💥Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Archives: News

  • [20th August 2026] The Hindu OpED: A Palestinian state is the foundation for regional peace

    Question (2018, GS2): “India’s relations with Israel have, of late, acquired a depth and diversity, which cannot be rolled back. Discuss.”
    Linkage: This question directly evaluates India’s strategic partnership with Israel. Historically, India’s West Asia policy was heavily anchored in support for the Palestinian cause and the two-state solution. This question asks candidates to analyze how India’s relations with Israel have de-hyphenated from its stance on Palestine, expanding into robust defense, agricultural, and technological cooperation.

    Mentor Comment:

    United Nations Security Council Resolution 2803, adopted in November 2025, established a Board of Peace for Gaza, and its annex acknowledges a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood once Gaza redevelopment advances and Palestinian Authority reform is carried out. The tension this exposes is that every subsidiary conflict in West Asia turns on a Palestinian state that the war since October 2023 has pushed further out of reach.

    What is the two-state solution, and what does it actually require?

    1. Core formula: The two-state solution proposes two sovereign states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in defined borders with mutual recognition.
    2. The asymmetry inside the phrase: One of the two states already exists, so the operative task is not maintaining a balance but creating a second state that does not yet exist.
    3. The three qualifying tests: A Palestinian state must be sovereign, independent and viable, meaning it must control its own territory, conduct its own external relations and possess an economic base capable of sustaining a state.
    4. The claimed consequence: Peace and stability in the region are treated as unattainable until this second state comes into being.

    What is Resolution 2803 and the Board of Peace?

    1. Instrument: United Nations Security Council Resolution 2803, adopted in November 2025, set up a Board of Peace (BoP) as the transitional oversight mechanism for the Gaza Strip.
    2. The statehood clause: Its annex states that while Gaza redevelopment advances and the Palestinian Authority (PA) reform programme is faithfully carried out, conditions may finally be in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood.

    Why are the region’s separate conflicts treated as one unresolved question?

    1. Gaza: Israel’s war on Gaza is framed not as a discrete security operation but as the most violent expression of an unsettled sovereignty question.
    2. Hezbollah: Hezbollah began launching rockets and missiles at Israel immediately after Israel’s Gaza campaign opened following 7 October 2023, tying the northern front directly to the Palestinian question.
    3. Iran: The Iran war, Iranian arms supply to Hezbollah and Iranian hostility to Israel are held to rest on the denial of Palestinian self-determination rather than on theological difference.
    4. The Houthi factor: The Houthi phenomenon in the Red Sea is treated as a further derivative of the same unresolved dispute.
    5. Arab normalisation: Israel’s relations with its Arab neighbours will remain strained until it accepts the reality of a Palestinian state, in the same way Arab states have reconciled to the reality of Israel.
    6. The secondary issues: Once an irreversible road map to Palestinian statehood is accepted by all parties, disputes such as freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz become far easier to resolve.

    What are the historical roots of regional hostility towards Israel?

    1. The Balfour Declaration, 1917: British support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine expressly limited the indigenous Arab population to civil and religious rights, converting a holy land claim into a homeland project.
    2. The founding grievance: Hostility rests on the fact that Israel was created and imposed on the region at the expense of the indigenous Arab population.
    3. The 1947 partition offer: Palestinians were offered a state under the United Nations resolution of 1947 and on later occasions and rejected each offer, a record an Israeli Foreign Minister summarised as the Arabs never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
    4. The counter-reading of that rejection: Rejection of a partial offer by a party that holds the underlying title is treated as a defensible refusal rather than as proof of intransigence, since the Zionist slogan itself described the territory as land without people for a people without land.
    5. The Holocaust and western guilt: Israel’s creation is attributed substantially to the Holocaust and to the sense of guilt felt by western countries, most of which, including the United States, had barred the entry of Jews fleeing Nazi Germany.
    6. No inherited religious enmity: Islam and Judaism carry no record of perpetual enmity, since the Koran names prophets and patriarchs from the Hebrew bible including Moses and Abraham, the Crusades were fought between Muslims and Christians with Jews not party to them, Jews were persecuted in countries professing Christianity, and the Arabs bore no responsibility for the Holocaust carried out by Nazi Germany and its collaborators.

    Why does a Shia axis support a Sunni movement?

    1. The alignment: Hezbollah, a Shia movement, and Iran, a Shia-majority country, both support Hamas, a Sunni movement.
    2. The explanation: The alignment rests on a shared commitment to the right of self-determination for the Palestinian people rather than on sectarian affinity.
    3. Where Israel sits in that logic: Israel attracts hostility as the only power standing in the way of an independent Palestine, not as a religious adversary.
    4. Iran was not always hostile: Under the Shah, Iran’s relations with Israel were cordial and a sizeable Jewish community lived in Iran.
    5. The residual community: About 15,000 Jews remain in Iran, and Iran’s Constitution reserves a seat for the Jewish community in Parliament.
    6. The conditional off-ramp: If Israel accepts a Palestinian state, Hezbollah loses its stated reason to disrupt life in northern Israel and Iran loses its reason to supply Hezbollah with weapons.

    Why has the war since October 2023 pushed statehood further away rather than closer?

    1. Collapse of domestic support: Whatever limited support existed within Israel for the concept of a Palestinian state has evaporated since the Hamas terrorist attack on Israeli civilians in October 2023.
    2. The cost of the response: Israel’s disproportionate and ruthless strikes on Gaza after 7 October have almost isolated Israel internationally.
    3. The physical precondition destroyed: The Gaza Strip has been devastated, and with it the territorial and administrative base on which a Palestinian state would have to be built.
    4. The time horizon pushed out: The possibility of Palestine emerging has receded by many years and possibly decades.
    5. The resulting deadlock: Peace and stability in the region have become an illusion precisely because the instrument that was to deliver security has removed the conditions for a settlement.
    6. The development cost: Without peace and stability, the region’s people cannot realise the development potential that new technologies offer.

    Why is external mediation, not bilateral negotiation, the only viable route?

    1. The bargaining asymmetry: The stronger side normally insists on a bilateral approach and the weaker side prefers an outside agency, which is why Israel has insisted on bilateral talks while simultaneously saying there is no one on the other side to negotiate with.
    2. The only power with leverage: The United States is the only external power with the required influence and residual goodwill with both sides.
    3. The honest broker objection answered: No broker is genuinely honest, but even a non-honest broker can sell a transaction to the satisfaction, or the equal dissatisfaction, of both parties.
    4. The single precedent that worked: The only period of real progress came with the Oslo Accord of 1993, negotiated through the mediation and good offices of Norway.
    5. What Oslo produced: Under Oslo the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) formally recognised Israel and the Palestinian Authority was created, and it is a reformed version of that Authority that is now proposed as a caretaker government of Palestine.
    6. Oslo’s downstream effects: The Accords paved the way for Jordan’s recognition of Israel and eventually for the Abraham Accords.
    7. The second broker: The United Nations remains the other viable mediator, and although Israel has declared the United Nations Secretary-General persona non grata, Israel owes its existence to the United Nations, and positions in international relations evolve with situations.
    8. The leadership obstacle: The current Israeli Prime Minister voted against the Oslo Accords and remains opposed to the idea of a Palestinian state.

    Conclusion

    The West Asian conflict system is not a set of separate wars but one unresolved sovereignty question, and every subsidiary conflict persists because a sovereign, independent and viable Palestinian state has not been created. Resolution 2803 has restored a conditional pathway to statehood in Security Council language, but the material base for that state in Gaza has been destroyed. What remains unaddressed is the absence of leadership on any side willing to accept mediation and convert a conditional pathway into an irreversible road map.

    What is the Right of Self-Determination in International Law?

    1. About: Self-determination is the right of a people to freely determine their political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
    2. Rationale: It exists to convert the political fact of a distinct people under external or alien rule into a legal claim, so that statehood does not depend solely on the consent of the controlling power.
    3. Charter basis: It is recorded in Article 1(2) and Article 55 of the United Nations Charter and in Common Article 1 of the two 1966 International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
    4. External self-determination: The right of a people to determine its international status, including independence, association or integration with another state.
    5. Internal self-determination: The right of a people to choose its own government and to pursue development within an existing state, without a claim to secession.
    6. Uti possidetis juris: The principle that new states inherit the administrative boundaries existing at the moment of independence, which limits the redrawing of borders by force.

    Key Concerns Regarding the Right of Self-Determination

    1. Conflict with territorial integrity: The right runs directly against the principle of territorial integrity of existing states, and international law provides no settled test for which prevails.
    2. No agreed definition of a people: There is no accepted legal test for what constitutes a people entitled to the right, which allows both over-claiming and denial.
    3. Selective recognition: Recognition of statehood is a political act by individual states, so identical factual situations attract different outcomes depending on great power alignment.
    4. Enforcement gap: A recognised right of self-determination carries no enforcement mechanism where the controlling power is protected by a Security Council veto.
    5. Viability threshold: A territory may satisfy the legal criteria for statehood yet lack contiguous territory, revenue base or control over borders, leaving nominal sovereignty without effective sovereignty.

