Tirtha Prasad Saikia, Director of the North-East Affected Area Development Society, speaks to IPS at the IUCN World Conservation Congress in Abu Dhabi, UAE. Credit: Diwash Gahatraj/IPS

By Diwash Gahatraj
ABU DHABI, Oct 13 2025 (IPS)

As global conservation leaders gather in Abu Dhabi for the IUCN World Conservation Congress, communities in the hills of Darjeeling, thousands of kilometers away, are still counting their losses. In early October, heavy rains triggered deadly landslides that buried homes, blocked key roads, and left several people dead. The destruction has once again exposed how vulnerable India’s mountain regions are to extreme weather.

The Congress, convened every four years, started on October 9, 2025, in Abu Dhabi, UAE. This flagship global forum unites over 10,000 conservation experts, policymakers, and stakeholders to advance nature-based solutions amid escalating climate and biodiversity crises. Key agendas of the Congress include localizing climate finance, nature-positive development, and post-2025 biodiversity targets, with sessions on Himalayan resilience. 

On October 4 and 5, intense late-monsoon rains hit Darjeeling, setting off multiple landslides across the tea-producing district in West Bengal. At the same time, starting October 3, continuous downpours flooded large parts of North Bengal’s Terai and Dooars regions. By October 10, the death toll had climbed to 40, with thousands forced into relief camps in Jalpaiguri, Alipurduar, and Kalimpong.

The recent Darjeeling landslides and North Bengal floods killed dozens of people and displaced thousands—for Tirtha Prasad Saikia, Director of NEADS, these disasters are more than statistics. They’re an urgent wake-up call.

Speaking with IPS on the sidelines of the IUCN World Conservation Congress in Abu Dhabi, Saikia drew on years of frontline experience responding to floods and climate disasters across Assam and northeast India. His message is clear: India’s fragile hill regions need immediate action combining nature-based solutions, local wisdom like Meghalaya’s living root bridges, and fair climate finance.

The Congress, he believes, offers a crucial platform to push these priorities forward, ensuring vulnerable communities and ecosystems can survive and thrive as climate risks escalate. Read excerpts from the conversation below.

IPS: How do you interpret this event, IUCN WCC 2025 from a conservation and climate-resilience perspective?

Saikia: The Abu Dhabi IUCN Congress is perfectly timed to advance the global conservation agenda, emphasizing nature-based solutions and integrated resilience. This focus is crucial for mountain and riverine ecosystems, where safeguarding biodiversity is inseparable from ensuring human safety.

IPS: What do such disasters reveal about the state of preparedness in India’s hill regions?

Saikia: They reveal predominantly reactive systems, poor enforcement of hazard zoning, weak micro-catchment early warnings, and infrastructure placed in high-risk locations, so extreme rainfall turns rapidly into catastrophe.

IPS: In your work across the northeast of India, do you see similar patterns of vulnerability emerging?

Saikia: Yes, the northeast shows the same mix of steep, fragile terrain, increasing extreme rainfall, deforestation, and unplanned hill-cutting, producing repeated landslides, erosion and compound flood impacts.

IPS: What makes Darjeeling and other Eastern Himalayan areas so susceptible to landslides and flooding?

Saikia: A natural baseline of steep slopes, young/unstable geology and intense orographic rain combined with human pressures such as hill-cutting, vegetation removal and riverside construction that weaken slope and river resilience.

IPS:  How much is this crisis driven by human actions versus changing climate patterns?

Saikia: It’s a combination of both. Climate change is increasing the frequency and intensity of extreme rainfall that’s often the trigger. But local human actions like deforestation, unplanned road construction, and illegal building remove natural buffers and increase exposure. These factors work together, turning what could  have been manageable events into major disasters.

IPS: Do current development models in India’s hill regions take ecological limits into account?

Saikia: Not sufficiently! Many development choices prioritize short-term growth (tourism, housing, roads) without rigorous catchment assessments, undermining long-term resilience.

IPS: When disasters strike, what immediate challenges do local communities face (displacement, livelihoods, relief)?

Saikia: Rapid displacement, loss of homes and farmland, ruptured connectivity that blocks relief, loss of seasonal incomes and acute health/sanitation risks are immediate and severe.

IPS: Are there examples of community-led efforts or local knowledge that reduce these risks?

Saikia: Yes, living root bridges of Meghalaya, stilted/raised houses and granaries among the Mishing communities and other indigenous peoples of Assam and locally run flood shelters and community early-warning practices show strong, low-cost resilience rooted in local knowledge.

IPS: How can these local practices be scaled up or integrated into formal disaster management and planning?

Saikia: Systematically document and evaluate practices, fund pilots via micro-grants, adopt hybrid designs (traditional and engineering standards), secure community tenure and embed proven models in state DRR and climate plans.

