💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (August Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS2

  • What are environmental pressure groups? Discuss their role in raising awareness, influencing policies and advocating for environmental protection in India.

    Environmental Pressure Groups (EPGs) are organized civil society or citizens’ groups that seek to influence public opinion, government policy, and corporate behavior on ecological and sustainability issues.

    Role of Environmental Pressure Groups in India

    Raising Environmental Awareness

    Public Mobilization through mass movements, awareness drives, and media campaigns. Eg-

    Chipko Movement (1973) – led by Sunderlal Bahuguna to stop deforestation in Uttarakhand.

    Save Silent Valley Movement (Kerala, 1978) – against a hydroelectric project threatening tropical rainforest.

    Environmental Education – – Centre for Environment Education (CEE) works with schools and universities on sustainability curricula.

    Media and Digital Advocacy – Fridays for Future India leverages digital activism for climate awareness.

    Influencing Public Policy and Legislation

    Policy Advocacy and Research Inputs – Provide scientific evidence, policy recommendations, and stakeholder consultations to shape environmental laws.

    Judicial Activism and PILs – Eg- MC Mehta v. Union of India cases (Ganga Pollution, Oleum Gas Leak) strengthened India’s environmental jurisprudence.

    Shaping Environmental Institutions – Their advocacy contributed to the creation of MoEFCC (1985), National Green Tribunal (2010), and Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) framework.

    Advocacy for Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development

    Grassroots Environmental Movements – Eg- Appiko Movement (Karnataka) replicated Chipko in Western Ghats.

    Corporate Accountability – Pressure corporations to adopt clean technologies and CSR-based sustainability models. Eg- anti-mining movement in the Niyamgiri mountains in Odisha

    Climate Change and Renewable Energy Advocacy – TERI (The Energy and Resources Institute) conducts research on climate resilience and sustainable energy policy.

    Urban Environmentalism – Citizen for Green Bengaluru and Clean Air Collective India promote sustainable urban planning.

    Challenges Faced by Environmental Pressure Groups

    Perception of Obstructionism: Often labelled as anti-development or “foreign influenced.”

    Funding and Regulatory Constraints: Tightened FCRA norms and compliance burdens.

    Limited Representation: Urban, elite-driven activism may overlook local realities.

    Fragmentation and Coordination Gaps: Lack of unified national environmental network.

    Balancing Ecology and Economy: Difficulty in reconciling conservation with livelihood interests.

    Way Forward

    Institutionalized Government-CSO Dialogue: Establish consultative platforms under MoEFCC and NITI Aayog.

    Data-Driven Advocacy: Leverage NDAP and IndiaAI Mission for environmental data visualization.

    Grassroots Capacity Building: Empower Panchayats and tribal groups for local conservation.

    Transparency and Collaboration: Adopt transparent funding and promote state-civil society partnerships.

    Environmental Education: Integrate sustainability into national curriculum via National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.

    Environmental pressure groups act as guardians of ecological justice and public conscience in a rapidly developing economy.

    Development Processes

  • India–Africa digital partnership is achieving mutual respect, co-development and long-term institutional partnerships. Elaborate.

    In the words of PM Modi, “Africa will remain at the center of our attention. Our partnership is not just about sharing resources but about sharing dreams and a vision for a brighter future.”

    India-Africa Digital Partnership

    Foundation of Mutual Respect-

    South-South Cooperation– based on equality, non-conditionality, and mutual benefit.

    Unlike the Chinese “Digital Silk Road”, India provides low-cost and interoperable solutions.

    Africa views India as a partner in capacity building, not a neo-colonial actor. (Shashi Tharoor)

    Co-development through Technology and Capacity Building-

    Pan-African e-Network (2009)- Connects 48 African countries with India for tele-education and telemedicine.

    India’s Aadhaar, UPI, CoWIN, and DigiLocker systems serve as models for Africa’s Digital Transformation Strategy (2020-2030). Eg- Namibia – NPCI Pact for a UPI-like instant payment system

    ITEC Program- Trains African professionals in e-governance, AI, fintech, and cybersecurity, promoting shared digital growth.

    Long-term Institutional Partnerships-

    India-Africa Forum Summit (IAFS) & Voice of Global South Summit (2023)- Institutionalize digital cooperation as a core agenda.

    EXIM Bank LoCs & Tech Parks- Fund ICT hubs and innovation centers (e.g., Ethiopia, Rwanda, Tanzania).