    Key Milestones in the Palestine Question

    1. 1917: The Balfour Declaration records British support for a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine.
    2. 1947: United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 proposes partition of Mandate Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish state with Jerusalem under international administration.
    3. 1948: The State of Israel is declared, followed by the first Arab-Israeli war.
    4. 1967: The Six Day War brings the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights and Sinai under Israeli control, and Security Council Resolution 242 sets out the land for peace principle.
    5. 1993: The Oslo Accord, mediated by Norway, brings mutual recognition between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization and creates the Palestinian Authority.
    6. 1994: Jordan recognises Israel, following Egypt’s earlier recognition under the 1979 peace treaty.
    7. 2012: The United Nations General Assembly upgrades Palestine to a non-member observer State.
    8. 2020: The Abraham Accords normalise Israel’s relations with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, later extended to further states.
    9. 2025: Security Council Resolution 2803 creates the Board of Peace for Gaza and records a conditional pathway to Palestinian statehood.

    India’s Position on Palestine and the Two-State Solution

    Source: Backgrounder, India-Israel Relations Backgrounder.docx

    1. Long-standing principled support: India maintains a long-standing principled support for the Palestinian cause and for a negotiated two-state solution.
    2. De-hyphenation: India separates its Israel policy from its Palestine policy, engaging each on its own terms rather than treating support for one as opposition to the other.
    3. Recognition timeline: India recognised the State of Israel in 1950 but withheld full diplomatic relations for four decades, shaped by its support for the Palestinian cause, its ties with Arab states and its energy dependence on West Asia.
    4. Normalisation in 1992: Full diplomatic relations were established in January 1992, in the post-Cold War context and alongside India’s economic liberalisation.
    5. The 2017 signal: The first visit by an Indian Prime Minister to Israel, in July 2017, elevated the relationship to a Strategic Partnership and notably did not include Ramallah, which signalled de-hyphenation.
    6. Voting record: India has continued to vote for Palestinian causes at the United Nations even while deepening its ties with Israel.
    7. The Gulf balance: India’s energy imports, remittance inflows and a large diaspora in Gulf states require its Israel ties to be balanced against Arab partners.
    8. Strategic autonomy: India frames the Israel relationship as issue-based cooperation and not as alignment against any third party.

    Back2Basics: The Palestinian Authority

    1. Origin: The Palestinian Authority was created under the 1993 Oslo Accord as an interim self-governing body for parts of the West Bank and Gaza.
    2. Parent body: It was established by the Palestine Liberation Organization, which formally recognised Israel under the same Accord.
    3. Mandate: It exercises civil and, in designated areas, security administration, with the Oslo framework dividing the West Bank into Areas A, B and C by degree of Palestinian and Israeli control.
    4. Interim design: It was designed as a transitional arrangement pending a final status agreement covering borders, Jerusalem, refugees and settlements, which was never concluded.
    5. Current relevance: A reformed Palestinian Authority is the body named in Resolution 2803 as the vehicle through which a pathway to statehood would run.
    6. Territorial split: Its writ has not extended to Gaza since the 2007 split with Hamas, which is itself a constraint on any single Palestinian government.

    Challenges to a Two-State Settlement

    1. Absence of contiguous territory: A viable Palestinian state requires territorial contiguity that settlement expansion has progressively removed, e.g. the West Bank’s division into Areas A, B and C leaves Palestinian-administered zones as separated enclaves.
    2. Physical destruction of the state base: Reconstruction must precede governance, since the administrative and economic base has been destroyed, e.g. the devastation of the Gaza Strip after the campaign that followed 7 October 2023.
    3. Divided Palestinian leadership: No single Palestinian authority commands both territories, e.g. the Palestinian Authority governs parts of the West Bank while Gaza has been under Hamas control since 2007.
    4. Collapse of political constituencies: Domestic support for a Palestinian state has evaporated inside Israel, e.g. the shift in Israeli opinion after the Hamas attack on Israeli civilians in October 2023.
    5. Leadership opposition at the top: The settlement requires assent from leaders personally committed against it, e.g. the current Israeli Prime Minister voted against the Oslo Accords and remains opposed to Palestinian statehood.
    6. Veto-protected deadlock: Security Council action is constrained by permanent member vetoes, e.g. repeated vetoes of ceasefire and membership resolutions have prevented enforceable outcomes.
    7. Spoiler incentives on both flanks: Armed actors gain standing from continued conflict and lose it from a settlement, e.g. Hezbollah’s rocket campaign against northern Israel began only after the Gaza war opened.
    8. Refugee and Jerusalem questions unresolved: Final status issues deferred at Oslo remain untouched, e.g. the right of return and the status of East Jerusalem were left to a final agreement that was never negotiated.

    Way Forward

    1. Convert the conditional clause into a road map: Translate the Resolution 2803 annex language on a credible pathway into a sequenced, dated and irreversible road map accepted by all parties.
    2. Restore a single Palestinian administration: Complete the Palestinian Authority reform programme so that one reformed administration can serve as a caretaker government across both territories.
    3. Anchor mediation in an external broker: Retain United States mediation, supplemented by United Nations involvement, rather than allowing a return to bilateral talks that the bargaining asymmetry makes unproductive.
    4. Sequence reconstruction with governance: Tie Gaza reconstruction financing to the standing up of civil administration, policing and revenue functions, so that physical rebuilding creates state capacity rather than only shelter.
    5. Use regional normalisation as leverage: Make further Arab normalisation with Israel conditional on measurable progress on the statehood pathway, so the Abraham Accords framework reinforces rather than bypasses the Palestinian question.
    6. Sustain India’s dual-track engagement: Maintain principled support for a negotiated two-state solution alongside development assistance to Palestine and cooperation with Israel, which protects India’s standing across West Asia.

    “[2018] The term “two-state solution” is sometimes mentioned in the news in the context of the affairs of (a) China (b) Israel (c) Iraq (d) Yemen Answer: (b)”

  • Count caste by all means, but abandon the belief that counting settles anything

    Why in the News

    Survey evidence shows the recorded Other Backward Class share of India's population rising at a rate no human fertility can produce, which points to reclassification rather than births. The finding shifts the caste census debate from the design of the question to the incentives the question creates, since a self declared category that carries an entitlement will be answered strategically.

    What is the fertility test for auditing a group's growth?

    1. The logic: A group's population can rise only through births exceeding deaths, through migration, or through people newly identifying with it, so an implausible growth rate isolates reclassification as the cause.
    2. The demographic fingerprint: Fertility leaves a mark on the age structure, because a group growing through births must be over represented among children relative to adults.
    3. The diagnostic that follows: Where a group's share rises among adults as fast as among children, the growth is not coming from births, since adults are not born.
    4. Why it is decisive: The test needs no assumption about honesty, only the arithmetic relationship between fertility, age structure and growth.

    What is the Hutterite fertility benchmark?

    1. Who they are: The Hutterites are an Anabaptist community of the North American plains who married early, used no contraception, and had good nutrition and medical care.
    2. Why they are the benchmark: Their total fertility rate of 10.9 children per woman is treated as the outer limit of human fertility, and their population growth from 443 in 1880 to 8,542 by 1950, a rate of 4.32 percent a year, is the ceiling against which any other group's growth is indexed.

    What is the NSS and PLFS caste share series?

    1. What the surveys are: The National Sample Survey (NSS) and its successor, the Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS), are the government's large sample household surveys, which record the social group each household reports itself as belonging to.
    2. Why the series matters: These surveys are the only continuous national record of self reported caste category shares between censuses, so the trend in the OBC share is read from them.

    Why do the recorded OBC numbers imply impossible growth?

    1. The starting point: In 1999-2000, 35.7 percent of Indians said they were Other Backward Class.
    2. Five years on: By 2004-05, 40.9 percent did, while India's population grew at 1.8 percent a year.
    3. The implied rate: The OBC population moved from 357 million to 447 million in five years, a growth rate of 4.6 percent a year.
    4. The mirror movement: The General category, meaning those who are neither OBC nor Scheduled Caste nor Scheduled Tribe, fell from 359 million to 342 million, shrinking at 0.95 percent a year.
    5. Above the human ceiling: A rate of 4.6 percent a year exceeds the Hutterite rate of 4.32 percent, so on the survey evidence India's OBCs out reproduced the outer limit of human fertility.
    6. Not a five year aberration: Between 1999 and 2025 the OBC population nearly doubled, from 357 million to 674 million, while the General category shrank from 359 million to 350 million.
    7. The share of all growth: India added 456 million people over those 26 years, so a group that was 36 percent of the country in 1999 accounted for 70 percent of every person added since.

