The government amended forest conservation and biodiversity laws, inviting sharp criticism from several state governments, policy experts, and conservationists 

 India made significant progress in 2023 in combating climate change and conserving wildlife, despite criticism for the cheetah translocation programme and changes to regulations pertaining to forests and biodiversity. The country put out the idea of hosting the UN climate conference in 2028, highlighting its dedication to a “Green Credit Initiative” that aims to build carbon sinks in order to address the problems associated with global warming. India and other poor countries pushed wealthier counterparts to surpass net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 and instead aim for negative carbon emissions at the climate summit in Dubai.

International experts estimate that although India’s per capita carbon dioxide emissions increased by roughly 5 per cent in 2022 to two tonnes, they still only made up less than half of the world average. India achieved the target eleven years ahead of schedule when it submitted its third national communication to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in December, revealing a noteworthy reduction of 33 per cent  in GDP emission intensity between 2005 and 2019. During this time, the nation added to its carbon sink capacity by absorbing 1.97 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent.

In terms of protecting wildlife, India’s tiger population increased by 6 per cent year, from 2,967 in 2018 to 3,682 in 2022, with Madhya Pradesh having the highest number of tigers at 785. However, the fact that six of the twenty imported adults died brought criticism to the cheetah conservation project. One of the project’s obstacles was the unforeseen development of winter coats in Indian temperatures, which resulted in illnesses, injuries, and fatalities.

In addition, India established the International Big Cat Alliance in April with the goal of protecting the world’s seven major big cat species. Changes to the forest laws, especially the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Act, which limited the Act’s application to government-recorded forest lands, were met with harsh criticism at the same time. Certain categories of land were excluded by the amendment, such as regions within 100 km of international borders for important projects and territories up to 10 hectares for infrastructure connected to security. Many states expressed alarm over this action, citing concerns about how it will affect native people and forest lands.

Furthermore, through encouraging the growth of therapeutic plants, the Biological Diversity Act was modified in an effort to preserve resources and plants. The modified statute signalled a shift in regulatory enforcement strategy by shifting the punitive focus to fines ranging from Rs 1 lakh to Rs 50 lakh, notwithstanding concerns concerning benefit-sharing from traditional knowledge.