sq. km, and Maharashtra and Goa sought to exclude 378 and 21 villages, respectively. While there are instances of progress, the shared geography of the Ghats across six States and the Centre's 2024 decision to allow ESAs to be notified State-by-State heighten the pressure on Karnataka.

In particular, Karnataka's ability to sustain its resistance to the framework as a whole becomes increasingly difficult if it does not also devise an equally well-reasoned alternative. To reconcile the apprehensions of its farmers and workers with the responsibilities of the State, which oversees the largest share (by area) of the proposed ESAs, Karnataka must find a balance that acknowledges all pertinent factors.