    What does the age structure show?

    1. The 2004 gap: The OBC share among children under 15 exceeded the OBC share among adults by just 2.0 percentage points.
    2. The 2025 gap: That gap had narrowed to 1.2 percentage points, even as the OBC share climbed a further five points.
    3. What real growth would look like: At Hutterite fertility, OBCs would account for three quarters of all births and be over represented among children by more than 30 percentage points.
    4. Even at a lower fertility: A total fertility rate of six would still require an over representation of 20 percentage points.
    5. A genuine differential for comparison: Muslims, who do have higher fertility, were over represented among children by 3.2 points in 2004, widening to 4.3 by 2025.
    6. The conclusion the data force: The OBC share is rising almost as fast among adults as among children, which is the signature of reclassification, not of births.

    Why would households reclassify?

    1. The entitlement attached to the answer: India allocates reserved places in education and public employment on the basis of caste category, so the category recorded carries a measurable benefit.
    2. The answer is self chosen: A survey or census question that asks for the category invites the respondent to select her own entitlement rather than state a fact about herself.
    3. No dishonesty is required: The claim is not about the honesty of Indians, it is the standard proposition that people respond to incentives.
    4. The response is invisible to the rule maker: Those who design the classification rarely observe the behavioural response the classification produces.
    5. The result for the data: The recorded category becomes a measure of the incentive structure rather than a measure of the population.

    What does the Christian and Sikh comparison show?

    1. The fertility baseline: Christians have the highest female education in India and among the lowest fertility, at 2.4 children per woman, against 2.8 for Hindus and 3.6 for Muslims on the 1998-99 National Family Health Survey.
    2. The only lower group: Sikhs were lower still, at 2.3 children per woman.
    3. What Sikhs did: Between 1991 and 2011 Sikhs grew at 1.2 percent a year, exactly as their fertility predicts.
    4. What Christians did: With virtually the same fertility, Christians grew at 1.9 percent a year, faster than Hindus and matching the national average.
    5. The arithmetic mismatch: Achieving that growth demographically would need a fertility rate near 3.3, not the recorded 2.4.
    6. The incentive behind it: A Christian of backward caste origin can sit on State and central OBC lists and claim reservation while simultaneously holding notified minority status with the institutional protections of Article 30, under which minority institutions set their own admissions and are exempt from quota obligations.
    7. The limit on that position: What such a person cannot claim is Scheduled Caste status, which is why the incentive runs towards the OBC and minority combination.
    8. The separate question: Whether that double classification is an anomaly or a form of justice is a distinct argument, but that it creates an incentive is not arguable.

    Where else does the same incentive logic appear?

    1. Capital leaving: Indian promoters sent a record 33.3 billion dollars abroad last year while domestic private investment stagnated.
    2. Investment falling: Net foreign direct investment has fallen to 0.18 percent of gross domestic product.
    3. The usual explanation rejected: The outcome is attributed to a failure of animal spirits, with appeals to industrialists to invest at home, though no participant is behaving badly.
    4. The dispute resolution cost: A firm choosing between a factory in India and one abroad faces a bilateral investment treaty requiring 60 months in Indian courts before arbitration can begin.
    5. The compliance cost: It faces 765 Quality Control Orders, against 14 in 2014.
    6. The market access cost: It faces no trade agreement with the United States, the market that absorbs 42 billion dollars of Indian exports.
    7. The common explanation: The firm responds exactly as the incentives instruct, and so do the households that discovered they were OBC in 2004.

    Does counting caste settle what it is meant to settle?

    1. The case for counting: India allocates education and employment on caste, so the state must know the distribution it is allocating against.
    2. What counting cannot do: A count of a self declared category measures the response to an entitlement, not the underlying social structure.
    3. The prior diagnosis it revises: An earlier commentary held that the caste census had been killed by the technical choice of an open ended question, which in 2011 produced 4.7 million caste names, and proposed a dropdown menu in its place.
    4. Why a dropdown is not the fix: Confusion about caste names is not the binding problem, the incentive attached to the category is, and a cleaner menu does not remove it.
    5. The tension stated plainly: The exercise must be conducted and its result must not be treated as settling the question of who is backward.

    How should the caste question be designed instead?

    1. Ask for the fact, not the entitlement: Ask for caste, sub caste and surname, and never for the category, so the respondent is not invited to choose her own entitlement.
    2. Move the classification downstream: Let the statistical office, with professional sociologists rather than commentators, map the responses to categories after enumeration.
    3. Publish the microdata: Release the unit level records so the mapping and its consequences can be independently checked.
    4. Audit every count against fertility: Test each group's recorded growth against the fertility its own surveys report, since a group whose growth requires Hutterite fertility has not grown.
    5. Treat the result as evidence, not verdict: Use the count as one input into allocation decisions rather than as a settlement of the claim to backwardness.

    Challenges to relying on self reported caste data

    1. The category is self selected: A question that offers the reservation category records the choice, not the identity. e.g. the OBC share rose 5.2 percentage points between 1999-2000 and 2004-05 with no corresponding change in the age structure.
    2. The age structure test is not applied: Statistical offices publish category shares without checking them against the fertility those shares would require. e.g. an OBC growth rate of 4.6 percent a year exceeds the Hutterite ceiling of 4.32 percent and was published unremarked.
    3. Multiple classifications can be held at once: A person can hold benefits flowing from two separate classifications simultaneously. e.g. a Christian of backward caste origin can hold OBC listing along with minority status protected by Article 30.
    4. State lists differ from the central list: The same community may be backward in one jurisdiction and not in another, so a national count is not additive. e.g. the 105th Constitutional Amendment, 2021 was enacted to restore the States' power to maintain their own backward class lists.
    5. Microdata is withheld: Without unit level records, no independent check on the classification is possible. e.g. the raw caste data of the 2011 Socio Economic and Caste Census were never released.
    6. Counting raises the stakes of the count: Publication of group shares immediately becomes an argument for revising quota percentages. e.g. State caste surveys have been followed by demands to raise reservation beyond the 50 percent ceiling.
    7. Survey and census definitions diverge: Survey social group codes and census caste entries are not the same instrument, so the two series cannot be spliced. e.g. the NSS records four social group codes while the Census will record open ended caste names.

    Conclusion

    The recorded growth of India's Other Backward Classes is arithmetically impossible as a demographic event and is explicable only as reclassification in response to entitlement. The same logic explains the Christian growth rate that fertility cannot support and the investment that leaves a jurisdiction charging 60 months of litigation and 765 Quality Control Orders. Counting caste is still necessary, because the state allocates on caste and must know what it is allocating against. What must be abandoned is the belief that the count settles the question, since a self declared count measures the incentive as much as the population.

    What are the Other Backward Classes?

    1. About: Other Backward Classes are communities identified by the state as socially and educationally backward, distinct from the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and entitled to reservation in education and public employment.
    2. Rationale: The category exists to extend substantive equality to groups whose backwardness arises from social and educational disadvantage rather than from untouchability or geographical isolation.
    3. The identification test: Backwardness is determined on social, educational and economic indicators, with caste permitted as a starting point but not as the sole criterion.
    4. The named typology in use:
    5. Central List: Maintained by the Union government for reservation in central government posts and central educational institutions, now referenced by Article 342A.
    6. State Lists: Maintained by each State for its own posts and institutions, with membership frequently differing from the Central List.
    7. Creamy layer: The economically advanced section within an OBC household, excluded from reservation, with the income and status criteria revised periodically.
    8. The reservation quantum: 27 percent of central government posts and central educational institution seats are reserved for non creamy layer OBCs.

    Key Concerns Regarding the Other Backward Classes Framework

    1. Absence of an authoritative count: No caste wise population figure for OBCs has been published since 1931, so the 27 percent quantum rests on an estimate rather than a count.
    2. Unequal distribution within the category: A small number of dominant communities capture a disproportionate share of reserved places, which is the basis of the sub categorisation demand.
    3. Self declaration and the creamy layer: Creamy layer exclusion relies on income and status certificates whose verification is weak, so the exclusion is imperfectly enforced.
    4. Pressure on the 50 percent ceiling: Successive State enactments raising total reservation above the ceiling laid down in Indra Sawhney have been struck down, leaving the demand unresolved.
    5. Confusion between category and caste: Administrative records capture the reservation category rather than the community, which prevents any assessment of which communities the benefit actually reaches.
    6. Federal friction over list making: The power to identify backward classes moved between the Union and the States through the 102nd and 105th Constitutional Amendments, leaving two parallel lists in operation.

