CAG Performance Audit flags major gaps in Green India Mission implementation
Environment · Friday, 14 August 2026
The CAG reported a nearly 98% shortfall in achieving the Green India Mission’s forest-cover expansion target during 2015–16 to 2024–25. The audit also found weak monitoring, planning and financial management, and flagged inflated/overstated achievements in several states.
Quick highlights
- CAG audit covered 16 States/UTs for 2015–16 to 2024–25, examining planning, implementation, financial management, and monitoring of GIM.
- Forest-cover expansion: 1.4 million hectares targeted; only 0.03 million hectares observed (nearly 98% shortfall).
- Forest quality improvement: improved over 0.11 million hectares against a target of 1.4 million hectares (92% shortfall).
- Landscape selection issues: low-to-moderate climate vulnerability areas chosen in some cases instead of more vulnerable landscapes.
- Monitoring/reporting gaps: 14 States failed to provide required public web links; GIS analysis found no noticeable GIM-attributable change at 70% of sampled sites.
- Audit flagged inflated data and overstated achievements.
Context
The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) flagged major implementation gaps in the Green India Mission (GIM), particularly on forest-cover expansion and forest quality improvement.
Key Facts
Scope: Performance audit across 16 States and Union Territories for 2015–16 to 2024–25. Assessed objectives: increase forest/tree cover, improve forest quality, strengthen ecosystem services, and support forest-dependent livelihoods. Key quantitative findings: • Forest-cover expansion target: 1.4 mha; observed increase: 0.03 mha. • Forest-quality improvement target: 1.4 mha; observed improvement: 0.11 mha. Governance findings: • Inadequate scheme convergence, poor coordination, deficiencies in planning and financial management. • Monitoring deficiencies: 14 States lacked required public web links; GIS analysis showed no noticeable GIM-attributable change at 70% sampled sites. • Inflated/overstated reporting noted.
Significance
Weak afforestation outcomes can constrain carbon sequestration, biodiversity conservation, and climate resilience. Poor monitoring and unreliable reporting undermine transparency and effectiveness of environmental expenditure and can affect livelihoods dependent on forest ecosystem services.
Challenges / Way Forward
Based on audit flags: improve targeting of climate-vulnerable landscapes, strengthen convergence and coordination, tighten financial management, ensure public disclosure of monitoring links/data, and strengthen GIS-based monitoring to reduce inflated reporting.
Exam Angle
GS2 (Governance): Role of CAG, accountability and transparency, performance auditing. GS3 (Environment): Afforestation, biodiversity, climate change, environmental governance, sustainable development.
Remember this
- Audit period: 2015–16 to 2024–25.
- Coverage: 16 States/UTs.
- Forest-cover expansion: target 1.4 mha; observed 0.03 mha (nearly 98% shortfall).
- Forest quality improvement: target 1.4 mha; observed 0.11 mha (92% shortfall).
- 14 States did not provide required public web links (as per audit).
- GIS analysis: no noticeable GIM-attributable change at 70% sampled sites.
- Audit flagged inflated/overstated achievements.
More from Friday, 14 August 2026
- Constitutional Limits on Arrest: Supreme Court reiterates safeguards against arbitrary arrest
- India Optel launches indigenous ‘GARUD’ High Resolution Binoculars for civil market
- Gaj Gaurav Awards 2026 conferred during World Elephant Day celebrations
- Small Modular Reactors (SMRs): India plans at least five indigenous SMRs by 2033
- Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC): role and significance
- River Boards: purpose and relevance in river basin governance
- Romania faces energy stress amid severe Danube drought
- Religious freedom and State neutrality: why neutrality is central to protecting choice