    Start-up collaboration under Digital India-Digital Africa initiative, in agri-tech, e-health, fintech, and education.

    Triangular cooperation with Japan under Asia-Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC) supports digital infrastructure.

    Education and Skilling – Eg- IIT Madras campus in Zanzibar (first overseas IIT)

    The digital partnership reflects a new model of South-South cooperation for inclusive digital transformation

  • Discuss the evolution of collegium system in India. Critically examine the advantages and disadvantages of the system on appointment of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India and that of the USA.

    The appointment of judges is central to judicial independence and part of the Basic Structure (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973).

    In India, this evolved through judicial interpretation, whereas in the USA, the process is constitutionally and politically structured.

    Evolution of the Collegium System in India

    Articles 124(2) and 217(1)– Provide for appointment of judges by the President after consultation with the Chief Justice of India (CJI).

    First Judges Case (S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, 1981)

    Held that “consultation” does not mean “concurrence.” CJI’s opinion was not binding

    Gave primacy to the executive in judicial appointments and transfers.

    Second Judges Case (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, 1993) – Overruled the 1981 judgment. Established the Collegium System– CJI + 2 senior-most judges of the Supreme Court to recommend appointments.

    Third Judges Case (Re Presidential Reference, 1998) – Expanded the collegium to CJI + 4 senior-most judges. Made consultation with the collegium binding on the executive.

    Parliament passed the 99th Constitutional Amendment to replace the collegium with NJAC. Composition- CJI, 2 senior judges, Law Minister, and 2 eminent persons.

    Supreme Court Judgment (2015), NJAC was struck down as unconstitutional, violating the Basic Structure (judicial independence).

    Present Status

    Collegium Composition-

    Supreme Court- CJI + 4 senior-most judges.

    High Court- Chief Justice + 2 senior-most judges.

    Executive Role- Can seek reconsideration once, but must accept the collegium’s recommendation thereafter.

    In the USA, Judges of the Supreme Court are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate after public hearings.

    Analysis of system of appointment

    India

    USA

    India’s collegium ensures independence but lacks transparency, whereas the U.S. model ensures openness but risks politicisation. Thus, a mechanism balancing independence and accountability is essential to preserve judicial integrity and democratic legitimacy.

  • Indian Constitution has conferred the amending power on the ordinary legislative institutions with a few procedural hurdles. In view of this statement, examine the procedural and substantive limitations on the amending power of the Parliament to change the Constitution.

    The Indian Constitution, under Article 368, confers the power of amendment on Parliament. However, this power is neither absolute nor unlimited, being subject to procedural and substantive limitations.

    Procedural Limitations

    These are explicit constitutional conditions laid down in Article 368. Violation of any renders the amendment invalid.

    Special Majority Requirement – Majority of total membership of each House, and Two-thirds of members present and voting.

    Separate Approval by Each House – No joint sitting is allowed under Article 108.

    Ratification by Half States for Federal Provisions – Eg- 101st Amendment (GST) required ratification.

    Presidential Assent under Article 368(2).

    Bill must follow all legislative procedures – notice, debate, quorum, and voting. Procedural irregularities can invite judicial scrutiny (as per Raj Narain v. Indira Gandhi, 1975).

    Substantive Limitations on the Amending Power

    These are judicially evolved constraints that restrict Parliament from altering the core identity of the Constitution.

    Doctrine of Basic Structure (Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973))

    Limited Amending Power Itself is Basic Structure (Minerva Mills, 1980) – Clauses (4) and (5) of Article 368 (inserted by the 42nd Amendment) were struck down.

    I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007) held that even laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after 1973 are open to Basic Structure review.

    Parliament cannot amend to abrogate or emasculate Fundamental Rights forming part of the Basic Structure (e.g., equality, liberty).

    Parliament cannot alter the essential federal balance between Centre and States. (Kuldip Nayar v. Union of India (2006))

    Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975)- Free and fair elections, rule of law, and judicial review are part of Basic Structure.

    Harmony between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles – Both must coexist; destroying one in favor of the other violates Basic Structure.

    Examination of limitations

    Thus, the limited amending power under Article 368 makes the Indian Constitution a living document, capable of growth yet immune from destruction.

  • Discuss the nature of Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly after the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019. Briefly describe the powers and functions of the Assembly of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir.

    The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019, following the abrogation of Article 370 and 35A, reorganized the former State of J&K into two Union Territories – Jammu & Kashmir (with legislature) and Ladakh (without legislature).