    Constitutional Provisions Related to Caste Based Classification

    1. Article 15(4): Enables the State to make special provision for socially and educationally backward classes and for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
    2. Article 15(5): Enables reservation in admission to private educational institutions, aided or unaided, excluding minority institutions.
    3. Article 15(6) and Article 16(6): Inserted by the 103rd Constitutional Amendment, 2019, providing 10 percent reservation for economically weaker sections.
    4. Article 16(4): Enables reservation in appointments for any backward class not adequately represented in State services.
    5. Article 16(4A) and 16(4B): Provide for reservation in promotion with consequential seniority for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and for carrying forward unfilled reserved vacancies.
    6. Article 30: Guarantees minorities the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice, the provision that exempts minority institutions from quota obligations.
    7. Article 335: Requires that claims of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes be considered consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration.
    8. Article 338B: Establishes the National Commission for Backward Classes as a constitutional body, inserted by the 102nd Constitutional Amendment, 2018.
    9. Article 340: Empowers the President to appoint a Commission to investigate the conditions of socially and educationally backward classes.
    10. Article 342A: Provides for the Central List of socially and educationally backward classes, with the 105th Constitutional Amendment, 2021 restoring the States' power to maintain their own lists.

    Commissions and Official Initiatives on Backward Classes

    1. Kalelkar Commission, 1953: The first Backward Classes Commission appointed under Article 340, whose report was not acted upon by the Union government.
    2. Mandal Commission, 1979: The second Backward Classes Commission, which reported in 1980 and recommended 27 percent reservation for OBCs, implemented from 1990.
    3. National Commission for Backward Classes: Set up in 1993 following the Indra Sawhney judgment, given constitutional status in 2018 by the 102nd Constitutional Amendment.
    4. Rohini Commission, 2017: Appointed under Article 340 to examine sub categorisation of OBCs within the 27 percent quota, so that benefits are distributed more evenly across communities.
    5. Creamy layer income ceiling revisions: Periodic revisions by the Department of Personnel and Training of the income and status criteria that exclude the advanced section within OBCs.
    6. National Family Health Survey and Periodic Labour Force Survey: The two national survey instruments that carry social group identifiers and are the source of the caste category share series between censuses.

    Key Facts about Caste, Reservation and Fertility Data

    1. The 50 percent ceiling on total reservation was laid down in Indra Sawhney v Union of India (1992), which also introduced the creamy layer exclusion for OBCs.
    2. 27 percent is the OBC reservation in central government posts and central educational institutions, and 10 percent is the economically weaker sections quota introduced in 2019.
    3. 1931 was the last Census whose caste data were released, recording 4,147 castes.
    4. Replacement level fertility is a total fertility rate of about 2.1 children per woman, the level at which a generation exactly replaces itself once child mortality is accounted for.
    5. India's total fertility rate fell to 2.0 in the fifth National Family Health Survey, 2019-21, below replacement level.
    6. Total fertility rate is the average number of children a woman would bear over her lifetime at prevailing age specific fertility rates, which is why it is comparable across groups of different age structures.

    Challenges in Caste Based Affirmative Action

    1. No current population base: Quotas are fixed against estimates rather than an enumerated caste population. e.g. the 27 percent OBC quota rests on the Mandal Commission's estimate derived from the 1931 Census.
    2. Unequal capture within categories: A few communities within a category take most of the reserved places. e.g. the Rohini Commission was appointed in 2017 precisely because benefits within the OBC quota were found to be concentrated.
    3. Creamy layer enforcement: Income and status certificates are issued without effective verification, so the excluded section is not consistently excluded. e.g. repeated departmental instructions have been issued on the correct computation of the creamy layer income ceiling.
    4. Litigation over the ceiling: State laws raising reservation above 50 percent are struck down, leaving political demands unmet and entitlements unstable. e.g. the Maratha reservation enactment was set aside by the Supreme Court in 2021 for breaching the ceiling.
    5. Reservation without expansion of opportunity: The quota redistributes a shrinking pool of public sector posts rather than creating new ones. e.g. government employment has grown far more slowly than the number of aspirants competing in public examinations.
    6. Category based data collection: Administrative systems record the reservation category rather than the community, so outcomes by community cannot be measured. e.g. no published dataset shows which OBC communities occupy the reserved posts filled each year.
    7. Minority institution exemption: Institutions covered by Article 30 stand outside the quota framework, which creates unequal obligations across comparable institutions. e.g. minority educational institutions set their own admissions and are exempt from the reservation applied to other aided institutions.

    Back2Basics: Mandal Commission

    1. Formal name: The Second Backward Classes Commission, appointed in 1979 under Article 340 of the Constitution.
    2. Chairperson: Headed by B. P. Mandal, from whom the Commission takes its name.
    3. Report submitted: Reported in 1980, recommending 27 percent reservation for Other Backward Classes in central government services and public sector undertakings.
    4. Basis of its estimate: Estimated the OBC share of the population at about 52 percent, extrapolating from the 1931 Census, since no later caste count existed.
    5. Method of identification: Used eleven indicators grouped under social, educational and economic heads to identify backwardness, with social indicators weighted highest.
    6. Implementation: Recommendations were implemented for central government posts from 1990 and extended to central educational institutions by the 93rd Constitutional Amendment, 2005.
    7. Judicial outcome: Upheld in Indra Sawhney v Union of India (1992), which fixed the 50 percent ceiling, excluded the creamy layer, and barred reservation in promotions for OBCs.

    Way Forward

    1. Record community, not category: Design the schedule to ask for caste, sub caste and surname and leave category mapping to the statistical office.
    2. Publish unit level microdata: Release anonymised records so the classification and its consequences can be independently verified.
    3. Institutionalise the fertility audit: Require the statistical office to publish, alongside every group share, the fertility rate that the recorded growth would require.
    4. Reconcile survey and census series: Align social group codes in the National Sample Survey and the Periodic Labour Force Survey with the Census code frame so the two series are comparable.
    5. Complete sub categorisation: Act on the sub categorisation exercise so the benefit is distributed within the OBC category rather than captured by dominant communities.
    6. Verify creamy layer certification: Link income and status certificates to tax and employment records so the exclusion is enforced rather than declared.
    7. Separate the count from the quota decision: Treat the enumeration as an evidence gathering exercise, with quota revision decided through the constitutional process rather than triggered automatically by the count.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2023, GS1, 15 marks] Why is caste identity in India both fluid and static?”

  • RBI moves to define revolving credit for the first time and bar non-banks from offering it

    Why in the News

    The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has proposed the first ever regulatory definitions of a term loan and revolving credit, and any facility failing the term loan test would become revolving credit that non-banking financial companies can no longer offer. Revolving credit is the instrument that carried formal finance into rural India, where income is seasonal and expenses run months ahead of receipts. The regulator is now weighing that inclusion gain against the risk of debt recycling through digital credit lines.

    What is revolving credit?

    1. About: Revolving credit comes with a pre approved credit limit against which a borrower can draw, repay and reuse without applying afresh each time.
    2. Contrast with a term loan: A normal term loan is sanctioned once and repaid in fixed instalments, and the limit is not restored after repayment.
    3. Function for the borrower: It works as a financial buffer, letting households, farmers and small entrepreneurs manage short term cash needs, emergencies and income fluctuations.
    4. Function for the lender: It provides recurring income streams, better utilisation of existing credit infrastructure and higher returns on assets through repeated usage.

    Why does rural India need revolving rather than term credit?

    1. Weight in the economy: Rural India contributes 46 to 50 percent of gross domestic product, and its income is largely seasonal.
    2. The cash flow mismatch: Farmers incur expenses on seeds, fertilisers, labour and irrigation months ahead of the income stream, and structural rigidity in the formal credit framework does not match that timing.
    3. What revolving credit does: It bridges the gap by supplying liquidity as and when it is required rather than in a single sanctioned tranche.
    4. Protective function: It acts as a shield against financial shocks and against informal loan sharks.
    5. The instruments it produced: The Kisan Credit Card (KCC), overdraft facilities, self help group credit lines, microfinance linked loans and, increasingly, digital credit products.
    6. Beyond the farm: Rural micro enterprises depend on flexible working capital, and the self help group and bank linkage programme supported by NABARD has created one of the world’s largest community based credit ecosystems.

    What has the Kisan Credit Card delivered?

    1. Introduction: The KCC scheme was introduced in 1998-99 as the principal form of revolving credit in rural areas.
    2. Widening scope: It expanded beyond crop cultivation to allied activities such as dairy, fisheries and animal husbandry.
    3. Current spread: More than 7.72 crore KCCs are active nationwide.
    4. Who holds them: The majority of beneficiaries are small and marginal farmers.
    5. Broader effect: The share of rural households accessing institutional credit channels such as the KCC has risen significantly.

    How have non-banking financial companies become the main channel?

