💥UPSC 2026, 2027 UAP Mentorship September Batch
Talk to Mentor

Day: September 27, 2025

Bills/Act/LawsDOMREthicsExplainedHistorical SitesIOCRop-ed snapPIBPlaces in newsPrelims OnlySC JudgementsSchemesSpeciesStatesworld map
September 2025
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

Port Infrastructure and Shipping Industry – Sagarmala Project, SDC, CEZ, etc.

[27th September 2025] The Hindu Op-ed: Incentives for shipbuilding must include longterm offtake possibilities

op-ed snap | Economics | Mains Paper 3: Effects Of Liberalization On The Economy, Changes In Industrial Policy and their effects on Industrial Growth

PYQ Relevance:

[UPSC 2013] Adoption of PPP model for infrastructure development of the country has not been free from criticism. Critically discuss the pros and cons of the PPP model.

Linkage: India’s shipbuilding revival package too hinges on state support plus private shipowner participation, much like PPP projects, where delays, cost overruns, and weak ancillary ecosystems mirror the criticisms of PPP in other infrastructure sectors. Thus, the editorial’s concerns on viability and long-term offtake directly resonate with PPP model challenges.

[UPSC 2022] What are the maritime security challenges in India? Discuss the organisational, technical and procedural initiatives taken to improve the maritime security.

Linkage: Strengthening indigenous shipbuilding directly supports maritime security, as a larger and modern merchant fleet reduces reliance on foreign vessels, ensures secure energy transport, and complements India’s naval and coastal defence preparedness.

Mentor’s Comment

The Government’s announcement of a ₹69,725 crore package to revive India’s shipbuilding ecosystem marks a crucial moment for maritime infrastructure. With India building only a handful of merchant ships in the last decade despite global growth, the new push signals both opportunity and urgency. The challenge lies in transforming policy incentives into real competitiveness, something India failed to do under the 2015 package.

Introduction

India aspires to emerge as a global maritime power, but its shipbuilding sector has lagged far behind peers like China, Japan, and South Korea. While lucrative defence contracts have kept select shipyards active, India’s merchant ship production remains negligible. The new package seeks to expand capacity to 4.5 million gross tonnage, modernise yards, and create ancillary clusters. However, unless structural inefficiencies are addressed, ranging from delays in turnaround to absence of long-term offtake, the initiative risks becoming another missed opportunity.

Why in the News

The government has announced a massive ₹69,725 crore revival package to replace the expiring 2015 shipbuilding scheme. This is significant because, despite subsidies earlier, India produced only about half-a-dozen merchant ships in 10 years, a glaring failure when global yards deliver ships in just a year. The new plan aims to overcome these bottlenecks by upgrading infrastructure, ancillaries, and financing structures. The contrast between global efficiency (3–4 months keel to launch) and India’s 2–3 years turnaround highlights the magnitude of the problem.

The Scale of the Problem

  1. Negligible merchant shipbuilding: Only half-a-dozen small ships built in the last decade.
  2. Long delays: Turnaround time of 2–3 years in India vs 1 year globally.
  3. Lack of competitiveness: Shipowners avoid Indian yards due to sunk capital and overruns.

Global Best Practices in Shipbuilding

  1. Korea, Japan, China lead: Prefabricated component blocks welded in large assembly-line yards.
  2. High-capacity cranes: 1,000-tonne cranes enable block movement in foreign shipyards.
  3. Speed & efficiency: Keel-to-waterborne in 3–4 months; full build in about 1 year.

India’s Bottlenecks

  1. Inadequate infrastructure: Indian yards too small, lack crane capacity and prefab space.
  2. Weak ancillary ecosystem: Absence of robust component manufacturing clusters.
  3. Finance limitations: Benefits of lower interest rates & extended repayment apply only to large vessels.

Missed Opportunities in Policy Integration

  1. Green fuel projects: Kakinada & Kochi developing production for exports but no linkage with green shipbuilding.
  2. Lack of long-term offtake: Shipowners lack demand visibility; without assured contracts, newbuild investments stall.

The Way Forward

  1. Cluster-based development: Establish ancillary industries around shipyards for supply chains.
  2. Capacity building: Training institutions on lines of China to create skilled manpower.
  3. Policy synergy: Link green shipping contracts with renewable fuel policies.
  4. Long-term contracts: Use State-owned utilities and oil companies’ chartering needs to guarantee orders.

Conclusion

India stands at a decisive moment. A robust maritime ecosystem can secure energy lifelines, generate employment, and project India’s presence as a global power. The ₹69,725 crore package is promising, but unless structural inefficiencies, ancillary gaps, and demand visibility issues are resolved, it risks going the way of the failed 2015 policy. Success lies not merely in incentives but in creating a seamless ecosystem of infrastructure, skills, finance, and guaranteed demand.