    Nature of J&K Legislative Assembly after the J&K Reorganization Act, 2019

    The UT of J&K Assembly resembles that of Delhi and Puducherry, functioning under Article 239A with limited law-making powers.

    The Lieutenant Governor (LG) is the head of the UT, appointed by the President, and wields greater authority than Governors of states.

    The Assembly has a five-year term (not six as earlier).

    Abolition of J&K Legislative Council – Bicameralism ended, Assembly became unicameral.

    Out of 107 seats in J&K Assembly-

    83 elected,

    24 reserved for Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK),

    5 to be nominated by the LG, including 2 women (as per the Act, 2019 amendment 2023).

    Powers and Functions of J&K Legislative Assembly

    Legislative Powers

    Can legislate on subjects of the State List, except public order, police and concurrent list subject.

    Section 36 – Financial Bills in J&K UT can be introduced or moved in the Legislative Assembly only on the recommendation of the Lieutenant Governor.

    Laws require assent of the LG, who may refer bills to the President.

    Executive Oversight

    The Council of Ministers, headed by the Chief Minister, is collectively responsible to the Assembly.

    The Assembly exercises oversight through questions, motions, debates, and budget control.

    However, Section 53 – LG acts in discretion on matters related to All India Services & Anti-Corruption Bureau.

    Financial Powers

    Can pass the annual budget and authorize expenditure from the Consolidated Fund of J&K.

    Money Bills require the prior recommendation of the LG.

    The J&K Legislative Assembly post-2019 is a restricted legislature, balancing democratic representation with the Union’s direct control over sensitive subjects.

  • “Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike…” In view of the above observation of the Supreme Court, explain the concept of constitutional morality and its application to ensure balance between judicial independence and judicial accountability in India.

    Constitutional morality implies adherence to the core principles and spirit of the Constitution in a democracy. In the words of Ambedkar, “Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated”.

    Constitutional morality as the fulcrum

    Checks on High Functionaries

    Supremacy of Constitution – Limits arbitrary use of executive or legislative power.

    Rule of Law – Ensures decisions are legal, not personal or political.

    Judicial Review – Eg- NJAC Judgment

    Equality & Non-discrimination – Prevents rulers from favouring particular groups.

    Democratic Accountability – Demands transparency and answerability in governance. Eg- D. C. Wadhwa Case – frequent promulgation of ordinance as “fraud on the Constitution.”

    Separation of Powers – Eg – Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) struck down 39th Amendment to protect judicial review.

    Spirit of Justice – Requires policies and judgments to align with fairness.

    Checks on Citizens

    Ensures public morality does not override rights and dignity of individuals. Eg – Navtej Johar (2018) decriminalised homosexuality, Sabrimala Judgment.

    Equality & Non-discrimination – Binds citizens against practising caste, gender, or religious exclusion.

    Tolerance & Fraternity – Discourages hate speech, intolerance, or majoritarian excesses.

    Constitutional Patriotism – Promotes loyalty to constitutional ideals over narrow identity politics. Eg- Fundamental Duties

    Concept of constitutional morality

    George Grote, in his History of Greece, described constitutional morality as a “rare and difficult sentiment”–

    Paramount reverence for forms and procedures of the Constitution.

    Adherence to law while enabling open criticism of authority.

    Need for public reason, self-restraint, and trust in institutions.

    Application of Constitutional Morality in Balancing Judicial Independence and Accountability

    Judicial Appointments – Constitutional morality preserves judicial primacy in appointments (NJAC Case 2015), while demanding transparency and collegium reforms for accountability.

    Judicial Review – Protects independence of judiciary to strike down unconstitutional laws (Kesavananda Bharati 1973), yet requires judicial restraint to avoid overreach.

    Judicial Conduct – Ensures judges remain free from executive pressure, but also subject to scrutiny for corruption or misconduct (K. Veeraswami v. Union of India 1991).

    Public Trust – Judicial independence protects rule of law, while accountability ensures public confidence in the judiciary.

    Ensures Transparency and accountability – Subhash Agarwal Case- Brought CJI’s office under RTI.

    Public Interest Litigation (PIL) – Expands access to justice for the poor and marginalised, but constitutional morality demands avoidance of frivolous PILs to preserve judicial credibility.

    Contempt Powers – Secure judicial independence, but require tolerance of criticism unless it obstructs justice delivery. Eg- Prashant Bhushan Case

    As Justice D.Y. Chandrachud observed, “Judicial independence is not a privilege but a responsibility owed to the Constitution.”

