Can development and conservation Coexist? Lived realities from eastern Himalaya

Written by Nayanika Dutta, Balipara Foundation

Eastern Himalaya is one of the world’s most ecologically and culturally diverse regions, where phenomenal natural beauty meets with communities living through their daily web of life. With its verdant forests, rugged mountains, and remarkable wildlife, the region is every conservationist’s paradise.

At the same time, local communities here are eager for better roads, education, healthcare and energy access. In this landscape, development and conservation aren’t abstract ideas but lived realities, full of tough negotiations and constant compromises.

The challenge begins with how we approach infrastructure in such fragile terrain. Many large projects – highways, dams, and power lines are still designed with the same thinking as that of plains.

In Arunachal Pradesh, new roads have undeniably opened up remote areas, brought markets closer, and improved access to essential services. Yet in several stretches of the region, unpredictable monsoons and unstable slopes have led to frequent landslides, especially where drainage and slope stabilization were inadequate.

The lesson isn’t that we should stop building roads, but that we need to build them differently, more carefully with a much deeper understanding of mountain ecology.
Conservation initiatives have their own set of challenges. Resentment frequently results from protection measures that disregard the needs of the people who really reside in these forests.

Forests and rivers have historically provided food, fuel, and revenue for the local communities. Without alternatives, top-down restrictions are rarely effective in the long run.

This is where local initiatives have shown promising results. In Nagaland, many villages have taken conservation into their own hands through Community Conserved Areas.

Instead of solely relying on protection measures from the state, villages in entirety have come together to stand against hunting, protect regenerating forests, and develop alternative livelihoods like eco-tourism and sustainable farming.

These efforts most certainly are more durable because they grow from within, rooted in collective choice rather than external pressure.

Sikkim offers another interesting story. The state’s transition to entirely organic farming was a wise financial move in addition to an environmental one.

Sikkim gained access to upscale markets that appreciate clean produce while safeguarding its soil and waterways by doing away with chemical pesticides and fertilizers.

Farmers were initially doubtful, but over time, with proper training and market support, many have adapted and benefited.

However, not every situation has such neat solutions. The push for hydropower in the Teesta basin, for instance, was promoted as clean energy that would generate revenue and reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

However, the combined effects of several projects on the river system have raised serious concerns. The devastating 2023 Glacial Lake Outburst Flood in Sikkim, which seriously damaged the Teesta III dam and downstream villages, was a sobering reminder of how vulnerable these alpine rivers are, particularly if extreme weather events become more frequent due to climate change.

Wildlife conservation demands careful and well-balanced strategy. In Kaziranga National Park in Assam, new roads and infrastructure have improved connectivity for people but also has contributed to greater risks pertaining to animal movement, especially during the annual floods.

Authorities have responded with wildlife corridors, elevated roads, and speed restrictions. These measures aren’t perfect, but they reflect a growing recognition that development and wildlife protection must find ways to coexist.

A few key insights emerge from these contextual examples. One, initiatives that involve the local communities from the very outset, tend to achieve greater success rates as they hold better knowledge on the region-specific realities of ecosystems.

Two, compared to large, one-size-fits-all approach, smaller, decentralized initiatives often sit well in these contexts. Finally, development approaches must look beyond short term gains and consider long-term ecological stability, especially in a region that is already under risk from mounting climate induced pressures.
Of course, coexistence isn’t always achievable in its most ideal form.

Some ecologically critical zones need stronger protection, and certain kinds of development may simply be unsuitable for the most fragile landscapes. Acknowledging these limitations does not mean going against progress, it just signals responsible planning.

The Eastern Himalaya definitely does not offer easy solutions. What it does offer is years of wisdom from local communities who live at this intersection every single day.

Their experiences suggest that development does not have to come at the cost of nature. Development and conservation can support one another when carried out with caution, adequate ecological awareness, and sincere community involvement.

In an era of rapid climate change, these lessons from real world examples may hold value for the Eastern Himalaya and the region at large.