Value Addition

Data Points and Targets

  1. ₹69,725 crore package: A substantial commitment that signals government seriousness.
  2. Capacity goal: 4.5 million gross tonnage: Puts India on a higher trajectory, though still far below shipbuilding giants like China and South Korea.
  3. Current state: Only half-a-dozen merchant ships built in 10 years, showcasing India’s negligible share in global shipbuilding.

Policy Continuity and Course Correction

  1. 2015 Shipbuilding Financial Assistance Policy: Provided subsidies and financing incentives but failed to attract private shipowners due to delays and lack of ancillary ecosystem.
  2. 2025 Package: Designed as a replacement, expiring in March 2026 → reflects a policy learning curve and government recognition that capital subsidy alone cannot solve systemic inefficiencies.

Comparative Insights

Global benchmarks:

  1. Korea/Japan/China → Keel-to-waterborne in 3–4 months; full build in 1 year.
  2. India → 2–3 years, meaning two additional years of sunk capital for shipowners.
  3. Infrastructure gap: Foreign yards use 1,000-tonne cranes and prefab assembly lines, while Indian yards lack such capacities.

Linkage with Atmanirbhar Bharat & Make in India

  1. Strategic autonomy: India relies heavily on foreign-built merchant fleets; indigenous shipbuilding aligns with Atmanirbhar Bharat.
  2. Employment multiplier: Shipbuilding is a labour-intensive sector with downstream benefits in steel, electronics, design, and logistics.
  3. Ancillary clusters: Policy push for ecosystem development resonates with the cluster-based growth approach seen in auto and pharma sectors.

Strategic and Security Relevance

  1. Energy lifelines: India’s crude oil and coal imports (~80% and ~45% dependence respectively) require long-term fleet security.
  2. Green transition: Linkage of shipbuilding with India’s green hydrogen/ammonia exports (Kakinada, Kochi projects) can make India a global hub for green shipping.
  3. Maritime security: A stronger indigenous merchant fleet reduces vulnerability to global freight disruptions and strengthens India’s position in the Indo-Pacific.

Broader Economic Linkages

  1. Financing ecosystem: Recognising shipbuilding as “infrastructure” lowers cost of credit → aligns with long-term financing reforms.
  2. Trade competitiveness: Owning merchant ships reduces foreign exchange outflow in charter hire and freight payments.
  3. Technology upgradation: Push towards prefab block construction → spinoffs for other infrastructure and defence industries.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

WTO and India

India at the Crossroads: Navigating WTO Pressures After China’s SDT Exit

Explained | Economics | Mains Paper 3: Effects Of Liberalization On The Economy, Changes In Industrial Policy and their effects on Industrial Growth

Introduction

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) has long been a battleground where developing nations, including India and China, defended their need for lenient subsidy caps, longer compliance timelines, and tariff protections. China’s self-exit from Special and Differential Treatment (SDT) concessions, despite retaining its developing country tag, signals a dramatic shift in the global trade order. For India, which has depended on SDT since its 1995 WTO accession, this development comes amid escalating US trade pressures, Trump-era tariff wars, and growing criticism of India’s subsidy regimes. The question is not only about trade but about food security, farmer livelihoods, and future economic strategy.

Why is this development significant?

  1. First-time shift: China, the world’s second-largest economy, has for the first time announced it will not seek SDT despite being classified as a developing country.
  2. Sharp contrast: Since 1995, SDT flexibilities have been central to India’s WTO negotiations; China’s withdrawal isolates India’s position.
  3. Big stakes: India subsidises around $50 billion annually to low-income farmers and channels over $40 billion into Minimum Support Price (MSP) schemes, directly impacting 1.4 billion people.
  4. Striking implications: If phased AMS (Aggregate Measurement of Support) cuts are enforced, subsidies may fall by 20–30% per decade, with a 10–15% rural income drop and worsening food insecurity.

How has India historically benefited from SDT?

  1. Tariff flexibility: Allowed India to impose 100%+ tariffs on sensitive goods such as branded medicines, automobiles, and luxury goods.
  2. Agriculture support: Article 6.2 exemptions for low-income farmers and public distribution schemes like MSP ensured food and livelihood security.
  3. Special treatment: Shielded India from disputes, despite often breaching the 10% subsidy cap under AMS rules.
  4. Trade defence: Enabled India to resist developed country pressures, citing its developing nation status.

What challenges does India face now?

  1. Coercive reduction: Phased AMS cuts threaten to undermine National Food Security Act (NFSA) provisions.
  2. Malnutrition risk: With 35% of children under five malnourished, subsidy rollback could worsen hunger and inequality
  3. Export vulnerability: Without SDT, India’s MSMEs and farmers face tougher competition in global markets.
  4. US/EU pushback: Developed nations already accuse India of trade distortion, citing examples like MSP and high farm subsidies.

What options does India have?

