Performance Audit on the Green India Mission, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change

Findings

1. Against an approved target of 2.8 million hectares of afforestation by 2018, interventions had been made on 0.14793 million hectares as of March 2025 — after ten years of implementation.

   “Audit scrutiny reveals that while the country's overall forest and tree cover marginally increased from 24.62 per cent (ISFR 2021) to 25.17 per cent (ISFR 2023), GIM, despite being the flagship afforestation programme of MoEF&CC, could not deliver commensurate output. As of March 2025, afforestation interventions were made only on 0.14793 million hectare of land during the period 2015-16 to 2024-25, against the approved target of 2.8 million hectare to be achieved by 2018 under GIM.”Executive Summary

2. The mission was designed to draw ₹10,600 crore of its ₹13,000 crore cost from other schemes — CAMPA, MGNREGS and the National Afforestation Programme. None of that convergence happened, and the ministry provided only ₹1,149.14 crore over ten years.

   “Out of ₹13,000 crore, a total of ₹10,600 crore was to be sourced through convergence with schemes like Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (₹6,000 crore), Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (₹4,000 crore) and National Afforestation Programme (₹600 crore). However, it was observed that the convergence of activities of GIM with other afforestation schemes amounting to ₹10,600 crore could not be achieved and the proposed funding support could not be attained. Consequently, all the activities for GIM were financed by MoEF&CC through the limited annual budgetary support received from the Government of India. Only ₹1,149.14 crore (47.88 per cent) had been provided during 10 years of implementation (2015-16 to 2024-25).”Executive Summary

3. A new target of 25 million hectares by 2030 was adopted in 2021 to align the mission with India's Nationally Determined Contribution, but implementation guidelines for it had still not been framed as of September 2025.

   “In order to realign Green India Mission with India's Nationally Determined Contribution of creation of an additional carbon sink of 2.5-3 billion tonnes of carbon equivalent through forest and tree cover, the Ministry adopted new afforestation target of 25 million hectare in 2021, to be achieved by 2030. Further, the implementation guidelines for achieving the new target of 25 million hectares set in 2021 had not been framed by the Ministry as of September 2025.”Executive Summary

4. The mission's stated purpose was to green ecologically fragile land — scrublands, ravines, wetlands, abandoned mines — but planting was largely confined to low-vulnerability sites while the critical landscapes were largely ignored.

   “Conceptually, GIM is a forward-looking initiative that adopted a landscape-level approach and emphasised greening of ecologically fragile and critical areas such as scrublands, ravines, wetlands and abandoned mines. However, Audit observed that on the ground plantation activities were largely confined to low-vulnerability sites, while ecologically critical landscapes despite being identified in multiple studies and present across several States, were largely ignored.”Executive Summary

5. The audit independently checked the plantation sites using GPS, satellite imagery on Google Earth Pro and temporal analysis by IISc Bangalore, and found little to no improvement in nearly 70 per cent of the locations assessed.

   “As a demonstration of effective analysis of data available with MoEF&CC using available technology, Audit attempted to independently validate and evaluate the performance reports under GIM by evaluating the area where GIM interventions were undertaken using a GPS device, by viewing the KMLs of plantation sites on Google Earth Pro and leveraging the services of IISc, Bangalore, to conduct temporal analysis. This analysis revealed little to no improvement in nearly 70 per cent of the locations assessed.”Executive Summary

6. The apex National Governing Council and National Executive Council met less often than prescribed, and the revamped state and district bodies were either not constituted or not functioning, which the audit links to faulty site selection.

   “The meetings of National Governing Council and National Executive Council at the apex level were conducted less often than the prescribed frequency, resulting in delays in the approval of Perspective Plans, APOs and non-resolution of key issues relating to the implementation of GIM. Non-constitution of revamped bodies and inadequate functioning of the revamped bodies at the State and the District level hindered not only the programmatic convergence envisioned under GIM but also led to faulty selection of sites.”Executive Summary

7. Most of what was done fell under the sub-mission for improving existing forest quality; the three sub-missions with scope for new planting — ecosystem restoration, urban tree cover, and agro and social forestry — drew limited attention from both central and state authorities.

   “The bulk of GIM interventions were concentrated under Sub Mission 1, which focused on improving the quality of existing forest cover. In contrast, Sub Missions 2, 3 and 4 (Ecosystem restoration and increase in Forest Cover, Enhancing tree cover in Urban and Peri-Urban areas and Agro Forestry and Social Forestry) where substantial scope existed for new plantations and expansion of forest and tree cover, elicited limited attention and weak response from both Central and State authorities.”Executive Summary

8. The audit's overall conclusion is that a decade of the mission reflects a compelling vision constrained by inadequate planning, fragmented coordination, persistent under-funding, underused technology and weak monitoring.

   “In sum, the decade-long implementation of the Green India Mission reflects a compelling vision constrained by inadequate planning, fragmented institutional coordination, persistent under-funding, underutilisation of technology and weak monitoring mechanisms. The experience of GIM underscores the critical need for realistic planning, assured financing, robust institutional frameworks and outcome-oriented monitoring if future environmental missions are to translate ambition into measurable impact.”Executive Summary

Fact-checks citing this report

• ◑Lacks contextPromoting Afforestation and Agroforestry: We are committed to achieving the target of a carbon sink by enhancing the tree cover.