IPS: How can restoring forests, wetlands and slopes reduce landslide and flood risks in regions like Darjeeling?

Saikia: Restoration increases infiltration, reduces peak runoff and sediment load, and stabilizes soils, recreating natural buffers so heavy rains are less likely to produce catastrophic landslides or extreme floods.

IPS: Examples where ecosystem-based interventions have outperformed conventional infrastructure:

Saikia: Living root bridges and mature catchment reforestation resist heavy rains better and last longer than many concrete fixes, and wetland/floodplain reconnection reduces downstream peaks more sustainably than embankments that simply transfer risk.

IPS: What are the biggest governance or institutional gaps that limit adaptation?

Saikia: Weak enforcement of hazard zoning, siloed sectoral planning, limited local fiscal autonomy, poor micro-catchment data and inadequate local early-warning systems.

IPS: How can state and local governments better coordinate with communities and civil society?

Saikia: Create support for the local disaster planning units, finance communities on micro-projects, institutionalize the communities and convene multi-stakeholder basin platforms.

IPS: Is climate finance reaching the ground, or are structural barriers locking it up?

Saikia: Much finance remains centralized or tied to complex procedures; slow disbursement, weak local fiduciary capacity and donor timelines misaligned with ecosystem recovery keep funds from reaching communities quickly.

IPS: What funding mechanisms could ensure faster, more direct support for community-led resilience?

Saikia: Use micro-grant windows, locally managed climate funds and blended finance that pairs seed grants with technical assistance and results-based payments to accelerate on-the-ground action.

IPS: Do you see opportunities at IUCN WCC 2025 for regional collaboration on mountain adaptation and resilience?

Saikia: Yes, WCC is ideal to launch transboundary basin platforms, share hazard-mapping tools and early-warning protocols, and co-finance coordinated restoration targets across the Eastern Himalayas.

IPS: One key action India should take in the next five years to strengthen hill resilience:

Saikia: Set up and fund a National Mountain and Riverine Resilience Mission to map hazards, enforce land use, finance community nature-based solutions and build multi-level basin governance and local capacity.

IPS: How can the IUCN Congress and global gatherings turn conversations into concrete action for places like Darjeeling and the Eastern Himalayas?

Saikia: Fast-track pilot financing for community-led nature-based projects, publish an implementation handbook of proven local practices and broker multi-year donor–government–community agreements with measurable resilience targets to convert pledges into delivery.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Emmanuel Nsabimana, a casual labourer at the National Tree Seed Centre, in Huye, in Rwanda’s Southern Province, has worked planting trees for over 40 years. He believes there has been considerable improvements in the seed quality from the centre since the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) became one of the contributors to its restoration. Credit: Emmanuel Hitimana/IPS

By Emmanuel Hitimana
HUYE, Rwanda, May 20 2020 (IPS)

In 2011, when Rwanda committed to restoring 2 million hectares of land in a global effort to restore 150 million hectares of degraded and deforested areas by 2020 — it seemed like a big ask. 

The densely populated and geographically small African nation had many limitations which could stand in the way of this as well as a commitment to achieving forest cover increase of up to 30 percent of total land area by 2030 as part of the Bonn Challenge.

Aside from limited land availability — Rwanda’s land area only encompasses 2.4 million hectares or 24,000 square kilometres — the country’s terrain did little to support the efforts. The country’s topography includes steep slopes, and it is the country with the highest mean soil erosion rate, according to the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO).

There were other factors too:

• A majority of the population — some 98 percent — were using trees as an energy source and the situation was not expected to change soon;
• 70 percent of the land was used by smallholder farmers, and the diversity of tree species was also low, with limited quality seed available. 

But by 2018, Rwanda, along with South Korea, Costa Rica, Pakistan and China, was considered one of the lead countries in the world with its successful restoration programme.

How did the country manage to restore more than 800,000 hectares — almost half of its original pledge — in less than a decade? 

Part of the answer lies in the restructuring and strengthening of the country’s National Tree Seed Centre, located in Huye, in Rwanda’s Southern Province, some 133 kilometres from the country’s capital.

The centre is tasked with centralising the supply of tree seeds across the country, including establishing new seed sources, improving trees with growth deficiencies, and collecting and certifying seed.

Until 2014, the Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Development Board (RAB) managed the centre. But farmers complained that they were unable to grow plants from almost 90 percent of the seeds from the centre.

Emmanuel Nsabimana, a casual labourer at the National Tree Seed Centre, has worked planting trees around Huye for over 40 years.

He remembers the attitude of local farmers and communities.