  1. Recalibrate subsidies: Shift from price support to income support (direct cash transfers), reducing WTO disputes.
  2. Promote Green Box subsidies: Focus on R&D, extension services, and sustainability programs which are WTO-compliant.
  3. Negotiate transitional safeguards: Demand longer compliance windows to cushion the shift.
  4. Defend digital/data sovereignty: Push for data localisation rights and tiered tariff structures in new trade deals.

What should India’s strategic plan look like?

  1. Phased tariff liberalisation: Gradually reduce non-essential SDT protections while safeguarding food security.
  2. Boost MSME competitiveness: Use the ONDC (Open Network for Digital Commerce) to integrate small businesses into global e-commerce.
  3. Intellectual property balance: Protect generic drug exports while resisting pressure for stronger IP regimes.
  4. Coalition building: Revive alliances like the G33 to collectively defend agricultural and food security concerns.
  5. Domestic reforms: Enhance farm productivity and diversify exports to reduce dependence on SDT shield.

Conclusion

China’s withdrawal from SDT marks a turning point in global trade politics. India now faces mounting pressure to reform its subsidy structure, align with WTO disciplines, and balance food security with competitiveness. The way forward lies not in clinging to outdated protections but in crafting innovative, WTO-compliant support systems that secure farmer welfare while projecting India as a responsible global player. Strategic coalition-building, calibrated reforms, and smart diplomacy will decide whether India emerges weakened or empowered in the new trade order.

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2018] What are the key areas of reform if the WTO has to survive in the present context of ‘Trade War’, especially keeping in mind the interest of India?

Linkage: China stepping back from SDT intensifies calls for WTO reforms in subsidy rules, dispute settlement, and fair treatment of developing nations, directly testing India’s ability to safeguard food security and farmer support while pushing for a more equitable trade order.

Value Addition

WTO Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) – Article 6.2 Exemptions

  • Provision: Allows developing countries to provide investment subsidies and input subsidies to low-income or resource-poor farmers without it being counted under the AMS cap.
  • India’s Use: India justifies its fertilizer, electricity, and irrigation subsidies under this clause to protect small farmers who form nearly 85% of the farming community.
  • Relevance: Central to defending India’s MSP and food security programs in global negotiations.

Aggregate Measurement of Support (AMS)

  • Definition: WTO’s metric for calculating trade-distorting farm subsidies (amber box), capped at 10% of the value of production for developing countries.
  • India’s Issue: With large MSP and food procurement under NFSA, India is often accused of breaching this cap. Example – Rice subsidies have repeatedly attracted scrutiny in WTO disputes.
  • Relevance: Reform of AMS rules is India’s key demand in WTO negotiations, arguing current methodology undervalues developing nations’ needs.

Green Box vs Amber Box Subsidies

  • Amber Box: Trade-distorting subsidies (e.g., MSP, procurement at administered prices).
  • Green Box: Non-trade distorting subsidies like agricultural R&D, extension services, crop insurance, and environmental protection.
  • India’s Position: Heavy reliance on amber box through MSP and PDS; however, India is now trying to expand its green box spending on crop diversification, climate-resilient agriculture, and digital extension services.
  • Relevance: Diversifying support to green box can shield India from WTO disputes while modernising agriculture.

G33 Coalition

  • About: A group of 47 developing countries led by India, China, and Indonesia, advocating flexibility in agriculture negotiations.
  • India’s Role: Spearheads demands for a ‘Special Safeguard Mechanism’ (SSM) and permanent solution for public stockholding (PSH) of food grains.
  • Relevance: Strengthens India’s negotiating leverage by projecting its subsidy and food stockholding as a collective developing-world concern, not just a national exception.

National Food Security Act (2013) (NFSA)

  • Provision: Legally entitles 75% of rural and 50% of urban population to subsidised food grains through PDS.
  • Conflict with WTO: Heavy procurement at MSP and distribution under NFSA is seen as trade-distorting. Critics argue this exceeds the 10% AMS cap.
  • Relevance: WTO restrictions on subsidies could directly affect India’s food security safety net covering over 800 million people.

ONDC (Open Network for Digital Commerce)

  • Concept: A government-backed initiative to democratise e-commerce by creating an open-source, interoperable digital network for buyers and sellers.
  • Trade Defence: Seen as India’s strategic response to global e-commerce giants (Amazon, Walmart-Flipkart), ensuring fair competition for MSMEs.
  • Relevance: In WTO’s ongoing e-commerce negotiations, ONDC is a shield for India to resist pressure for blanket liberalisation of digital trade and data flows, while protecting domestic digital sovereignty.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Foreign Policy Watch: India – EU

India-EU Strategic Agenda

Explained | International Relations | Mains Paper 2: Bilateral, Regional and Global Groupings and agreements involving India

Introduction

The India–European Union (EU) relationship has traditionally been overshadowed by India’s closer ties with the U.S. and Russia. However, the release of the EU’s Strategic Agenda for India, ahead of the 2026 leaders’ summit, is a milestone. It lays out a comprehensive framework across five pillars:

  • Economy & Trade
  • Global Connectivity
  • Emerging Technologies
  • Security & Defence
  • People-to-People Ties

With trade volumes nearing EUR 180 billion (goods + services), EU FDI nearly doubling in five years, and ambitious connectivity projects like the India–Middle East–Europe Corridor, this document represents Europe’s intent to recalibrate its Asia policy with India at the centre.

