There is a difference between planting and restoring.
Planting is a transaction: seedlings in the ground, a photograph, a number.
Restoration is a system: soils that hold water again, rivers that run longer into summer, habitats that reconnect, rural incomes that stabilise, cities that cool by a degree when it matters most.
Maharashtra’s decision to plant 300 crore trees between 2026 and 2031, raise the State’s green cover from the current 21.25% towards 33% (the long-stated national goal), and establish a Green Maharashtra Authority is therefore best read not as a plantation drive but as a test of institutional capacity—planning, procurement, hydrology, community incentives, and long-horizon maintenance.
The announcement carries several technically sophisticated design intentions: priority to low forest-cover regions such as Marathwada, species selection aligned to local soil and climate, explicit exclusion of grasslands and wetlands from tree-planting (restoration instead), and a commitment to survival monitoring through digital and satellite-based systems, with long-term care supported via convergence with schemes such as MGNREGA and CAMPA.
What follows is a technical, project-risk–centred view of what could go wrong, why green cover must be protected as strategic natural infrastructure, and the future-proof risk mitigation strategies that can convert ambition into measurable ecological outcomes. A final section shows how to anchor implementation in an IRM-based ERM framework.
1.The Strategic Importance of Green Cover
Green cover is not merely a forestry metric; it is a strategic asset class embedded within ecological, economic, and societal systems. Forests, grasslands, wetlands, and agroforestry landscapes collectively regulate hydrological cycles, sequester carbon, preserve biodiversity, stabilise soils, and moderate microclimates.
For a state like Maharashtra—characterised by diverse ecological zones ranging from the Western Ghats to semi-arid Marathwada—the expansion and protection of green cover directly influences water security, agricultural productivity, disaster resilience, and public health.
1.1 Climate Regulation and Carbon Sequestration
Forests act as carbon sinks by absorbing atmospheric CO₂ through photosynthesis and storing it in biomass and soils. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), land-based mitigation strategies, including afforestation and reforestation, are essential to limiting global warming to 1.5°C.
India has committed under its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to create an additional carbon sink of 2.5–3 billion tonnes of CO₂ equivalent through forest and tree cover. Maharashtra’s ambition to plant 300 crore trees between 2026 and 2031 aligns with this macro-commitment, positioning the state as a material contributor to national climate strategy.
1.2 Water Security and Hydrological Stability
Green cover enhances groundwater recharge, reduces surface runoff, and mitigates flood and drought cycles. In drought-prone districts such as Marathwada, vegetation buffers evapotranspiration extremes and improves soil moisture retention.
The World Economic Forum (WEF) has repeatedly emphasised nature-based solutions (NbS) as critical infrastructure for climate adaptation. Forest restoration is not an environmental expense; it is hydrological insurance.
1.3 Biodiversity and Ecosystem Integrity
The Western Ghats, partly located in Maharashtra, are a globally recognised biodiversity hotspot. Habitat fragmentation and unplanned plantation drives using monoculture species risk undermining ecosystem resilience.
Effective green cover expansion must distinguish between:
- Ecological restoration
- Commercial plantation
- Carbon-offset planting
Conflating these categories introduces biodiversity risks and weakens long-term ecological value.
1.4 Economic and Social Multiplier Effects
The Green Maharashtra Mission integrates rural employment through schemes like MGNREGA and CAMPA. When executed prudently, afforestation in India can:
- Enhance rural incomes
- Promote non-timber forest products
- Reduce climate-induced migration
- Strengthen local livelihoods
However, economic benefits are contingent upon survival rates, ecological appropriateness, and long-term stewardship.
2.Risks in the Green Maharashtra Mission and Consequences of Poor Execution
Large-scale environmental missions carry complex, interdependent risk exposures. 300 crore tree plantations in five years is operationally and strategically ambitious. Without a structured Enterprise Risk Management framework, systemic risks may materialise.
2.1 Ecological Risks
Monoculture Bias
Over-reliance on fast-growing species for numerical targets can degrade soil health and biodiversity.
Invasive Species Risk
Non-native species may disrupt local ecosystems and outcompete indigenous flora.
Misclassification of Ecosystems
The plan correctly avoids planting on grasslands and wetlands; however, misidentification or poor ecological mapping could result in unintended ecological damage.