    1. Why they entered: Small ticket unsecured revolving loans carry higher interest rates on higher risk, so the untapped rural market offered both volume and yield.
    2. Product spread: Non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) expanded revolving credit through consumer credit lines, digital loans, merchant finance, working capital loans to micro, small and medium enterprises, and fintech partnerships.
    3. Last mile role: They became a pillar of last mile credit delivery in rural and semi urban areas where banks face high transaction costs, lack of collateral and information asymmetry.
    4. Scale: More than 9,000 registered NBFCs operate in India, the vast majority in the Base Layer, with overall outstanding credit of Rs 58.61 lakh crore by mid-2026.
    5. Composition of the rural footprint: It is driven by microfinance institutions, gold loan companies, vehicle financiers, and lenders to micro, small and medium enterprises and small ticket retail borrowers.
    6. The gap in it: Agriculture remains a relatively small component of overall NBFC lending.

    What does the microfinance data show?

    1. Portfolio outstanding now: The portfolio outstanding of the microfinance sector, comprising NBFC microfinance institutions and small finance banks, stood at Rs 2.77 lakh crore as at March-end 2026.
    2. The two preceding years: It was Rs 3.35 lakh crore a year earlier and Rs 3.78 lakh crore as at March-end 2024.
    3. Rate of contraction: Total microfinance portfolio outstanding fell by about 17 percent year on year to Rs 2.77 lakh crore by March 2026, per the SIDBI-Equifax report.
    4. Geographic concentration: The top five States, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Karnataka, account for 57 percent of total portfolio outstanding.
    5. What the numbers indicate: A two year contraction of over a quarter in the portfolio, concentrated in five States, signals asset quality stress rather than a policy induced slowdown.

    What is the RBI proposing to change?

    1. First ever definitions: The RBI is proposing an amendment that defines term loan and revolving credit for the first time.
    2. The term loan test: A term loan may be disbursed in one or more tranches, but repayment must follow a fixed schedule.
    3. The reuse bar: Once repaid, the credit limit cannot be restored or reused.
    4. The residual category: Any facility that does not meet this definition will be treated as revolving credit.
    5. The operative restriction: Revolving credit, so defined, is what NBFCs can no longer offer.

    Why is the RBI concerned?

    1. Evergreening: The regulator has repeatedly flagged the rapid growth of unsecured retail credit, particularly through fintech and NBFC partnerships offering high risk products as revolving credit.
    2. Masked indebtedness: It remains sceptical of forms of revolving credit where repayment patterns conceal the true level of household indebtedness.
    3. Ease outpacing discipline: Technology has made borrowing easier and faster than financial discipline, and multiple borrowings through various applications with weak due diligence have elevated risk.
    4. Underwriting by algorithm: Some digital platforms relied on algorithms and alternative data without sufficient assessment of repayment capacity.
    5. Purpose of the borrowing: Unlike farm or business revolving credit, many digital credit lines financed consumption rather than income generation.
    6. Official assessment: The latest Economic Survey acknowledged the critical role of NBFCs in inclusion while warning that unchecked expansion can weaken household balance sheets.

    Can the restriction be tightened without pushing borrowers back to informal lenders?

    1. The regulator’s mandate: The RBI must tread a delicate balance between financial inclusion and financial stability, and both claims are legitimate.
    2. The case against a blanket bar: A blanket restriction may be counterproductive, since the microfinance space has historically been underserved and lending is already muted on asset quality pressures and limited funding access.
    3. The instruments at stake: The KCC and similar instruments are essential for growth, while unchecked and easy accessibility through digital platforms and consumer finance channels creates fresh vulnerability.
    4. The real policy problem: The challenge is to identify credit that helps in income generation and separate it from credit that finances consumption, since the two carry different repayment logic.
    5. The failure mode: Excessive regulatory tightening may push borrowers back towards informal lenders, defeating the very purpose of financial inclusion.

    Challenges to Revolving Credit in Rural India

    1. Debt recycling: A revolving limit lets a borrower repay one obligation by drawing on another without the stress becoming visible. e.g. a household clearing one digital credit line by drawing on a second application in the same month.
    2. Multi lending and over indebtedness: Several lenders extending limits to the same household produce a repayment burden none of them has measured. e.g. the microfinance portfolio contracting by about 17 percent year on year to Rs 2.77 lakh crore by March 2026.
    3. Geographic concentration of risk: A localised shock hits a disproportionate share of the sector’s book. e.g. Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Karnataka holding 57 percent of microfinance portfolio outstanding.
    4. Consumption financing: Credit that funds consumption creates no repayment capacity of its own. e.g. digital credit lines used for durables and lifestyle spending rather than for working capital.
    5. Weak underwriting: Alternative data and algorithmic scoring substitute for an assessment of cash flow. e.g. platforms sanctioning limits without verifying seasonal farm income.
    6. Exclusion of tenant cultivators: Revolving farm credit is tied to land records, so the actual cultivator is often ineligible. e.g. oral lessees who cannot produce title to obtain a Kisan Credit Card.
    7. Delinquency and capital cost: Unchecked expansion raises delinquencies and capital requirements together, so profitability depends entirely on risk controls. e.g. small finance banks tightening disbursement after the microfinance portfolio fell from Rs 3.78 lakh crore in March 2024.

    Conclusion

    Revolving credit solved a timing problem that term lending could not, which is why the Kisan Credit Card, self help group credit lines and NBFC credit lines became the core of rural financial inclusion. The RBI is now proposing the first regulatory definitions of a term loan and revolving credit, with the effect that non-banks would be barred from the residual revolving category. The stated concern is evergreening and masked household indebtedness through fintech linked digital credit rather than farm or enterprise credit. The measure is at the proposal stage, and its success will be judged by whether the definitional line separates income generating credit from consumption credit, since a blanket restriction would return underserved borrowers to informal lenders.

    “[2014, GS3, 12.5 marks] “In the villages itself no form of credit organization will be suitable except the cooperative society.”-All India Rural Credit Survey. Discuss this statement in the background of agricultural finance in India. What constraints and challenges do financial institutions supplying agricultural finance face? How can technology be used to better reach and serve rural clients?”

  • India to build hospital in West Bank, seeks to deploy field hospital in Gaza

    Why in the News

    India and Palestine broke ground on 19 August for a 200 seat super speciality hospital in Arrabeh city in the Jenin Governorate of the northern West Bank, during the first high level Indian visit to the affected region since the conflict broke out in October 2023. India simultaneously sought the deployment of an Indian field hospital in the Gaza Strip and reiterated its support for a negotiated two state solution. Palestine used the visit to back India's bid for a non permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council for 2028 to 2029.

    What does India's development package for Palestine cover?

    1. The hospital: A 200 seat super speciality hospital funded by India, to be built in Arrabeh city in the Jenin Governorate of the northern West Bank, with construction work launched jointly on 19 August.
    2. The field hospital: India has sought the deployment of an Indian field hospital in the Gaza Strip, discussed with Palestinian officials during the visit.
    3. Health sector support: Essential medicines and anti cancer drugs, an Artificial Limb Fitment Camp, and a consignment of medicines handed over to the Palestinian Ministry of Health during the visit.
    4. Beyond health: A vocational training centre, the provision of artificial limbs for amputees in Gaza, and talks on medical equipment including dialysis machines, some of which are expected to be moved into Palestine through Jordan.

    What is the two state solution?

    1. The proposition: It is the framework under which an independent State of Palestine would exist alongside the State of Israel, with agreed borders, security arrangements and a settlement on Jerusalem and refugees.
    2. India's position on it: India supports a negotiated two state solution, and has restated that position through every phase of the current conflict.

    What did the Ramallah visit deliver?

    1. The rank of the visit: The Secretary in charge of Consular, Passport, Visa and Overseas Indian Affairs in the Ministry of External Affairs is the highest ranking Indian diplomat to visit the West Bank since the attack of 7 October 2023.
    2. Where it took place: Ramallah, the administrative headquarters of the Palestinian Authority, with a meeting held there with the Palestinian Foreign Minister.
    3. The officials met: The Minister of Health and the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the State of Palestine, and a call on the Prime Minister of Palestine on 19 August.
    4. The positions restated: India's consistent support for the Palestinian people, its support for a negotiated two state solution, and a pitch for addressing the humanitarian situation in Gaza.
    5. The deliverable launched: The groundbreaking ceremony for the super speciality hospital in Jenin, carried out jointly by the Indian and Palestinian teams.
    6. What Palestine asked for: The Palestinian Ambassador to India said Palestine welcomes New Delhi's help towards key infrastructure projects in the region.

    Why does Palestine's backing of India's UNSC bid matter?

