India’s mangroves occupy a narrow ecological space between land and sea, but their significance extends far beyond their physical area. They reduce coastal erosion, support fisheries, provide habitats for biodiversity and store carbon in vegetation and waterlogged soils. For communities living near deltas, creeks and estuaries, they also provide a natural layer of protection against storms and tidal surges. Yet mangrove conservation remains institutionally fragmented. It is often treated as a forestry activity, a coastal protection intervention, a biodiversity programme or a carbon project, depending on which agency or financier is involved. Each approach captures only one part of the value mangroves create.
India now needs a blue carbon compact that brings these objectives together.
A strategic coastal asset
India’s coastline has recently been reassessed at 11,098.81 kilometres, using high-resolution data and modern geospatial methods. The India State of Forest Report 2023 records 4,991.68 square kilometres of mangrove cover. For a country with major ports, densely populated coastal cities, fishing economies, industrial corridors and island territories, mangroves must be viewed as strategic national assets rather than peripheral forests. Their role is becoming more important as climate risks intensify. Coastal infrastructure is expanding at the same time that sea-level rise, erosion, extreme rainfall and cyclonic events are increasing pressure on shorelines. Concrete embankments and engineered barriers will remain necessary in many places, but they cannot be the only response.
Mangroves can complement built infrastructure by absorbing wave energy, trapping sediment and allowing coastlines to adapt more dynamically. Their soils are also significant carbon sinks, giving mangrove protection a direct connection with climate mitigation. UNESCO recognises mangroves as natural defences that support biodiversity, food security and the resilience of coastal communities. The problem is that these services are rarely valued together. Forest departments may bear the cost of restoration while ports, industries, tourism facilities, municipalities and insurers benefit from reduced coastal risk. Local residents may protect the ecosystem, but the economic value created by their stewardship is often captured elsewhere.
The limits of plantation-led conservation
India has established the Mangrove Initiative for Shoreline Habitats and Tangible Incomes, known as MISHTI, with a target of restoring 54,000 hectares by 2028. This provides an important national platform for expanding restoration. However, restoration cannot be reduced to the number of saplings planted or hectares covered.
Mangroves depend on tidal exchange, elevation, salinity, sediment supply and freshwater flows. A site where hydrology has been disrupted may require creek restoration or removal of tidal obstructions before planting can succeed. Some open mudflats are also valuable ecosystems and should not automatically be converted into mangrove plantations. A credible programme must therefore begin with ecological suitability, not numerical targets. Finance should support baseline assessments, hydrological restoration, natural regeneration and long-term monitoring, in addition to plantation.
This creates a financing challenge. Government schemes can fund initial activities, but mangrove recovery may take years. Sites require protection after planting, maintenance following extreme weather events and repeated monitoring of survival and ecosystem condition. Annual budgets are not always designed for such long ecological timelines.
Building the financing compact
Public finance must remain the foundation because many ecological and social benefits generated by mangroves cannot easily be converted into market revenue. Government funding should support mapping, restoration planning, hydrological repair, protection of natural mangroves and the establishment of monitoring systems.
The second layer should come from economic actors that depend on stable coastlines. Ports, coastal industries, urban authorities, tourism operators and infrastructure developers could contribute to estuary-level or district-level resilience funds. Such contributions should be viewed as part of managing physical climate risk, rather than merely as corporate social responsibility.
Banks and insurers can also influence investment decisions. Where mangroves demonstrably reduce the exposure of coastal assets, lenders could incorporate ecosystem protection into environmental and climate-risk conditions. Insurers could support restoration programmes where improved natural protection reduces expected losses.
Blue carbon finance can provide a third layer. Projects that demonstrate additional, measurable and durable emission reductions or removals may generate carbon credits. Revenue from these credits could support long-term monitoring, maintenance and ecological stewardship.
Carbon finance, however, must not be treated as an automatic reward for plantation. Projects need credible baselines, conservative carbon accounting and safeguards against over-crediting. They must also account for risks arising from erosion, storms, degradation and changes in land use.
A project implemented entirely through an existing public mandate cannot simply relabel the same activity as an additional carbon intervention. High-integrity blue carbon requires a clear distinction between routine expenditure and the added ecological outcome made possible by carbon finance.
Creating scale without losing ecology
Many potential mangrove restoration sites are too small to independently bear the costs of project design, field sampling, validation and verification. India should therefore consider aggregating compatible sites at the estuary, delta or coastal-district level.
Aggregation can reduce transaction costs and create a sufficiently large portfolio to attract public, concessional and private capital. But it must not impose one model on ecologically different locations. Each site would still require its own assessment of hydrology, species suitability, land tenure and community use.
A national blue carbon framework could establish common rules for project eligibility, carbon measurement, ecological safeguards and financial disclosure. It could also create standard arrangements for engaging fishing cooperatives, women’s groups and local institutions in monitoring and maintenance.
Coastal residents should not be expected to wait for uncertain revenue from future carbon-credit sales. Multi-year stewardship agreements could provide regular payments for maintaining tidal channels, protecting natural regeneration, monitoring survival and reporting ecological damage. Carbon income, where generated, could help sustain these agreements over longer periods.
This would convert mangrove protection into skilled and compensated climate work, rather than short-term plantation labour.
An opportunity for climate leadership
A credible domestic blue carbon framework would also strengthen India’s climate diplomacy. Countries across the Bay of Bengal, the Indian Ocean and the wider Global South face similar challenges: ecologically valuable coastlines, climate-vulnerable communities and limited public finance for long-term restoration. India can demonstrate how public programmes, private beneficiaries, climate finance and carbon markets can be combined without allowing one source of finance to dominate. It can also promote standards that value adaptation, biodiversity and livelihoods alongside carbon.
The opportunity is not simply to generate a new category of credit. It is to create a replicable model for financing coastal resilience. Mangroves should therefore be recognised simultaneously as ecosystems, carbon stores, livelihood foundations and protective infrastructure. Treating them as only one of these will continue to undervalue them. A national blue carbon compact can align the institutions, finance and ecological knowledge needed to protect India’s coastline. It can also show that nature-based climate action becomes credible not when saplings are planted, but when functioning ecosystems remain standing for decades.
Leave a Reply