Why in the News?

This development is significant because it is the first time the EU has released a detailed, forward-looking strategic agenda exclusively for India. Traditionally, India–EU ties have been seen as underwhelming compared to India–US or India–Russia ties. But with EUR 120 billion goods trade in 2024 (a 90% increase over the last decade) and the EU emerging as India’s largest trading partner, the stakes have never been higher. What makes this moment compelling is the convergence: Europe seeks predictability away from U.S. uncertainty, and India seeks diversification in partners. The scale of planned cooperation, from AI and nuclear fusion to migration and maritime security, signals that India–EU ties are set to move from rhetoric to institutionalised, multi-sectoral partnership.

How significant is the economic partnership? (Pillar 1 – Economy & Trade)

  1. Largest trading partner: EU is India’s biggest trade partner; India is EU’s largest in the Global South.
  2. High-value trade: Goods trade at EUR 120 bn in 2024 (+90% in 10 years); services add EUR 60 bn.
  3. FDI surge: EU FDI in India EUR 140 bn in 2023 (doubled in 5 years).
  4. Employment impact: 6,000 European companies directly employ 3 million Indians.
  5. Future goals: Negotiations on FTA, Investment Protection Agreement (IPA), Geographical Indications (GI), and air transport deal.

How are India and the EU shaping global connectivity? (Pillar 2 – Global Connectivity)

  • Global Gateway: EU’s EUR 300 bn infrastructure programme aligned with India’s MAHASAGAR initiative.
  • EU-India Connectivity Partnership (2021): Framework for joint digital, energy, and transport projects.
  • IMEC (India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor): Revival of historical trade routes via rail, maritime, clean hydrogen, and digital infrastructure.
  • Digital corridor: Blue Raman cable (11,700 km) connecting EU–Africa–India with secure, high-speed internet.
  • Green shipping: Joint efforts for sustainable maritime corridors to cut carbon dependency.

How will cooperation in emerging technologies unfold? (Pillar 3 – Emerging Technologies)

  • Complementary strengths: EU = regulation, research, green tech; India = startups, datasets, frugal innovation.
  • Innovation hubs: Proposed EU-India platforms on critical tech domains.
  • Startup partnership: Collaboration with European Innovation Council & Start-up India.
  • AI applications: Joint work on large language models, multilingual NLP, climate-focused AI.
  • Nuclear cooperation: Euratom-India pact on nuclear safety, waste, security, and fusion energy.

What are the prospects in security and defence? (Pillar 4 – Security & Defence)

  • Strategic Dialogue (2025): Maritime, cyber, counter-terrorism, and non-proliferation as focus areas.
  • Security of Information Agreement: To enable sharing of classified intelligence.
  • Indo-Pacific role: EU aligning with India as a stabilising force in the region.
  • Naval cooperation: Proposed link between EU Naval Force & Indian Navy in Western Indian Ocean.
  • Defence industry: EU–India Defence Forum under consideration to build resilient supply chains.

Why are people-to-people ties central to this partnership? (Pillar 5 – People-to-People Ties)

  • Migration scale: 825,000 Indians in EU (2023); largest group with EU Blue Cards.
  • Visa access: 1 million Schengen visas issued in 2024 (many multiple-entry).
  • Education mobility: Focus on Erasmus+ expansion, Union of Skills, recognition of qualifications.
  • Talent mobility: Balancing India’s workforce needs with the EU’s labour market.
  • Strategic timing: EU’s education appeal grows as U.S. under Trump curtails research openness.

Issues and Complications in India–EU Relations

  1. Stalled Free Trade Agreement (FTA) in the past: Negotiations began in 2007 but stalled due to disagreements over tariff reductions, intellectual property rights, and services access. This history raises doubts about the 2025 deadline.
  2. Agricultural sensitivities: India’s reluctance to open its farm sector clashes with EU’s push for market access and strict sanitary and phytosanitary standards.
  3. Regulatory frictions: The EU’s strict data protection regime (GDPR), climate-linked trade measures like the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), and sustainability norms could penalise Indian exports.
  4. Human rights and political conditionalities: The EU often raises concerns about human rights, labour laws, and democratic freedoms, which India perceives as interference in internal matters.
  5. Slow EU decision-making: Unlike bilateral partnerships with the US or Russia, negotiations with the EU are often complicated by the need for consensus among 27 member states.
  6. Strategic divergence: The EU still lacks a coherent Indo-Pacific strategy compared to the Quad or NATO, limiting its security role. India, on its part, prioritises strategic autonomy and may be hesitant to align too closely with Western blocs.