Consequences:
- Biodiversity loss
- Reduced ecosystem services
- Long-term restoration costs
2.2 Survival and Maintenance Risk
Historically, large plantation drives across India have suffered from low survival rates (sometimes below 50%).
Failure points include:
- Inadequate irrigation
- Lack of community ownership
- Poor post-plantation monitoring
The mission’s commitment to 3–10 years of maintenance is strategically sound. However, funding continuity, administrative oversight, and accountability mechanisms must be institutionalised.
Consequences of poor survival rates:
- Carbon accounting inaccuracies
- Public trust erosion
- Misallocation of fiscal resources
2.3 Governance and Accountability Risks
The establishment of a Green Maharashtra Authority is a structural governance innovation. However, risks remain:
- Fragmentation across departments
- Data manipulation to meet targets
- Inconsistent reporting standards
- Overlapping mandates with forest, agriculture, and rural departments
Digital satellite tracking introduces transparency but also cybersecurity risks and data integrity risks.
2.4 Financial and Funding Risks
Convergence with MGNREGA and CAMPA is resource-efficient. However:
- Delayed fund disbursement
- Budget overruns
- Leakage or corruption
- Inadequate cost provisioning for long-term care
Failure to integrate lifecycle costing undermines mission sustainability.
2.5 Climate and Environmental Risks
Ironically, climate change itself poses risks to plantations:
- Extreme heatwaves
- Erratic rainfall
- Pest outbreaks
- Wildfires
Without adaptive species selection, climate modelling, and concrete strategies for climate change adaptation, planted saplings may not survive future conditions.
2.6 Reputational and Political Risk
Large-scale public commitments carry reputational exposure. Failure to meet survival targets or evidence of ecological mismanagement may lead to:
- Public backlash
- Legal scrutiny
- Policy discontinuity
- Reduced investor confidence in sustainability initiatives
In ESG-conscious capital markets, environmental credibility has financial implications.
3.Future-Proof Risk Mitigation Strategies
To secure long-term impact, Maharashtra must transition from a plantation campaign to an ecological systems transformation strategy.
3.1 Climate-Resilient Species Planning
Species selection must integrate:
- Agro-climatic zoning
- Soil typology
- Future climate projections
- Biodiversity restoration priorities
Collaboration with research institutions and ecological scientists is essential.
3.2 Survival-Linked Performance Metrics
Shift from “number of saplings planted” to:
- Five-year survival rates (closing the gap from the current 75–80% to a 90–100% survival benchmark)
- Biodiversity index improvement
- Soil carbon enhancement
- Water retention metrics
Incentives for contractors, local bodies, and NGOs should be survival-based, not plantation-count-based.
3.3 Community Ownership Models
Empowering farmers, SHGs, and rural youth strengthens custodianship.
Mechanisms may include:
- Revenue-sharing from agroforestry
- Community forest management rights
- Carbon credit participation
Without local ownership, plantations remain transactional rather than transformational.
3.4 Digital Twin and Satellite Verification
The mission’s satellite-based monitoring system should integrate:
- GIS-based geo-tagging
- Real-time survival audits
- AI-driven anomaly detection
- Public dashboard transparency
Data integrity protocols must be aligned with cybersecurity standards.
3.5 Integrated Risk Heat Mapping
District-level risk heat maps should identify:
- Drought vulnerability
- Soil degradation
- Fire risk corridors
- Biodiversity sensitivity zones
This supports prioritisation and adaptive allocation of resources.
3.6 Financial Risk Controls
Implement:
- Ring-fenced maintenance budgets
- Independent third-party audits
- Performance-linked fund releases
- Transparent procurement frameworks
Embedding financial controls within mission architecture reduces leakages and reputational risk.
3.7 Grounding Execution in an IRM-Based ERM Framework
Embedding the mission within an ERM framework aligned with Institute of Risk Management’s standards in ERM provides structural discipline.
The Green Maharashtra Authority should define a formal risk appetite statement clarifying acceptable mortality thresholds, financial variance tolerances, and biodiversity protection standards. A mission-level Chief Risk Officer could oversee risk identification, mitigation, and reporting.
A dynamic risk register must catalogue ecological risks, operational risks, financial risks, climate risks, water risks, legal risks, and reputational risks. Ownership, mitigation actions, and review cycles should be explicitly defined.
