Rishikesh-Bhaniyawala project has reopened debate on Uttarakhand’s development model

The question of how to balance development with environmental conservation is not new in Uttarakhand. From the Tehri Dam and the Char Dham All-Weather Road Project to the Joshimath land subsidence, several events have repeatedly raised a difficult question: is the model of development adopted in the plains suitable for the Himalayan region? In July 2026, the Rishikesh-Bhaniyawala National Highway widening project brought this debate to the fore once again.

The nearly 20-kilometre highway expansion project, estimated to cost about Rs 743 crore, is being implemented by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI). It aims to improve connectivity between Dehradun, Rishikesh and Jolly Grant Airport, ease traffic during the Char Dham Yatra, and promote tourism and regional economic growth. However, the proposal involved the felling of nearly 4,000 mature trees. 

The project also passes through the Shivalik Elephant Reserve and an important elephant movement corridor, prompting strong opposition from residents, environmentalists and civil society groups. Protesters embraced trees in a movement reminiscent of the historic Chipko movement. Responding to growing public pressure, Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami announced a halt to tree felling and called for fresh consultations with all stakeholders.

A fragile Himalayan landscape

This controversy is not merely about a highway project. It is also about Uttarakhand’s development model.

Development is undoubtedly essential. Better roads, healthcare, education, employment opportunities and efficient transport during disasters are basic requirements for every state. However, the fundamental question remains: can the same model of development be applied across the country?

The geographical and ecological conditions of the Himalayan region are vastly different from those of the plains. The Himalayas are among the world’s most ecologically fragile regions, where large-scale tree felling and unplanned construction can intensify landslides, land subsidence, depletion of water resources and biodiversity loss.

Uttarakhand therefore needs a development model suited to its unique geographical and ecological conditions. Development cannot be confined to wider roads, bridges and buildings. It must also conserve natural resources, ensure the participation of local communities, reduce disaster risks and secure a safe environment for future generations.

Before any major project is approved, there must be a scientific assessment of the region’s carrying capacity, an independent environmental impact assessment and meaningful participation of local communities. Only then can development be considered people-centric, environmentally responsible and sustainable.

Similarly, environmental impact assessments should not remain a procedural formality. They must form the basis of decision-making, helping evaluate a project’s potential effects on forests, wildlife, water resources and local livelihoods, and identifying ways to minimise harm.

Development without ecological loss

The most sensitive aspect of the Rishikesh-Bhaniyawala project is that it passes through elephant corridors and dense forests. The NHAI has proposed wildlife underpasses, an elevated wildlife passage, sound barriers and compensatory afforestation. Yet a critical question remains: can centuries-old natural forests truly be replaced by planting new saplings?

Forests are not merely collections of trees. They sustain water resources, soil stability, biodiversity and the livelihoods of local communities.

The most significant message emerging from this movement is that the people of Uttarakhand are not opposed to development. They seek better roads, education, healthcare and employment, but not at the cost of destroying forests, biodiversity and natural resources. Their protest is not against development itself, but against unsustainable development.

Today, Uttarakhand needs development that supports sustainability, not development that turns into disaster. The Kedarnath disaster, the Joshimath land subsidence and the increasing frequency of landslides show that ignoring the carrying capacity of the Himalayas can lead to severe crises.

The time has come to adopt a mountain-specific development model, one that gives equal importance to scientific planning, independent environmental impact assessment, community participation and environmental conservation.

The Chief Minister’s decision to suspend tree felling and initiate dialogue is a positive step. However, genuine success will be achieved only when every development project is guided by public consensus, scientific evidence and environmental justice.

Uttarakhand needs development, but not at the cost of its forests, biodiversity and fragile Himalayan ecology. The future of the state lies in a development model where roads are built without sacrificing forests. That alone can represent truly sustainable and inclusive development for Uttarakhand.

Rakesh Negi is assistant professor, department of political science at Hemvati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University, Srinagar Garhwal, Uttarakhand, and Km Neha is research scholar, department of political science at Hemvati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University, Srinagar Garhwal, Uttarakhand

Views expressed are the authors’ own and don’t necessarily reflect those of Down To Earth