Way Forward

  1. Conclude the FTA swiftly: India and the EU must avoid past deadlocks by ensuring flexibility on tariff and regulatory issues, especially in agriculture, services, and data protection.
  2. Deepen strategic convergence: Institutionalise the proposed EU–India Security and Defence Partnership, enhancing naval cooperation in the Indo-Pacific, and expanding counter-terrorism and cyber security frameworks.
  3. Leverage connectivity initiatives: Ensure timely execution of flagship projects like IMEC and the Blue Raman digital corridor, aligning them with India’s own initiatives (MAHASAGAR, Sagarmala) to strengthen regional integration.
  4. Balanced tech cooperation: Create safeguards for responsible AI, nuclear safety, and emerging tech to ensure mutual trust while tapping into EU’s regulatory strengths and India’s innovation ecosystem.
  5. Migration and education synergy: Streamline recognition of Indian qualifications in Europe and negotiate mobility partnerships that align with India’s demographic advantage and EU’s labour market shortages.
  6. Sustain political momentum: Regular high-level summits, parliamentary dialogues, and Track-II diplomacy should be pursued to prevent bureaucratic inertia from stalling this ambitious agenda.

Conclusion

The India–EU strategic agenda signals a qualitative shift in the partnership, moving beyond transactional trade ties to a multi-pillar strategic convergence. With ambitious timelines, such as concluding the FTA by 2025, and big-ticket projects like IMEC and nuclear fusion cooperation, both sides are investing political capital. For India, this means access to technology, markets, and security partnerships that complement ties with the U.S. and Indo-Pacific allies. For the EU, this provides an anchor in Asia’s fastest-growing economy and a reliable partner in turbulent global politics.

PYQ Relevance:

[UPSC 2023] The expansion and strengthening of NATO and a stronger US-Europe strategic partnership works well in India.’ What is your opinion about this statement? Give reasons and examples to support your answer.

Linkage: The India–EU Strategic Agenda complements a stronger US–Europe partnership by giving India parallel, diversified strategic options in trade, technology, and security; together, they reinforce India’s strategic autonomy while balancing China’s rise. NATO’s strengthening secures Europe’s defence, freeing the EU to deepen economic and technological engagement with India, as seen in IMEC, AI cooperation, and FTA talks.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Modern Indian History-Events and Personalities

Who was Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar (1820–1891)?

Prelims Only | History | Mains Paper 1: Modern Indian History

Why in the News?

On his birth anniversary (26 September), the Union Home Minister paid tribute to the Bengali social reformer, Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar.

Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar

About Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar:

  • Birth & Death: Born on 26 September 1820 in Birsingha, Paschim Medinipur, West Bengal; died on 29 July 1891 in Kolkata.
  • Early Life: Born into a poor priest family to Thakurdas Bandyopadhyay and Bhagavati Devi.
  • Title “Vidyasagar”: Meaning “Ocean of Knowledge,” conferred by Sanskrit College for his mastery of Sanskrit and philosophy.
  • Education: Excelled in Sanskrit grammar, Vedanta, literature, astronomy, logic; graduated with honours in 1841 from Sanskrit College, Calcutta.
  • Career: Served as Head Pandit at Fort William College, later Principal of Sanskrit College, Kolkata, and also Inspector of Schools.

His Contributions:

  • Educational Reforms:

    • Simplified and modernised the Bengali alphabet and prose.
    • Authored “Borno Porichoy”, a primer still used to teach Bengali script.
    • Opened teacher training institutions and promoted non-Brahmin access to Sanskrit College.
    • Advocated blending traditional Indian learning with Western education.

  • Women’s Rights and Social Reform:

    • Leading advocate of Hindu widow remarriage; efforts led to the Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act, 1856.
    • Strongly opposed child marriage and polygamy.
    • Championed raising the age of consent, influencing the Age of Consent Act, 1891.
    • Promoted women’s education, serving as secretary of the Hindu Female School (later Bethune School).

  • Philanthropy and Grassroots Work:

    • Founded schools for girls and adults in Santhal Parganas (Jharkhand).
    • Set up a free homeopathy clinic for tribals and the poor.

  • Language and Literature:

    • Regarded as the Father of Modern Bengali Prose.
    • Made Bengali prose clear, concise, and accessible to common people.
[UPSC 2021] Who among the following was associated as Secretary with Hindu Female School which later came to be known as Bethune Female School?

Options: (a) Annie Besant (b) Debendranath Tagore  (c) Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar* (d) Sarojini Naidu

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Climate Change Impact on India and World – International Reports, Key Observations, etc.

What are ‘Planetary Boundaries’?

Prelims Only | Enviro & Biodiversity | Mains Paper 3: Conservation, Environmental Pollution & Degradation, Eia

Why in the News?