    1. The specific endorsement: The Palestinian Ambassador to India said Palestine backs India's bid for a non permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council for the 2028 to 2029 term.
    2. The wider position stated: Palestine has appealed, as a country of the global South, for India to be among the countries holding a permanent seat on a reformed Council.
    3. The reasoning offered: The endorsement was tied to India's global standing as a major economy and a political power.
    4. What Palestine seeks in return: Palestinians hope India will use its influence, including its ties with Israel, to push forward the peace process.
    5. Why it counts in a Council election: A non permanent seat requires a two thirds majority in the General Assembly, so endorsements from within the Asia Pacific group and the wider global South build the coalition a candidacy needs.

    How does India balance its Palestine policy with its Israel ties?

    Source: Backgrounder, India-Israel Relations Backgrounder.docx, supplemented

    1. The stated policy: India maintains long standing principled support for the Palestinian cause and a two state solution, balanced against deepening ties with Israel, a policy described as the de hyphenation of Israel from Palestine.
    2. When de hyphenation was signalled: The first ever visit by an Indian Prime Minister to Israel in July 2017 elevated the relationship to a Strategic Partnership, and notably did not include Ramallah.
    3. What the Israel relationship carries: Israel is among India's top defence suppliers alongside Russia, France and the United States, with merchandise trade anchored in diamonds, chemicals, defence equipment, high technology and agriculture, and a Free Trade Agreement under negotiation.
    4. Where the friction sits: Reports of Indian military shipments to Israel during the Gaza conflict draw domestic and diaspora criticism, and India's energy imports, remittances and large diaspora in the Gulf require careful balancing of Israel ties with Arab partners.
    5. How India frames it: India describes the relationship as issue based cooperation rather than alignment against any third party, which is its strategic autonomy formulation.
    6. What the present visit adds, supplemented: Restoring a high level Indian presence in Ramallah after nearly three years, and pairing it with a physical asset in the West Bank, gives the Palestine half of the balance a visible deliverable rather than a stated position alone.

    Challenges to India's engagement in Palestine

    1. Physical access to Gaza: A field hospital cannot be deployed without a functioning crossing and security guarantees from the parties in control of it. e.g. medical equipment including dialysis machines is expected to reach Palestine only through Jordan.
    2. Construction in a contested territory: Building in the northern West Bank exposes a project to demolition orders, permit refusals and military operations. e.g. the Jenin Governorate, where the Arrabeh hospital is sited, has been the site of repeated large scale Israeli operations.
    3. Balancing against defence ties with Israel: Visible development assistance to Palestine sits beside a defence relationship with Israel that domestic critics read as inconsistent. e.g. reports of Indian military shipments to Israel during the Gaza conflict drawing domestic and diaspora criticism.
    4. Fiscal and delivery capacity of the Palestinian Authority: A completed hospital requires recurrent staffing and operating budgets from an authority under fiscal stress. e.g. the vocational training centre and artificial limb programmes also depend on Palestinian institutions for continuity after handover.
    5. Gulf balance: India's energy imports, remittances and a large diaspora in Gulf states constrain how far it can lean toward either party. e.g. India's calibrated positions at the United Nations through successive phases of the Gaza conflict.
    6. Dependence on a stalled peace process: Development assistance cannot substitute for a political settlement, so the same infrastructure is at risk in the next round of hostilities. e.g. the India Middle East Europe Economic Corridor, announced at the 2023 G20 New Delhi Summit, whose progress regional conflict has slowed.
    7. Competing donor crowding: Reconstruction finance in Gaza and the West Bank is dominated by much larger Gulf and Western donors, which limits the visibility of Indian contributions. e.g. India's assistance is delivered through discrete projects rather than through a large reconstruction fund.

    Conclusion

    India's Palestine policy has for two decades rested on a stated position on the two state solution, and this visit converts part of that position into physical assets in health and vocational training. Palestine's endorsement of India's non permanent Security Council candidature for 2028 to 2029, coupled with its request that India use its ties with Israel to advance the peace process, prices that assistance in diplomatic terms. The next milestones are the finalisation of modalities for the Gaza field hospital deployment and the completion of the Jenin hospital construction.

    India-Israel Relations

    Source: Backgrounder, India-Israel Relations Backgrounder.docx

    1. Recognition and normalisation: India recognised the State of Israel in 1950 but withheld full diplomatic relations for four decades, and full ties were established in January 1992, when India opened its embassy in Tel Aviv and Israel opened its mission in New Delhi.
    2. Elevation to Strategic Partnership: The relationship was elevated to a Strategic Partnership during the first ever visit by an Indian Prime Minister to Israel in July 2017, followed by a reciprocal visit by the Israeli Prime Minister in 2018.
    3. Defence as the anchor: Israel is among India's top defence suppliers, with cooperation covering the Barak-8 medium range surface to air missile jointly developed with the Defence Research and Development Organisation, Heron and Searcher unmanned aerial vehicles, Harop and Harpy loitering munitions, radars, electronic warfare systems and precision guided munitions.
    4. The Kargil precedent: Cooperation proved decisive during the 1999 Kargil conflict, when Israel supplied laser guided munitions and reconnaissance support at short notice.
    5. Trade profile: Bilateral trade grew from about 200 million United States dollars in 1992, largely diamonds, to several billion dollars diversified across refined petroleum, chemicals, textiles and machinery from India, and defence equipment, high technology, potash and fertilizers from Israel.
    6. Agriculture and water: The India Israel Agricultural Action Plan operates Centres of Excellence across Indian States transferring drip irrigation, precision farming and protected cultivation, alongside Israeli expertise in desalination and wastewater recycling.
    7. Minilateral and connectivity architecture: The I2U2 grouping of India, Israel, the United Arab Emirates and the United States, launched in 2021 to 2022 for food security and clean energy, and the India Middle East Europe Economic Corridor announced at the 2023 G20 New Delhi Summit, with Israel as a key transit node.
    8. The Abraham Accords effect: The normalisation of Israel's ties with several Gulf states in 2020 eased India's balancing act between Israel and the Arab world.

    Key Facts about India and Palestine

    1. Early recognition of the PLO: India was the first non Arab state to recognise the Palestine Liberation Organisation as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, in 1974.
    2. Recognition of the State of Palestine: India recognised the State of Palestine in 1988.
    3. Representative Office: India opened its Representative Office to Palestine in Gaza in 1996, and shifted it to Ramallah in 2003.
    4. First Prime Ministerial visit: The first visit by an Indian Prime Minister to Palestine took place in February 2018, to Ramallah.
    5. Institutional gifts: Indian assistance has built the Palestine India Techno Park and a centre of excellence in information and communications technology at Al Quds University, along with a school in Abu Dis and support to the Palestine Institute of Diplomacy.
    6. Multilateral contributions: India contributes annually to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, and extends training slots under the Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation programme to Palestinian officials.
    7. Voting record: India has consistently supported resolutions on Palestinian self determination at the United Nations General Assembly while abstaining on several resolutions that name parties for condemnation.

    Back2Basics: Non Permanent Membership of the UN Security Council

    1. What it is: The United Nations Security Council has fifteen members, five permanent with the veto and ten non permanent without it.
    2. Term: Non permanent members serve a term of two years and are not eligible for immediate re election.
    3. Who elects them: The United Nations General Assembly, by a two thirds majority of members present and voting.
    4. Regional distribution: The ten seats are allocated across the African group, the Asia Pacific group, the Latin American and Caribbean group, the Western European and Others group, and the Eastern European group, with five seats filled each year.
    5. India's record: India has served eight terms as a non permanent member, the most recent being 2021 to 2022, and is contesting the 2028 to 2029 term.
    6. What the seat carries: A non permanent member may preside over the Council in rotation, chair subsidiary bodies and sanctions committees, and vote on all resolutions, but holds no veto.
    7. The reform demand: India, along with Brazil, Germany and Japan in the G4 grouping, seeks permanent membership with expanded representation for Africa, Asia and Latin America.

    Way Forward

    1. Secure access guarantees for the Gaza field hospital: Modalities settled with all parties controlling the crossings are the precondition for deployment, without which the offer stays on paper.
    2. Build operating capacity alongside infrastructure: Pairing the Jenin hospital with training for Palestinian medical staff and a recurrent equipment supply line prevents a completed building without the workforce to run it.
    3. Route assistance through predictable channels: Formalising the Jordan transit route for medical equipment reduces the dependence on ad hoc clearances for each consignment.
    4. Sustain principled support for a two state solution: A consistent public position protects India's standing across West Asia irrespective of how the Israel relationship develops.
    5. Convert the Palestinian endorsement into a Council coalition: Following the endorsement with sustained outreach to the Asia Pacific group and the wider global South is what turns a statement of support into the two thirds majority the 2028 to 2029 election requires.
    6. Insulate long term cooperation from conflict cycles: Multi year funding commitments for health and vocational training projects prevent each round of hostilities resetting the assistance programme.
    7. Broaden beyond health: Extending assistance into water, agriculture and information technology training, where India already has delivery experience in Palestine, diversifies the partnership beyond a single sector.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2018] The term "two-state solution" is sometimes mentioned in the news in the context of the affairs of (a) China (b) Israel (c) Iraq (d) Yemen Answer: (b)”

    # Compiled Articles, 20 August 2026 (Part 5, Items 25 to 30)

  • Groundwater risk from solar irrigation is a property of the model, not of solar power

    Why in the News

    India’s agricultural solar programme has installed over 2.5 million solar pumps in five years, and the government is now preparing PM-KUSUM 2.0. The standard objection is that free solar power removes every incentive to limit pumping and will therefore deepen the groundwater crisis. That objection treats solar irrigation as a single model, when the groundwater outcome is determined by ownership structure, pricing incentive and local hydrogeology.