  • With the waning of globalization, post-Cold War world is becoming a site of sovereign nationalism. Elucidate.

    Thomas Friedman, (The Lexus and the Olive Tree), defines globalization as the inexorable integration of markets, nation-states, and technologies, making it farther, faster, deeper, and cheaper. However, at present, the world is witnessing ‘Deglobalisation’.

    Waning of Globalization

    Global trade as % of GDP peaked at 61% in 2008, declining to ~52% by 2024 (World Bank).

    Reversal of Liberalization- Trade wars, tariffs (US-China), and reshoring policies mark a retreat from free markets.

    The splinternet, 5G bans, and AI regulation indicate the politicisation of technology.

    Weakening of Global Institutions- paralysis of WTO, and unilateral sanctions. Eg- USA’s CAATSA

    Regionalism replacing globalization – RCEP, IPEF, BRICS+, EU strategic autonomy.

    Rise of Sovereign Nationalism

    Economic Nationalism – US “America First”, India’s Atmanirbhar Bharat, EU’s strategic autonomy.

    Resource Nationalism- Nations asserting control over rare earths, energy, and food exports. Eg- Indonesia’s nickel ban.

    Political Sovereignty – Brexit (2016) justified as “taking back control”.

    Identity Politics- Nationalist rhetoric linked to cultural, ethnic, or religious identity. Eg- rise of Neo Fascist powers in Europe.

    Strategic Assertion – Russia’s rejection of Western dominance through the Ukraine war.

    Digital Sovereignty – EU’s GDPR and DSA for data protection; China’s Great Firewall.

    Security Nationalism – Eg- Iran’s nuclear program

    Vaccine & Resource Nationalism during COVID-19

    Backlash Against Migration- Eg- Immigration controls in UK, EU, USA

    Public Opinion Shift- Global surveys (Pew, 2023) show declining trust in globalization and preference for domestic self-reliance.

    The retreat of globalization signals a transition from hyper-interdependence to guarded sovereignty and realist state-centric politics

  • “In contemporary development models, decision-making and problem-solving responsibilities are not located close to the source of information and execution, defeating the objectives of development.” Critically evaluate.

    Contemporary development models

    Neoliberal – privatization, and deregulation

    Technocratic Model – Data driven governance

    Donor-Driven Model

    PPP Model

    Participatory Development Model

    Decision-Making and Problem-Solving Not Close to Ground

    Centralized Policy Design, with limited input from grassroots institutions. Eg- Uniform guidelines under PMAY-Gramin

    Bureaucratic Hierarchies lead to delayed responses. Eg- delays in fund release under MGNREGA due to multi-tier approvals.

    Technocratic and Data-Centric Planning leads to exclusion of indigenous knowledge.

    Weak Decentralization – PRIs and ULBs lack fiscal and functional autonomy. Only 40% of states have functional District Planning Committees (NITI Aayog, 2022).

    Lack of Coordination – ministries and departments work in silos. Eg- Smart Cities Mission: 60% projects delayed due to poor coordination.

    Lack of Participatory democracy – Communities are treated as beneficiaries rather than partners in development.

    Political and Fiscal Centralization through centrally sponsored schemes

    Regulatory Capture – Eg- Nexus of Bureaucracy-Politicians-Corporate. (Vohra Committee)

    Counter-Argument

    73rd & 74th Constitutional Amendments empowered PRIs and ULBs for local governance and participatory planning.

    Gram Panchayat Development Plans (GPDPs) institutionalized bottom-up planning in over 2.6 lakh Panchayats.

    Aspirational Districts Programme (ADP) – Promotes data-driven local governance with district-level flexibility and real-time monitoring.

    PM Gati Shakti National Master Plan – Integrates 16 ministries on a GIS-based platform to align planning and execution at ground level.

    Mission Karmayogi – Builds capacity of field-level officials for local problem-solving and citizen-centric service delivery.

    Cooperative Federalism via NITI Aayog – Governing Council enable state-specific and local feedback-based planning.

    Community-Led Models – Swachh Bharat Mission and Jal Jeevan Mission emphasize village-level implementation and monitoring.

    State Level Measures – Kerala’s People’s Plan Campaign

    Way Forward

    Capability Approach – increase spending on Health (2.5%of GDP) and Education (6% of GDP)

    Adopt Best Practices – Participatory Budgeting in porto alegre brazil

    Decentralized Governance based on principle of subsidiarity.

