The proposed WBI guidelines 2022 have many different new provisions which are much wider if we compare with the existing guidelines of 2016. We can clearly see that the new guidelines would be a regulation with facilitation instead of only regulation that is in 2016 guidelines. The new proposal definitions for WBI guidelines has been enlarged with added terms that include: Municipal area, Wood council, Tree outside Forests, Farm wood, Imported wood, Charcoal, Tree growers, Trader or agent, Inter-state trade, Intra-state trade, Electronic trading and transaction platform, Trade area, Sponsor, Farming agreement, Local bodies etc. The Industrial Estate means areas notified by the state government or Union Territory Administration of establishment of wood based industries.
The earlier guidelines had no specific definition of Municipal area while the new proposal says that it shall also include all industrial townships, district industrial areas and such other areas established for the aforesaid purpose. ‘Municipal area’ means any area notified by the state government or UT. It also includes district, tehsil, Circle or Block headquarters notified by state governments or UTs, and cantonment boards. In terms of forum for wood based industries and other related stakeholders there is no such provision while the new guideline proposes for wood advisory council at national level, State and District/regional level.
In the new proposal farm-grown wood has been separated from that of forests as a separate category for Trees outside Forests (ToF) while in the 2016 guideline all wood whether from forests or agricultural fields is under one category. In 2016 the licensing for WBI has been made compulsory even for WBI using raw materials from ToF and the assessment of wood availability is compulsory for such industries while the new proposed guidelines says Industries based on raw materials only from ToF or imported wood to be free from the liability of licensing and these industries will require only online registration. The assessment of wood availability for such industries is not required provided they demonstrate electronically about wood procurement from legal sources.
The State Level committee (Powers & functions) has significant role in the new proposed guidelines. In 2016 guidelines there is no explicit provision regarding licensing regulation for industries using only Farm Wood ( Plywood/MDF/Particle Board), but with new proposed guidelines there is no requirement of licensing for veneers, plywood, Medium Density Fibre (MDF) Boards, Particle Boards, pulp and paper, and such other industries that primarily use ‘farm wood’ or ‘imported wood’ as raw material.
The new proposal says that sch wood-based industries shall be registered with the State/ UT Forest Department; and shall be required to submit self-attested returns of wood procured and used by them at such intervals in such online electronic format that the State/ UT Forest Department will prescribe. In the states and UTs (other than North Eastern States), in respect of distance from the boundary of nearest notified forests or protected areas, wood-based industries shall be allowed to operate as per state-specific order/approval of the Hon’ble Supreme Court/ Hon’ble High Court/ Central Empowered Committee.
In terms of State Level committee (Composition) there is ambiguity in composition with respect to PCCF (HoFF) being the Chairman, also there is representation of Regional office of MoEFCC in the committee and the industry restricted to one with no representation from Agriculture sector, while in the new proposed guidelines any officer of the rank of PCCF may be notified as Chairman, representation of MoEFCC has been broadened as any nominee from MoEF&CC is sufficient, representatives from WBI has been broadened and has been proposed to at least two, the director of Dept. of Agriculture would be a member.
And in terms of State Level committee (Appeal) in the 2016 guidelines it has been aggrieved by any decision taken by the State Level Committee may file an appeal before the concerned Regional office of the Central Government in the MoEFCC seeking appropriate relief within 60 days’ time. It arises conflict of interests and subordination the SLC and also there is no review provision, while in the new proposed guidelines there is a provision to appeal before the concerned Regional Empowered Committee (REC) of the MoEFCC within a period of thirty (30) days. The decision of the REC shall be conveyed to the aggrieved within three (3) months of the filing and there is a provision of revision against such decision that shall lie before the Additional Director General (Forest Conservation), MoEFCC.
Opinion on the new proposed Guidelines
WBI has made representations from states like Punjab, UP, and Assam to make it clear that the wood used in the industries comes from agricultural land so, it is agricultural wood, and then for making a special provision for wood from agro forestry. They also asked for relaxation for such industries dependent on such wood, and there was demand for a national forum for wood-based" industry stakeholders. States, farmer associations, and a research institute worked together with the central government to deliberate on what the issues were related to WBI, and how to have a hassle-free functioning for the betterment of WBI.
Then, it is also being proposed to resolve some of the issues, especially with respect to industry and issues related to SLC. Finally, the revision recognises the special categories of farm wood, which will provide impetus to grow more wood outside the forest, particularly on agricultural land, and promotes the WBI to sustain the demand for wood products in the country and, as a result, the wood products to come under an agro-forestry remunerative price. This will facilitate the sector in realising its growth potential, and the expected outcome is an increase in the forest or tree cover outside the forest area in the country and creating demand for farm wood, which will lead to enhancing the farmers’ income.
