This post presents our monthly curation of developments in the policy landscape – highlighting I4I content pertaining to coercive sterilisation of males during India’s period of Emergency; challenges in the implementation of the Forest Rights Act, 2006; and recent measures to promote ethanol production in the country. 

Forced male sterilisation in ‘Emergency India’

On 25 June 1975, half a century ago, the then Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi imposed a state of ‘Emergency’ in the country. For a 21-month period until 1977, this declaration allowed the government to suspend the fundamental rights of citizens, if required, to curb internal and external threats to the nation. As we mark the 50^th anniversary of the Emergency, various commentators are reflecting on the policies of that period, and the importance of safeguarding democratic traditions and civil liberties in the present-day context. 

One such policy, pertaining to population control as a poverty alleviation measure, involved the mass sterilisation of men. In the first year of the programme, monetary incentives were offered to men and women to undergo sterilisation. However, on account of low take-up rates , coercive methods were adopted in the last 10 months of implementation, such as withholding payment of workers or requiring a certificate of sterilisation to access essential services. The result was the sterilisation of 6.2 million men during 1976-1977. 

In their 2024 study, Singh and Vincent leverage the variation in the intensity of programme implementation across the country to assess its impact on violent behaviours among men. They find that the level of coercion employed did not have a significant influence on overall crime rates, property crimes, or incidents of rioting. However, it did lead to a surge in the reported cases of rape and other forms of violence against women. Drawing on psychological literature, the researchers posit that the trauma induced by sterilisation, as well as the challenge to masculinity and consequent feeling of emasculation, may have raised the propensity towards aggression among the affected men. 

Furthermore, the research reveals that an increase in coercion intensity led to a slight positive uptick in fertility post-1976, rather than the intended decrease. This was particularly the case among families without a son, or large families. Starting in 1980, fertility increased; perhaps fears of the return of such programmes caused people to expand their families. 

Implementation of the Forest Rights Act

The Forest Rights Act (FRA) was passed in 2006 and came into force in 2008. Officially known as The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, this landmark legislation “recognizes the rights of the forest dwelling tribal communities and other traditional forest dwellers to forest resources, on which these communities were dependent for a variety of needs, including livelihood, habitation and other socio-cultural needs.” Besides seeking to undo the historical injustice faced by forest dwellers, the FRA is an acknowledgement of their knowledge of the forest ecosystem, and vests in them the responsibility of conservation. 

While the FRA has been the domain of the states so far, for the first time since enactment, the Union government has begun funding structural mechanisms to “facilitate” its implementation. The stated objective is to assist claimants and village councils with paperwork, expedite decision-making with regard to pending claims, and help with data management.   

In this context, it is instructive to re-visit Bharti Nandwani’s I4I article on the challenges of implementing the FRA. Examining information from a Land Conflicts Watch database, she demonstrates that conflicting claims to forest land by forest dwellers and the government have risen since the enactment of FRA, with the disputes being concentrated primarily in high-forest cover states of Odisha, Chhattisgarh, and Maharashtra. Of the 154 new cases of land disputes between forest dwellers and the government that were reported between 2008 and 2017, 45-52% can be attributed to contradictory provisions in legislations related to conservation. 

Nandwani explains that post-independence, the Indian government brought in several laws around forest conservation and wildlife protection, such as the Forest Conservation Act (FCA), 1980 and the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. Some of the provisions of these legislations are based on the premise that forest dwellers are, in fact, threats to forest and wildlife conservation, thus negating their rights. Hence, at a more fundamental level, efforts ought to be made to harmonise existing legislation and the recognition of the rights of forest dwellers – in order to improve the implementation of FRA and achieve its goals. 

Policy push for ethanol-blended petrol

India has set a target of 20% ethanol blending in petrol by 2025-26, so as to cut down the petroleum import bill, and transition to the use of a less polluting fuel for transportation. Given the availability of technology to produce ethanol from plant-based sources, the government’s rationale for this policy push is also based on the “availability of large arable land [and] rising production of foodgrains and sugarcane leading to surpluses”. While maize is the go-to grain for ethanol production, its diversion for this purpose created a shortage for the feed industry. In light of this, the government has made the excess stock of rice of the Food Corporation of India available at a reduced reserve price, up to a defined quantity cap. 

In a recent I4I post, Akansha Jain argues against the use of excess rice stocks for ethanol production. In her view, this move risks normalising the idea that surplus food can be burned for fuel, while many remain food insecure. Further, there are environmental concerns in the form of the high water-intensity of rice cultivation. Creating another avenue of demand for paddy may incentivise farmers in the Indo-Gangetic plain to increase production, which runs contrary to policy prescriptions for sustainable crop diversification in the region to prevent further environmental degradation. 

Instead, Jain recommends the use of agricultural residue, which will also enable the management of this abundant waste product that is often burnt by farmers and becomes a cause of seasonal air pollution in North India. She also calls for greater inter-ministerial coordination such that there is integrated planning across the domains of agriculture, food, fuel, and the environment.