The Planetary Health Check (PHC) 2025 has warned that 7 of 9 planetary boundaries have now been breached.

About Planetary Health Check (PHC):

  • The PHC is a global scientific assessment of Earth system health, tracking ecological thresholds that keep the planet habitable.
  • The 2025 report warns that 7 of 9 planetary boundaries have now been breached, with ocean acidification crossing the safe zone for the first time.
  • It highlights how human activities — fossil fuel combustion, deforestation, unsustainable agriculture, and industrial waste — are driving Earth beyond its safe operating space for the first time in 11,000 years.

What are ‘Planetary Boundaries’?

What are Planetary Boundaries?

  • Proposition: Coined in 2009 by scientists led by Johan Rockstrom.
  • What are they: Defines safe operating space for humanity by setting ecological thresholds that regulate Earth system stability and resilience.
  • Basis: Based on Holocene conditions (last ~11,000 years) that enabled human civilisation to thrive.
  • Significance: Crossing boundaries risks irreversible environmental collapse.

  • Nine Planetary Boundaries (PBs):

    1. Climate Change (CO₂ Concentration & Radiative Forcing): Safe atmospheric Carbon Dioxide (CO₂) level: 350 parts per million (ppm). Current: 423 ppm (2025); radiative forcing at +2.97 Watts per square meter (W/m²) (safe: +1.5 W/m²).
    2. Biosphere Integrity (Biodiversity Loss / Extinction Rate): Extinction rate at 100 extinctions per million species years (E/MSY) vs safe 10 E/MSY; severe biodiversity decline continues.
    3. Land System Change (Deforestation / Ecosystem Conversion): Global forest cover reduced to 59% (safe: 75%). All major terrestrial biomes breached.
    4. Freshwater Change (Streamflow & Soil Moisture Deviations): Over 20% of global land shows significant streamflow (22.6%) and soil moisture (22%) deviations beyond thresholds. Indo-Gangetic Plain & North China basins most at risk.
    5. Biogeochemical Flows (Nitrogen & Phosphorus Cycles): Excessive use of Nitrogen (N) and Phosphorus (P) in agriculture, worsening dead zones and eutrophication in water bodies.
    6. Novel Entities (Synthetic Pollutants & Plastics): Release of plastics, synthetic chemicals, and untested compounds exceeds the safe zero-threshold for environmental introduction.
    7. Ocean Acidification (Aragonite Saturation State): Surface ocean acidity has increased by 30–40% since the industrial era. Aragonite saturation state (Aragonite) at 2.84 (safe: 2.86). Threatens corals, molluscs, and plankton.
    8. Atmospheric Aerosol Loading (Aerosol Optical Depth – AOD) [Currently Safe]: Interhemispheric Aerosol Optical Depth (AOD) difference: 0.063, below safe threshold 0.10. Still harmful for health despite planetary stability.
    9. Stratospheric Ozone Depletion (Ozone Concentration in Dobson Units – DU) [Currently Safe]: Global ozone concentration stable at 285–286 Dobson Units (DU) (safe: 277 DU). Ozone hole recovery continues, though new threats flagged from rocket launches and satellite debris.
[UPSC 2018] The term “sixth mass extinction/sixth extinction” is often mentioned in the news in the context of the discussion of:

(a) Widespread monoculture practices in agriculture and large-scale commercial farming with indiscriminate use of chemicals.

(b) Fears of a possible collision of a meteorite with the Earth.

(c) Large scale cultivation of genetically modified crops.

(d) Mankind’s over-exploitation/misuse of natural resources, fragmentation/loss of natural habitats, destruction of ecosystems, pollution and global climate change.

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Soil Health Management – NMSA, Soil Health Card, etc.

Desert Soilification Technology

Prelims Only | Science Tech | Mains Paper 3: Awareness in various sc and tech fields

Why in the News?

For the first time, researchers at the Central University of Rajasthan (CUoR) have successfully grown wheat in arid land of western Rajasthan using desert soilification technology.

What is Desert Soilification Technology?

  • Overview: It is an innovative biotechnological method that transforms barren desert sand into soil-like material capable of supporting agriculture.
  • Technology: It uses bioformulations and polymers to bind loose sand particles, improve soil texture, and enable water retention.
  • Utility: It is designed to combat desertification, enhance agricultural productivity in arid zones, and ensure sustainable land use.
  • How does it work?
    • Polymer-based Bioformulation: Natural polymers and microbial formulations are applied to desert sand.
    • Cross-Linking of Sand Particles: Bio-polymers create a structural network, binding sand grains together into a soil-like matrix.
    • Water Retention: The cross-linked structure traps water, drastically reducing irrigation needs and preventing rapid percolation of water through sandy soil.
    • Microbial Boost: Introduced beneficial microbes stimulate plant growth, improve soil fertility, and enhance stress resistance of crops.
    • Soil-like Properties: The modified sand mimics fertile soil — enabling nutrient retention, microbial colonization, and sustainable cropping.