    “Growth becomes meaningful only when it expands human freedom and capability.” – Amartya Sen

    For this, decision-making authority and problem-solving responsibilities should be at the grassroots level.

    Social Justice

    Government Policies and Interventions for Welfare Schemes for Vulnerable Sections

  • Discuss the ‘corrupt practices’ for the purpose of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Analyze whether the increase in the assets of the legislators and/or their associates, disproportionate to their known sources of income, would constitute ‘undue influence’ and consequently a corrupt practice.

    The Representation of the People Act, 1951 defines a set of “corrupt practices” (Section 123), violation of which can lead to disqualification of a candidate (Section 8).

    Corrupt Practices under RPA, 1951

    Bribery – Offering or accepting gratification (money, jobs, gifts, entertainment) to induce candidature, withdrawal, or voting/refraining from voting. Eg- Distribution of cash or liquor during elections.

    Undue Influence – Interference (direct or indirect) with the free exercise of electoral rights through threats, inducements, or pressure. Eg- Threats of social boycott or misuse of official authority.

    Appeal on Identity Grounds – Seeking votes based on religion, caste, community, race, or language, or using religious/national symbols.

    Promotion of Enmity – Spreading hatred between groups for electoral gains.

    False Statements – Publishing knowingly false information about a candidate’s personal character or conduct to prejudice election prospects.

    SC in 2023 held that providing false information about electoral Candidates Qualification is not a Corrupt Practice under RPA, 1951.

    Free Conveyance of Voters – Hiring vehicles/vessels for voters’ free transport to polling stations.

    Excessive Expenditure – Spending beyond limits prescribed under Section 77.

    Misuse of Official Machinery – Seeking help from government servants such as gazetted officers, judges, police, armed forces.

    Booth Capturing – Seizing polling stations or ballot boxes by force.

    Glorification of Sati or Regressive Practices – Using such appeals for electoral advantage.

    Assets of Legislators and the Question of Undue Influence

    Since 2004, under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, MPs must declare their assets and liabilities to the Speaker (Lok Sabha) or Chairman (Rajya Sabha) within 90 days of taking their seat.

    The Supreme Court, in Lok Prahari case, mandated that candidates disclose not only their assets but also the sources of income of themselves, their spouses, and dependents.

    It directed the Centre to amend election rules and nomination forms, and sought a permanent mechanism to probe disproportionate asset growth of legislators.

    The Court held that non-disclosure of assets or income sources amounts to a corrupt practice under Section 123, RPA 1951.

    A legislator’s or associate’s increase in assets disproportionate to known income is also a matter of corruption under Prevention of Corruption Act (1988) or criminal misconduct under IPC/Prevention of Money Laundering Act. Section 8 (3) of the Act states that if an MP or MLA is convicted for any other crime and is sent to jail for 2 years or more, he/ she will be disqualified for 6 years from the time of release.

    Thus, the disqualification provisions ensure the trinity of Ethics, Accountability and Fairness of electoral process.

  • [22nd June 2026] The Hindu OpED: End the free rein of junk food advertising in India

    Mentor’s Comment

    India committed in 2017 to restrict the advertising of ultra-processed foods (UPFs) and foods high in fat, sugar and sodium (HFSS) foods under the National Multisectoral Action Plan, but that commitment remains unimplemented. In February 2026, the Supreme Court of India weighed in on the issue through a PIL on front-of-pack warning labels, and the Economic Survey 2025-26 called for stronger regulation of UPF advertising, bringing the policy gap into sharp focus.

    What has made UPF and HFSS advertising a public health concern?

    1. Rising exposure: Children and adolescents encounter UPF advertisements across television, social media, sports broadcasts and influencers.
    2. Misleading health claims: Advertisements highlight selective attributes such as “baked”, “multigrain” or “12-grain” and conceal high sugar, salt and fat content.
    3. Targeted marketing: Celebrity endorsements and child actors increase product appeal among vulnerable consumers.
    4. Demand creation: Advertising does not merely reflect demand. It actively shapes consumer preferences and consumption patterns.
    5. Scale of advertising expenditure: In 2024, three major transnational corporations spent USD 13.2 billion on UPF advertising globally. In India alone, more than two lakh junk food advertisements appeared in a single month, backed by an advertising expenditure of approximately ₹170 crore.

    Why are UPFs increasingly linked to adverse health outcomes?