“Farmers were always bitter towards the centre because they thought that it was incapable of providing them with adequate seeds,” he recalls.

“Many would return the seeds.”

But in 2014 the centre shifted from RAB to become a unit of the Rwanda Forestry Agency. In 2016, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) — one of the founders and Secretariat of the Bonn Challenge, along with the German Government — stepped in to become one of the most significant contributors to the restoration of Rwanda’s National Tree Seed Centre.   

IUCN also partnered with the Rwandan Government, the Belgian Development Agency (ENABEL) and the University of Rwanda (UR) to strengthen the centre.

IUCN supported capacity building, including the training of staff, providing equipment to the centre, upgrading and developing infrastructure like greenhouses, maintenance of the seed stands where seeds are collected form, and rehabilitation of seed store where seeds are kept before they are distributed, Jean Pierre Maniriho, Forest Landscape Restoration Officer at IUCN, tells IPS.

“Before partners came in, many things were not going well. For example, we did not have a cold room, which was bad for seeds. We were only two staff, and the stock was also old. But we have steadily improved until now,” Floribert Manayabagabo, the production officer at the National Tree Seed Centre, says. His job is to make sure the seeds harvested at the centre are ready for market.

Manayabagabo thinks that the centre’s success story is thanks to a combination of great partnerships that ensured the centre now has good infrastructure that includes nurseries, a laboratory, a modern cold room and five full-time staff.

Maniriho says seed quality and quantity are essential to ensure sustainability and to meet demand.

Currently, 30 percent of the seeds come from the nearby 90-year-old, 200-hectare Arboretum of Ruhande, which surrounds the University of Rwanda.

The seeds from the arboretum include 207 exotic and indigenous species, explains Emmanuel Niyigena, a field officer at the centre. 

The remaining 70 percent come from the outside of the centre, with a significant amount of seeds sourced from nine agro forestry-related cooperatives within Rwanda, and the remaining seed being imported from Kenya.

One of many nurseries at Rwanda’s National Tree Seed Centre. The centre is tasked with centralising the supply of tree seeds across the country, including establishing new seed sources, improving trees with growth deficiencies, and collecting and certifying seed. Credit: Emmanuel Hitimana/IPS

It’s Eric Kazubwenge’s job to make sure that the seeds from the centre never disappoint. He is in charge of seed inspection and regulation at the centre.

“We normally do a physical inspection to make sure that they are not damaged. Then we proceed with laboratory testing before we conduct other testing in the nursery where seeds are conserved to make sure they will not resist soil plantation.”

He adds that multiple tests are continually carried out to ascertain how long a seed can grow in a nursery or how much moisture they need to survive.

Kazubwenge learnt many of these skills in Kenya, where he was trained through an IUCN partnership.

While Kazubwenge’s training was highly technical, members of cooperatives involved in seed supply chain also received training.

Kazubwenge tells IPS that previously it was very difficult for the cooperatives to supply to the centre the good seeds as they couldn’t distinguish good from bad quality seeds. The Tree Seed Centre was also unable to test and prove the quality of seeds due to lack of equipment (seed laboratory was not well equipped). This combination of limitations meant only a handful of seeds provided to the forest growers before 2014 had been fruitful.

“Our stock is (now) full of good seeds in terms of quality and quantity, thanks to cooperatives that were trained in seed collection and selection through IUCN partnership,” Janviere Muhayimana, who is in charge of the seed stock, tells IPS.

The centre also ensures farmers and the community are given the necessary information about the planting of the improved seeds.

Nsabimana concurs: “There are no more complaints (from farmers) as the seeds respond well to the soil.”

The researchers are optimistic about the future.

Kazubwenge’s vision for the centre’s future involves advanced technologies that will allow him to “carry out genetic assessment and analysis because it gives us deep knowledge about the compatibility of seeds according to their origins”.

Maniriho sees Rwanda on a good path to become a regional seed hub.

“Deforestation is a global challenge. What we have in Rwanda is what exactly is happening in Burundi or Malawi. We are importing seeds from Kenya today, but tomorrow others may be importing from us. We can make those connections that can encourage and strengthen the reciprocal partnership in seed supply and keep us from sending money overseas to only import seeds that we are sometimes capable of producing.”

Rwanda’s successful steps towards meeting its reforestation pledge proves a powerful example of how nature conservation can support livelihoods ahead of the IUCN World Conservation Congress, which will be held in France in January 2021. Held every four years, the Congress is a meeting of conservation experts and custodians, government and business representatives, indigenous peoples, scientists, as well as other professional stakeholders, who have an interest in nature and the sustainable and just use of natural resources. One of the major issues addressed will be the managing of landscapes for nature and people.

** Writing with Nalisha Adams in Bonn.

Excerpt: