India’s efforts to clean its air need not slow its economic growth

Why in the News

India ranked 176 of 177 countries in the 2026 Environmental Performance Index (EPI), published by Yale and Columbia Universities, and performed worst on air quality. The question it raises is whether pollution can fall fast enough as the economy keeps growing. China’s record shows that pollution control need not wait until growth is complete.

Why does cleaning the air look like a choice against growth?

1. What the tradeoff is: The activities that pollute the air also drive development. It is like a stove that cooks the family’s meal and fills the room with smoke.
2. Sources tied to development: Industries create jobs, power plants supply electricity, transport moves goods and agriculture supports livelihoods. Cutting their emissions costs money and needs technology that users can afford.
3. Health burden: The State of Global Air 2025 report attributed more than 20 lakh deaths in India in a single year to air pollution.
4. The takeaway: India’s test is whether pollution falls faster than polluting activity grows.

What does China’s experience show?

1. Early industrial controls: China tightened industrial emission controls during rapid economic growth. Emissions of sulphur dioxide (SO2) fell 14% in the five years to 2010.
2. Clean air campaign: Research found that emission controls under a later, broader campaign, not weather alone, caused most of Beijing’s fall in PM2.5 (fine particles) during 2013 to 2017.
3. Limits of the comparison: China’s institutions, economy and energy systems differ from India’s, so India cannot copy its approach.

Why is counting clean technologies not enough to judge progress?

1. Net effect test: India is adding renewable power, electric vehicles and cleaner cooking fuels. Progress depends on whether together they offset the growth in polluting activities.
2. Rising electricity demand: The International Energy Agency (IEA) expects India’s electricity demand to grow 6.4% a year through 2030. Solar is expected to meet around half of it and coal about one quarter.
3. Thermal power norms: In July 2025, the Union government revised SO2 norms for coal and lignite power plants. One category kept mandatory standards, a second gets case by case review and a third conditional exemption.
4. Grounds cited: The government cited technical feasibility, electricity prices, water and limestone use and carbon emissions. The cost is that SO2 also forms secondary fine particles.

What do the National Clean Air Programme results show?

1. PM10 gains: 108 of 130 cities under the National Clean Air Programme (NCAP) recorded lower annual PM10 (coarser particles) than eight years earlier.
2. Limits of the evidence: A PM10 fall does not show a similar PM2.5 trend. Weather and changing emission profiles also move the numbers, so policy alone cannot take the credit.
3. Performance linked funds: NCAP cities have received Rs 16,423.55 crore tied to their performance.

How should clean air action be judged?

1. Allied programmes: Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (household fuel), PM E-DRIVE (transport) and PM Surya Ghar (electricity) also cut emissions, but cleaner air is not their only objective.
2. Shared benefits: Cleaner industrial processes improve energy efficiency, clean cooking improves health and better waste management improves urban services. Such gains should be shown explicitly.
3. Investment and outcome: A larger budget shows more activity, not more mitigation. Each measure should be judged on the pollution it prevents, its cost and whether exposure declined.

Challenges

1. Visible costs, delayed benefits: Pollution control costs are immediate and concentrated, but health benefits are spread widely and emerge over time.
2. Access without sustained use: Access to liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) does not guarantee use, because fuel prices and household income decide what families burn.
3. Pollution across boundaries: Polluted air crosses city and State boundaries, but clean air plans are drawn city by city.

Way Forward

1. Outcome linked funding: The Environment Ministry should release NCAP funds against measured falls in PM2.5, not money spent.
2. PM2.5 reporting: Cities should publish annual PM2.5 trends alongside PM10.
3. Refill support: Keep LPG refills affordable for low income households.

Conclusion

India’s clean air effort adds programmes and funds faster than it proves their effect on the air people breathe. Whether future spending is judged by exposure reduced, not by activity launched, is what to watch.

Key numbers

1. EPI coverage: 47 indicators across 12 categories (2026).
2. India’s EPI air ranks: 175 on air quality and 88 on air pollution.
3. Industry’s share of new power demand: Roughly a third through 2030 (IEA).
4. Air pollution deaths, year counted: 2023.
5. NCAP periods: PM10 compared for 2025-26 against 2017-18; funds from 2019-20 to 2025-26.

Matching Previous Year Question

“[2021, GS3, 10 marks] Describe the key points of the revised Global Air Quality Guidelines (AQGs) recently released by the World Health Organisation (WHO). How are these different from its last update in 2005? What changes in India’s National Clean Air Programme are required to achieve these revised standards?”