Key Features:

  • Sand-to-Soil Conversion: Cross-links sand particles into a soil-like structure, creating porosity and root-holding capacity.
  • Water Retention Efficiency: Increases moisture-holding ability of sand, thereby reducing irrigation requirements by 30–40%.
  • Microbial Boost: Bioformulation stimulates beneficial soil microbes, enhancing nutrient cycling and crop stress resistance.
  • Crop Versatility: Tested successfully with wheat, bajra, guar gum, chickpea, and is now being expanded to millets and green gram.
  • Low Input Agriculture: Reduces number of irrigation cycles (3–4 vs 5–6 in normal wheat farming).
  • Climate Resilience: Provides a sustainable model for food production in water-stressed and desertified regions.
  • Scalability: Can be replicated in other arid ecosystems beyond Rajasthan (potential use in Middle East, Africa).
[UPSC 2023] Which one of the following best describes the concept of ‘Small Farmer Large Field’?

(a) Resettling war-displaced people on shared cultivable land

(b) Marginal farmers group to coordinate farm operations *

(c) Marginal farmers lease land collectively to a corporate

(d) A company funds and guides farmers to grow required crops

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Bharat Emission Standards

Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) Norms

Prelims Only | Enviro & Biodiversity | Mains Paper 3: Conservation, Environmental Pollution & Degradation, Eia

Why in the News?

The Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) under the Ministry of Power has issued draft CAFE-3 and CAFE-4 norms, applicable from April 2027 to March 2037.

About Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) Norms:

  • What is it: Standards that mandate automakers to maintain a sales-weighted fleet average of fuel efficiency and CO₂ emissions across all passenger vehicles.
  • Origin:
    • First introduced in the United States in 1975 after the Arab Oil Embargo, aimed at lowering oil dependency.
    • In India, first notified in 2017 under the Energy Conservation Act, 2001, framed by the Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE), Ministry of Power.
  • Objective:
    • Reduce CO₂ emissions and oil imports, improve energy security.
    • Push adoption of EVs, hybrids, flex-fuels, and fuel-efficient technologies.
  • Applicability: Passenger vehicles (< 3,500 kg gross vehicle weight) across petrol, diesel, LPG, CNG, hybrid, and electric categories.
  • Phased Implementation in India:
    • CAFE I (2017–2022) → CO₂ emission limit of 130 g/km.
    • CAFE II (2022–2027) → stricter limit of 113 g/km.
    • CAFE III (Draft, 2027–2032) → 91.7 g/km CO₂ limit, aligned with WLTP (World Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure).
    • CAFE IV (Draft, 2032–2037) → 70 g/km CO₂ limit (most stringent stage yet).
  • Recent Updates (Draft CAFE-3 & CAFE-4, Sept 2025):
    • Automakers allowed to form pools of up to 3 manufacturers.
    • Pooling treated as one fleet for compliance; pool manager bears penalty if limits breached.
    • A manufacturer can join only one pool per year but can switch in later years.
    • Special relief for small cars (under 4m, <909 kg, <1200 cc): eligible for up to 9 g/km CO₂ relief.
    • Incentives for flex-fuel vehicles (ethanol-petrol blends) and strong hybrids alongside EVs.
    • Aim: Balance decarbonisation with consumer affordability and revive the small car segment (which saw 71% sales decline in 6 years).
  • Compliance & Penalties:
    • Exceeding CO₂ limits: Regulatory fines under the Energy Conservation Act, 2001.
    • CAFE credits may be earned, traded, or carried forward to offset temporary lapses.
  • Green Impact:
    • Complements India’s Net Zero 2070 goals.
    • Encourages fuel-efficient models, biofuels, and EV adoption.

How are CAFE Norms different from Bharat Stage (BS) Norms?

CAFE Norms Bharat Stage (BS) Norms
Full Form Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency Bharat Stage Emission Standards
Primary Focus Fleet-wide fuel efficiency & CO₂ emissions Individual vehicle toxic exhaust pollutants (NOx, PM, CO, HC, SOx)
Objective Reduce oil imports, improve energy efficiency, cut CO₂ Reduce air pollution & public health risks
Regulating Authority BEE, Ministry of Power (Energy Conservation Act, 2001) MoEFCC & CPCB
Scope Passenger vehicles (<3,500 kg GVW; petrol, diesel, LPG, CNG, hybrids, EVs) Mainly ICE vehicles; tailpipe pollutants from petrol & diesel
Parameters Measured Fleet average CO₂ (g/km) Pollutants: NOx, CO, PM, HC, SOx
Basis of Measurement Sales-weighted fleet average across all models Individual vehicle emissions tested
Phases in India CAFE I (2017–22: 130 g/km) → CAFE II (2022–27: 113 g/km) → Draft CAFE III (2027–32: 91.7 g/km) → Draft CAFE IV (2032–37: 70 g/km) BS-I (2000) → BS-II (2005) → BS-III (2010) → BS-IV (2017) → BS-VI (2020; leapfrogged BS-V)
Testing Standard Fuel efficiency & CO₂ per km (lab-tested, WLTP cycle for future) Pollutant emissions measured under regulated driving cycles
Impact on Industry Forces OEMs to balance fleet mix (e.g., SUVs offset by EVs/hybrids) Forces OEMs to adopt clean fuel & emission-control tech (e.g., DPF, SCR)
Penalties Heavy fines for fleet CO₂ non-compliance; penalties apply to pool manager in pooled fleets Non-compliant vehicles cannot be sold; penalties & recalls
Global Parallel U.S. CAFE norms (1975) Euro emission standards