    What is PM-KUSUM?

    1. About: The Pradhan Mantri Kisan Urja Suraksha evam Utthan Mahabhiyan (PM-KUSUM) is India’s agricultural solar programme, administered by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy.
    2. Delivery so far: It has installed over 2.5 million solar pumps over the past five years, made affordable for smallholder farmers through subsidies.
    3. Three routes: It supports decentralised grid connected solar plants on barren land, standalone off grid solar pumps, and the solarisation of existing grid connected agricultural pumps.
    4. Next stage: The government is preparing PM-KUSUM 2.0, whose design challenge is to advance the clean energy transition without worsening an already over exploited groundwater base.

    What is a feed in tariff?

    1. About: A feed in tariff is a guaranteed per unit price at which a distribution utility buys electricity that a small generator exports to the grid.
    2. Why it matters here: A high enough tariff converts every unit of electricity not used for pumping into cash income, so saving water becomes profitable rather than merely virtuous.

    Why is the standard objection to solar irrigation incomplete?

    1. The objection itself: Heavily subsidised or free electricity has driven unsustainable groundwater abstraction, falling water tables, depleting aquifers and growing fiscal burdens on energy utilities, and solar is assumed to extend that pattern.
    2. First gap, the single model assumption: The debate treats solar irrigation as one model, typically a farmer running a standalone pump with no incentive to conserve water, when models differ by design, ownership structure and pricing incentive.
    3. Second gap, energy as the only variable: The debate discounts local hydrogeology, cropping patterns, marginal returns to irrigation and soil type, all of which shape irrigation behaviour independently of the energy source.
    4. Third gap, evaluation in a silo: Solar irrigation is judged as either a water intervention or an energy intervention, when its consequences span water, energy and food together.
    5. The reframed question: The question is not whether solar irrigation is inherently good or bad for groundwater, but what kind of model is deployed, where, and with what incentives.

    How do ownership and pricing change the groundwater outcome?

    1. Grid connected models create a price for restraint: Models that let farmers sell surplus solar electricity back to the grid give a direct financial reward for using less water.
    2. Gujarat’s Suryashakti Kisan Yojana: Around 100 agricultural feeders were transitioned to solar energy under the scheme.
    3. Measured behaviour change: Solar farmers showed significantly slower growth in energy consumption and in irrigation application than non solar farmers, indicating more sustainable water use.
    4. The tariff that produced it: The scheme offered around Rs 7 per unit as a feed in tariff, a meaningful incentive to conserve electricity and export energy.
    5. Income effect: By exporting energy, farmers earned an average of roughly Rs 21,900 annually, converting them from energy consumers into energy producers.
    6. Standalone pumps vary too: Even for standalone off grid pumps under PM-KUSUM, utilisation and the extent to which the pump replaces diesel rather than grid electricity vary widely with installed capacity, the depth of the water table and years of operating experience.

    What does the Bangladesh model show about pricing solar water?

    1. The dominant model there: Bangladesh’s most common arrangement is the fee for service centralised solar model, in which a pump owner supplies water to multiple farmers within a fixed command area.
    2. The revenue logic: The owner earns from selling water, so the pump is operated as a business rather than as a private convenience.
    3. The measured result: Farmers using solar irrigation did not apply more water than farmers using diesel, even though solar irrigation was 20 to 30 percent cheaper.
    4. The mechanism behind it: Excessive irrigation by one farmer reduces the operator’s ability to serve others, so efficient and equitable groundwater use becomes a condition of the business remaining financially sustainable.
    5. What the case demonstrates: A cheaper energy source did not raise water use once the water itself carried a price and a rationing constraint.

    Why does the same pump produce different outcomes across regions?

    1. Hard rock aquifer regions: Where storage capacity is limited and cropping is rainfed, each additional unit of irrigation water yields high marginal benefit, and water use changed little between solar and non solar users regardless of the energy source.
    2. Punjab and Haryana: Irrigation is already widespread and dominated by water intensive rice and wheat, leaving little scope to expand irrigated area, so solar is unlikely to drive further over exploitation.
    3. The real question in those States: Whether solar can make water, energy and food systems more sustainable by replacing subsidised fossil fuel electricity with grid connected solar, cutting subsidy costs and emissions together.
    4. Eastern India: Irrigation expansion has been constrained by access to energy rather than to water, with large rainfed areas, high diesel costs and unreliable power.
    5. Policy consequence: Solar irrigation policy must follow a differentiated regional approach with context specific model choice, paired with stronger groundwater monitoring and adaptive management to catch emerging stress early.

    What does solar irrigation change beyond groundwater?

    1. Emissions from pumping: Groundwater irrigation in India is estimated to generate between 45 and 62 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year.
    2. Fiscal burden: Agricultural electricity subsidies across States amount to over Rs 1 lakh crore a year.
    3. Per farmer mitigation: Estimates from Gujarat suggest each grid connected solar farmer offsets approximately 12.3 tonnes of carbon dioxide annually through on farm solar use and electricity exported to the grid.
    4. Payback on public money: Subsidies covered nearly one fourth of government investments within the first two years.
    5. Scale of the opportunity: Applied across India’s more than 25 million agricultural pumps, the mitigation and fiscal implications are substantial.

    Should policy prioritise saving water or expanding access?

    1. The case for saving water: In water stressed regions, grid connected solar can be expanded through individual pumps or by taking entire agricultural feeders solar, with both models rewarding farmers for saving water.
    2. The case for expanding access: Where farmers still lack reliable irrigation, the priority is expanding access rather than saving water.
    3. The instrument each case needs: Standalone solar pumps remain the preferred option in areas with limited irrigation, poor grid access and low groundwater risk.
    4. The distributional point: Emphasis should shift from individual ownership to scaling through water user associations, water selling entrepreneurs and farmer cooperatives in India’s most irrigation deprived regions.
    5. Why the tension is real: A single national design cannot simultaneously suppress pumping in Punjab and expand it in Bihar, so the same programme must carry two opposite incentive structures.

    Why has the current design of both models underperformed?

    1. Weak uptake of surplus sale: The approach of paying farmers to save water by selling surplus electricity to the grid has seen limited uptake.
    2. Feeder transitions do not change behaviour: Feeder level transitions to solar have performed better on delivery, but in their current form do little to change pumping behaviour.
    3. What individual pumps need: Simpler grid connection procedures and attractive buyback prices that reflect the local value of water and crops.
    4. What distribution companies need: Distribution companies (DISCOMs), which buy and supply the power, must themselves be incentivised to support the individual pump model.
    5. What feeder solarisation needs: Pairing with water saving incentives such as support for micro irrigation and direct cash payments for reduced pumping, on the model of Punjab’s Pani Bachao Paisa Kamao and Haryana’s Mera Pani Meri Virasat schemes, so the gain is not confined to the distribution company.

    Challenges to PM-KUSUM

    1. Farmer contribution barrier: Even after central and State subsidy, the residual farmer share blocks the poorest applicants. e.g. smallholders in Bihar and Jharkhand, where the same pump costs a larger share of annual income than in Gujarat.
    2. Slow solarisation of existing pumps: Retrofitting grid connected pumps depends on a distribution company agreeing to buy the surplus at a workable price. e.g. the limited uptake of the surplus sale route recorded in the current programme.
    3. Feeder solarisation without behavioural conditions: Solarising a feeder cuts the utility’s power purchase cost without altering how much a farmer pumps. e.g. feeder transitions that improved supply economics while leaving abstraction unchanged.
    4. Unmetered farm supply: Without metering, neither pumping nor saving can be measured, so a water saving payment has no basis. e.g. Punjab, where agricultural supply is largely flat rate and unmetered.
    5. Land availability for decentralised plants: Barren and fallow land near substations is scarce in densely cultivated districts. e.g. canal command areas of western Uttar Pradesh with almost no uncultivated parcels.
    6. After sales service: A solar pump with no local technician becomes a stranded asset. e.g. standalone pumps idling in remote blocks for want of repair and spare parts.
    7. Equity of ownership: Individual ownership concentrates the benefit in farmers who already own a borewell and a landholding. e.g. tenant cultivators and landless water buyers, who gain nothing from a pump subsidy tied to land title.