    1. Industrial formulation: UPFs contain additives, flavour enhancers, emulsifiers and refined ingredients designed for high palatability.
    2. Overconsumption effect: Their design encourages repeated consumption and reduces satiety.
    3. Diet displacement: UPFs replace traditional and minimally processed foods.
    4. Disease burden: Scientific evidence links high UPF consumption to obesity, hypertension, diabetes and cardiovascular diseases.
    5. Rising NCD challenge: Growing UPF consumption coincides with increasing obesity rates globally and in India.

    Why are existing regulatory safeguards proving inadequate?

    1. Policy implementation gap: The National Multisectoral Action Plan (2017-2022) envisaged restrictions on HFSS advertising, but implementation remains incomplete.
    2. Weak disclosure norms: Advertisements can omit critical nutritional information and still remain legally compliant.
    3. Limited consumer protection: Existing rules focus more on product safety than marketing practices.
    4. Judicial concern: The Supreme Court has highlighted the need for stronger consumer information measures such as front-of-pack labelling.
    5. Reliance on self-regulation: Industry-led safeguards have not substantially reduced child-targeted advertising.

    What Is the Constitutional and Legal Basis for Restricting UPF and HFSS Advertising?

    1. State duty to protect vulnerable groups: Children are especially vulnerable to food marketing, requiring state intervention to safeguard public health.
    2. Existing policy commitment: The NMAP (2017-22) envisaged restrictions on HFSS food advertising, but implementation remains pending.
    3. Advertising law as the key instrument: The proposed solution is amendment of advertising laws, a measure already contemplated by the government.
    4. Supporting legal measures: The Supreme Court (2026) endorsed front-of-pack labelling, while MPs have advocated warning labels and taxation of UPFs.
    5. Right to health framework: Regulation of unhealthy food advertising flows from the constitutional right to health and is supported by the Economic Survey 2025-26.

    Does nutrition education alone solve the problem?

    1. Information asymmetry: Consumers receive nutrition advice but are simultaneously exposed to aggressive food marketing.
    2. Behavioural influence: Marketing exploits emotional triggers that often outweigh rational dietary choices.
    3. Children’s vulnerability: Children lack the capacity to critically assess persuasive advertising.
    4. Environmental constraint: Food choices are shaped by the surrounding commercial environment, not only by awareness levels.
    5. Public health limitation: Education programmes cannot fully offset continuous exposure to unhealthy food promotion.

    What do international experiences demonstrate about food advertising regulation?

    1. City of San Francisco lawsuit against UPF manufacturers: In 2024, San Francisco filed a lawsuit against 10 major UPF manufacturers alleging child-targeted marketing, highly compelling product formulations, and inadequate health risk disclosure. The suit sought prevention of deceptive marketing and corrective measures for past false advertising.
    2. Chile: Strong statutory restrictions on unhealthy food advertising reduced reliance on voluntary industry commitments.
    3. Mexico: Regulatory interventions demonstrated greater effectiveness than self-regulation mechanisms.
    4. Global evidence: International experience shows enforceable legal measures outperform voluntary compliance frameworks.
    5. Lancet Series evidence (November 2025): Three papers published in The Lancet in November 2025 presented scientific evidence linking UPF consumption to poorer diet quality, displacement of real foods, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, obesity, and other non-communicable diseases. The series argued that policymaking should not wait for further evidence.

    Why is this ultimately a state responsibility rather than a market choice?

    1. Right to Health: The state has a constitutional duty to protect public health when harms are foreseeable.
    2. Child protection principle: Children constitute a vulnerable group requiring enhanced regulatory safeguards.
    3. Market failure: Consumers often lack complete information about nutritional risks.
    4. Externalities: Rising obesity and NCDs impose social and healthcare costs beyond individual consumers.
    5. Public interest regulation: Restrictions on harmful advertising are comparable to other public health interventions.

    What policy changes are required?

    1. Advertising restrictions: Prohibit or significantly restrict child-targeted advertising of UPFs and HFSS foods.
    2. Front-of-pack labelling: Introduce clear warning labels to improve informed choice.
    3. Digital platform regulation: Extend restrictions to social media, influencers and online advertising.
    4. Stronger enforcement: Replace voluntary compliance with statutory obligations and penalties.
    5. Healthy food promotion: Incentivise marketing of minimally processed and nutritious foods.

    Conclusion

    The central issue is not consumer ignorance but the commercial environment that shapes food choices. Nutrition education cannot succeed when aggressive marketing continuously promotes unhealthy foods. India’s public health response must move beyond awareness campaigns and regulate the advertising ecosystem that drives UPF consumption, especially among children.