 

[UPSC 2020] Which of the following are the reasons/factors for exposure to benzene pollution?

1. Automobile exhaust 2. Tobacco smoke 3. Wood burning 4. Using varnished wooden furniture 5. Using products made of polyurethane

Select the correct answer using the code given below:

Options: (a) 1, 2 and 3 only * (b) 2 and 4 only (c) 1, 3 and 4 only (d) 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Foreign Policy Watch: India-Pacific Island Nations

[pib] Forum for India-Pacific Islands Cooperation (FIPIC)-III Summit

IOCR | International Relations | Mains Paper 2: Bilateral, Regional and Global Groupings and agreements involving India

Why in the News?

India recently hosted a meeting of foreign ministers of Forum for India-Pacific Islands Cooperation (FIPIC) in New York.

About Forum for India–Pacific Islands Cooperation (FIPIC):

  • Launch: Established in 2014 during PM Narendra Modi’s visit to Fiji under the Act East Policy.
  • Members: Comprises 14 Pacific Island Countries (PICs) i.e Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu.
  • Objectives: Strengthen cooperation in trade, investment, health, agriculture, renewable energy, disaster management, digital connectivity, and climate change adaptation.

  • Summits Held:

    • Suva (2014)
    • Jaipur (2015)
    • Port Moresby (2023)
  • Key Initiatives: $1 million climate fund, Pan-Pacific Islands e-network, visa on arrival, cooperation in space technology, and training of diplomats.
  • Trade: Current bilateral trade is about $300 million annually (exports $200 million, imports $100 million).

Strategic Importance of FIPIC:

  • Indo-Pacific Outreach: Expands India’s role in maritime governance and regional security.
  • Countering China: Acts as a soft-power tool to balance China’s influence in the Pacific.
  • Maritime Leverage: PICs control vast Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) crucial for shipping lanes, fisheries, and seabed resources.
  • Climate Diplomacy: Strengthens India’s leadership with climate-vulnerable PICs under South-South cooperation.
  • Global Forums: PICs often vote as a bloc in UN, WTO, and other multilateral institutions, enhancing India’s diplomatic weight.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

[pib] Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA)

Prelims Only | Governance | Mains Paper 2: Governance, Transparency & Accountability, Citizens Charters

Why in the News?

The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has imposed a penalty of ₹2,00,000 FirstCry for false and misleading price representations on its e-commerce platform.

Background of the Case: You Must Know

  • Complaint: Products were displayed with the claim “MRP inclusive of all taxes,” but additional GST was levied at checkout.
  • Effect: Misled consumers by showing higher discounts than actually offered.
  • Findings:
    • A product advertised at 27% discount was effectively sold at 18.2% discount after GST.
    • Such pricing amounted to misleading advertisements (Section 2(28)) and unfair trade practices (Section 2(47)).
  • Dark Pattern: The practice qualified as “drip pricing”, a dark pattern under the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023.
  • Violation of E-Commerce Rules: Contravened Rule 7(1)(e) of Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020, which mandates displaying the total price inclusive of all charges and taxes upfront.

About Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA):

  • Established: Under Section 10 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (effective July 20, 2020).
  • Nodal Ministry: Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution.
  • Functions & Powers:
    • Protects and enforces consumer rights as a class.
    • Prevents unfair trade practices and misleading advertisements.
    • Can initiate class-action suits (recalls, refunds, license cancellation).
    • Investigates through Investigation Wing headed by a Director-General.
    • Can order discontinuation of unfair practices and impose penalties.
  • Composition of CCPA: Chief Commissioner (Head); 2 Commissioners-
    • One for goods-related issues.
    • One for services-related complaints.
[UPSC 2023] Consider the following organizations/bodies in India:

1. The National Commission for Backward Classes

2. The National Human Rights Commission

3. The National Law Commission

4. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

How many of the above are constitutional bodies?

(a) Only one * (b) Only two (c) Only three (d) All four

 

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

JOIN THE COMMUNITY

Join us across Social Media platforms.