Adopting the Three Lines Model enhances governance integrity. Operational management executes plantations, a risk and compliance function monitors adherence, and independent assurance provides external validation.
Scenario analysis and stress testing—drought scenarios, pest outbreaks, funding shortfalls—should be conducted annually to ensure adaptive resilience.
Quarterly public risk dashboards would align the mission with global ESG disclosure norms and reinforce transparency.
Future Outlook
The Green Maharashtra Mission is not simply an afforestation programme—it is a systems-level resilience intervention.
If executed with disciplined ERM integration, Maharashtra can:
- Increase forest cover toward 33%
- Contribute meaningfully to India’s climate commitments
- Strengthen rural employment
- Enhance biodiversity resilience
- Position itself as a national model for risk-integrated environmental governance
Conversely, without structured risk management, the initiative risks becoming a numeric target exercise—high on visibility but low on ecological durability.
In a climate-constrained century, green cover is infrastructure. It is economic stability. It is a risk mitigation capital.
The true measure of success will not be the number of saplings planted, but the ecological integrity sustained over the long term.
The future of Maharashtra’s environmental security depends not on ambition alone—but on disciplined, risk-intelligent execution.
FAQS
1.What are the steps taken by Maharashtra for sustainable development?
The Maharashtra government has decided to plant 300 crore trees between 2026 and 2031 to raise the State’s green cover from the current 21.25% towards 33% (the long-stated national goal). The decision includes a plan to establish a Green Maharashtra Authority.
The announcement carries several technically sophisticated design intentions: priority to low forest-cover regions such as Marathwada, species selection aligned to local soil and climate, explicit exclusion of grasslands and wetlands from tree-planting (restoration instead), and a commitment to survival monitoring through digital and satellite-based systems, with long-term care supported via convergence with schemes such as MGNREGA and CAMPA.
For a state like Maharashtra—characterised by diverse ecological zones ranging from the Western Ghats to semi-arid Marathwada—the expansion and protection of green cover directly influences water security, agricultural productivity, disaster resilience, and public health.
2.Which scheme is launched by the government to promote tree plantation?
The Maharashtra government has decided to plant 300 crore trees between 2026 and 2031 to raise the State’s green cover from the current 21.25% towards 33% (the long-stated national goal).
The announcement carries several technically sophisticated design intentions: priority to low forest-cover regions such as Marathwada, species selection aligned to local soil and climate, and a commitment to survival monitoring through digital and satellite-based systems, with long-term care supported via convergence with schemes.
The mission’s commitment to 3–10 years of maintenance is strategically sound.
The establishment of a Green Maharashtra Authority is a structural governance innovation.
Digital satellite tracking introduces transparency.
3.How can Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) improve environmental missions?
Large-scale environmental missions carry complex, interdependent risk exposures. Planting 300 crore trees in five years is operationally and strategically ambitious. Without a structured Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) framework, systemic risks may materialise.
Embedding environmental missions within an ERM framework aligned with Institute of Risk Management’s standards in ERM provides structural discipline.
Defining a formal risk appetite statement helps clarify acceptable mortality thresholds, financial variance tolerances, and biodiversity protection standards. A mission-level Chief Risk Officer could oversee risk identification, mitigation, and reporting.
Scenario analysis and stress testing—drought scenarios, pest outbreaks, funding shortfalls— when conducted annually helps ensure adaptive resilience.
Quarterly public risk dashboards would align environmental missions with global ESG disclosure norms and reinforce transparency.
4.What is the Green Maharashtra Mission?
The Maharashtra government has decided to plant 300 crore trees between 2026 and 2031 to raise the State’s green cover from the current 21.25% towards 33% (the long-stated national goal). This is the Green Maharashtra Mission. The government also plans to establish a Green Maharashtra Authority.
The announcement carries several technically sophisticated design intentions: priority to low forest-cover regions such as Marathwada, species selection aligned to local soil and climate, explicit exclusion of grasslands and wetlands from tree-planting (restoration instead), and a commitment to survival monitoring through digital and satellite-based systems.
The Green Maharashtra Mission integrates rural employment through schemes like MGNREGA and CAMPA. When executed prudently, afforestation can:
- Enhance rural incomes
- Promote non-timber forest products
- Reduce climate-induced migration
- Strengthen local livelihoods
If executed with disciplined ERM integration, Maharashtra can enhance biodiversity resilience.