This new wood-based industry guideline has broadened its scope by incorporating many aspects, such as the municipal area and concept of wood council, trees outside of forests, imported wood, charcoal, tree growers, traders and agents entrants, interstate trade, electronic and electronic trading and transportation platforms, which are increasingly important these days, the trade area, sponsors, and farming against agreement, which may be prohibited. The local bodies, such as panchayats and municipalities, etc., were not seen in the previous guidelines.
The industry conglomerates have given their opinion, suggesting some changes in the guidelines to make them more relevant and supportive to the industry.
Mr Sajjan Bhajanka, President, FIPPI: The new policy is badly needed because in the existing policy there is a lot of ambiguity and interpretation. In this new proposal also, there is the same ambiguity in terms of area regulation for TOF that should be taken care of. In the preamble, it is said that no licence will be provided without SLC. It should be qualified; later, it would be exempted from WBI, so it should be specifically mentioned. The industry outside TOF would be required to get the license. Our target for TOF coverage is 33%, but we are far from that. According.
to the forest survey, approximately 25% of the land in the country is covered by forest of various types, with plantations covering 19% of the area and natural reserve forest covering 16%. I don’t see further addition of natural forest taking place, so whatever the addition of tree cover is, it will be from plantations, and it is also the need of the hour because the cash crops are in excess of the needs. Today, agriculture employs 60% of the workforce and contributes only 16% of GDP.
The dense natural forest area like Arunachal Pradesh should be divided into two parts, one for ecology reasons and the other to be demarcated as commercial forest, like what is happening in China where they allow PPP in its management. Today, there are large plantations in Hoshiarpur, so there will be plenty of timber to supply the demand in 4 to 5 years, and if industry is not present to consume it, prices will fall again. Timber should only be processed on the location of the plantation, and farmers should be allowed to farm cooperatively and establish sawmill and peeling units. Now MDF, PB, and plywood run on plantation timber. If it is not taken care of in the coming time, the problem will aggravate because it is definite that the industry will grow with India's upcoming revolution. Paper, PB, and MDF have the same material base, and for that reason, timber can be available in 3 to 4 years of plantation. We should make available financing for small farmers to assist them for 6–7 years until the timber crop comes.
Mr. Jikesh Thakkar, Secretary, IPMA: We established a plant in AP, and for that, we searched for the land for more than six months because there are hills and the government considers them to be reserved forest. Finally, We found land only in a designated industrial area. I wish to say that the recommendation is divided into three parts: establishment, operation, and market-related industry. TOF should have the maximum permitted species available to WBI. Second, the forest department's distance-based regulation of establishments should be eased with fewer restrictions, as in Karnataka, which lifted its ban on Eucalyptus and other less permitted species. Thirdly, WDC (the Wood Development Council) would develop some certification and export-related issues that should be looked at often by the commerce and finance ministries, like imposing import duties. Six months before, we had regular coordination meetings among the paper industry and WBI that we needed to restart. Secondly, for the ecology of the forest, FDC should work.
Mr Naval Kedia, President, All India Sawmillers Association (AISA): Sawmill has not been included in the preamble or anywhere in the guidelines. I believe sawmills are the first consumers of agricultural wood. Although there is a clause that says machines that use agri-wood as a raw material should be specifically mentioned, secondly, rural sawmillers are not so efficient that they can buy an industrial plot and establish their unit, so they should be relieved.
The SLC has not met in years, and holding it for three months is speculative. I doubt SLC can access the sustainability of wood, as until today it did not work well. Besides, the Wood Council, REC, etc. will complicate the mechanism for saw millers. Agri-wood should be free TP for the pan-India movement. The government should not have any control over TOF. Marketing has been left out; should we pay a marketing fee? Usable wood from forests should be used because it is being destroyed by nature itself. What is the relevance of the new guidelines for them if NGT did not follow the old guidelines?
Mr CN Pandey, FIPPI: There is a need for somebody to facilitate this industry, which is why the concept of the Wood Council came about. In Guideline 7.1, paragraphs should be rewritten. The WBI based on forest wood shall be guaranteed by the SLC only to those who provide access to hardwood availability. No other industry should be put under license. Secondly, para 5.3 states that the amount collected from each department for the forest industry in terms of fines and issuing licences should not be used for the department's needs. It should be utilised only for encouraging tree cover. We are missing the role of DPIIT, so we should incorporate them for the facilitation of development by facilitating chemical production (urea, plantations, etc.).
Mr BK Singh, ADG, MOEF & CC, Govt. of India: WBI based on farm-produced wood must be liberalized. Your suggestion will be considered, and we will try to reconcile it. The Wood Council will not be a regulatory body but a consultative body, and it will be basically a facilitating body. Our decision would be based on giving farmers the maximum benefit. If they have good returns, almost all issues will be resolved. The government is going to be a facilitator, not so much as a regulator, in a big way.