    Conclusion

    The groundwater question about solar irrigation has been asked at the wrong level, because the outcome is set by ownership structure, pricing incentive and local hydrogeology rather than by the energy source. Gujarat’s feed in tariff and Bangladesh’s fee for service model both show that water use falls once restraint carries a price, while standalone pumps in energy constrained Eastern India are correctly an access instrument rather than a conservation one. PM-KUSUM 2.0 therefore has to carry two opposite incentive structures within one programme, tightened in water stressed States and loosened where irrigation is scarce. The unresolved condition is measurement, since no water saving payment can operate on a farm supply that is neither metered nor monitored.

    “[2025, GS3, 15 marks] Examine the factors responsible for depleting groundwater in India. What are the steps taken by the government to mitigate such depletion of groundwater?”

  • How India plans to count caste now, and what went wrong earlier

    Why in the News

    The Registrar General of India has settled on an open ended question on caste for the ongoing Census, with no predetermined list of castes supplied to the enumerator. The same method in 2011 returned nearly 46.7 lakh distinct caste names and produced no usable table, which places the design of the question, rather than the decision to count, at the centre of the exercise.

    What is an open ended caste question?

    1. How it works: The respondent states a caste in their own words and the enumerator records that answer as given, with no dropdown list or code frame to select from.
    2. No verification step: The enumerator is duty bound to enter what is stated, including a surname offered in place of a caste name.
    3. Errors become data: A misspelling of the stated name becomes an entry in the caste column in its own right.
    4. The colonial precedent: The same open method was used until the 1931 Census, the last census whose caste data were released.

    Why does an open ended question produce unusable data?

    1. Interchangeable names for one group: Rajput, Thakur, Singh and Kshatriya may be used interchangeably by the same respondent for the same identity.
    2. The same name meaning different groups: Rajput in the Bundelkhand region cutting across Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh may also refer to the Other Backward Class Lodh community.
    3. Surnames that cross categories: Singh is a surname running across castes and across reservation categories, so it identifies nothing on its own.
    4. Volume without structure: The result is a very large number of entries that may all belong to a single caste, with no rule for collapsing them afterwards.
    5. The 2011 outcome: The open method returned nearly 46.7 lakh distinct caste names, against the 4,147 castes recorded in the last comprehensive caste census of 1931.

    What did the 1931 Census reveal about counting caste?

    1. Caste as a subjective category: The 1931 Census report itself recorded the difficulty of enumerating caste once respondents were free to name their own.
    2. New identities appearing between rounds: Sections of the leather working caste among Dalits in Punjab assumed a new religious identity as Aad Dharmis, meaning people of the original, pre Aryan religion of India.
    3. The scale of that shift: 418,789 persons enumerated themselves as Aad Dharmis, roughly the same number as Christians in Punjab at that time, in a category that did not exist in 1921.
    4. The pattern was not local: Similar names appeared in other regions, including Adi Dravida, Adi Andhras and Adi Karnatakas.
    5. Consolidation to bolster numbers: The report recorded grazier castes combining under the term “Yadava” the Ahirs, Goalas, Gopis, Idaiyans and other milkmen castes, a movement already effective in 1921.
    6. What both moves show: Caste counts respond to claims of new social status and to the arithmetic advantage of a larger group, not only to who people are.

    How did caste enumeration lapse after 1931?

    1. 1941: Caste details were collected but caste was dropped from the final tabulation.
    2. 1951: The government led by the first Prime Minister decided there would be no caste enumeration, in a newly independent India shaped by the ideals of equality and secularism.
    3. 2011: The Socio Economic and Caste Census conducted under the then government failed to produce usable caste data because of open ended enumeration.
    4. The data withheld: The Union government eventually withheld the raw caste data from the 2011 exercise.

    What did the Bihar caste survey show about using a list?

    1. The exercise: A statewide caste survey was ordered by the then Chief Minister of Bihar in 2023.
    2. The administrative choice made: State officials compiled a list of castes for the purpose, on the view that enumerating without a list would create an administrative nightmare.
    3. The contest that followed: Questions were raised after the data were released about how the lists were prepared and about the methodology used.
    4. What it establishes: A list makes tabulation possible and simultaneously makes the list itself the contested object, since inclusion and placement decide entitlement.

    What alternative design do experts propose?

    1. A predetermined list: A former chairman of the Indian Council of Social Science Research, who was a member of the expert committee on Telangana’s caste data, holds that a predetermined list is necessary.
    2. Building on lists that already exist: Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Other Backward Class lists are already recognised by the government, so only a similar list of castes in the general category is needed for the list to be exhaustive.
    3. The error trade off: Such a list may still carry a margin of error of about 2 to 3 percent, which is smaller than the error produced by open ended enumeration.
    4. Columns for non identification: Separate columns for “no caste” and “no religion” are needed for people who do not identify with either.
    5. Separate questionnaires by group: Distinct questionnaires are proposed for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, because the exclusion each faces differs, untouchability related for the former and physical and geographical isolation for the latter.
    6. No separate schedule for Other Backward Classes: A separate questionnaire is held to be unnecessary for OBCs, since social and educational backwardness would be captured by the Census exercise anyway.
    7. Questions on internal hierarchy: A Valmiki community activist campaigning for sub categorisation holds that the schedule must ask about hierarchies and exclusions within the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, since some castes within them are more deprived than others.

    How many caste groups does the state already recognise?

    1. Scheduled Castes: The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment lists 1,208 Scheduled Castes, with different castes appearing in the category in different States.
    2. Scheduled Tribes: A Press Information Bureau year end release of 2022 lists exactly 730 Scheduled Tribes.
    3. What the two lists prove: A workable, State specific enumeration frame already exists for the reserved categories, which is why the general category is the only gap in a list based design.
    4. The residual problem: The lists are State specific, so a single national code frame still has to reconcile the same caste appearing in different categories across States.

    Challenges to caste enumeration in the Census

    1. Self declaration cannot be verified: No enumerator can test a stated caste against any record, so the count is a record of claims. e.g. the 1931 appearance of 418,789 Aad Dharmis in Punjab was a reclassification, not a demographic change.
    2. Category and caste are conflated: Respondents answer with a reservation category rather than a caste, which destroys the disaggregation the exercise exists to produce. e.g. an entry of “OBC” or “General” tells the statistical office nothing about the specific community.
    3. State specific lists break national aggregation: The same caste name sits in different categories in different States. e.g. a community listed as OBC in one State appears in the general category in a neighbouring one, so a national total is not additive.
    4. Political stakes shape the answer: Enumeration takes place while reservation and sub categorisation demands are live, which gives groups a reason to consolidate. e.g. the Yadava consolidation of Ahirs, Goalas, Gopis and Idaiyans recorded in 1931 combined several castes into one larger head.
    5. Enumerator discretion at the point of entry: With no code frame, spelling, phrasing and abbreviation decisions rest with the field functionary. e.g. a misspelt surname entered as a caste becomes a distinct caste in the final dataset.
    6. Publication risk: Caste tables invite legal and political contest, which creates an incentive to withhold rather than release. e.g. the raw caste data of the 2011 exercise were never published.
    7. Sub caste invisibility: A single caste head hides sharp deprivation differences within it. e.g. sub categorisation demands within the Scheduled Castes rest on the claim that a few communities capture most of the benefit.

    Conclusion

    The choice of an open ended caste question repeats the design that failed in 2011 and that the 1931 report had already flagged as unstable. A predetermined list built on the existing Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Other Backward Class rolls, extended to the general category, is the correction experts have placed on record, along with separate questionnaires for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and questions on internal hierarchy. The self enumeration window is currently open, so the question design is close to being frozen. Whether the exercise yields a usable caste table will be settled by the code frame, not by the decision to count.

    “[2009] Consider the following statements:

    1. Between Census 1951 and Census 2001, the density of the population of India has increased more than three times.

    2. Between Census 1951 and Census 2001, the annual growth rate (exponential) of the population of India has doubled.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    (a) 1 only

    (b) 2 only

    (c) Both 1 and 2

    (d) Neither 1 nor 2

  • [20th August 2026] The Hindu OpED: The IISERs have a leadership problem

    Question (2014, GS2): “Should the premier institutes like IITs/IIMs be allowed to retain premier status, allowed more academic independence in designing courses and also decide mode/criteria of selection of students? Discuss in light of the growing challenges.
    Linkage: This question directly addresses the central conflict in your prompt: the struggle of premier national science and technology institutes to maintain their academic independence and elite status when confronted with structural and administrative constraints.

    Mentor Comment

    Several of the seven Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research are operating under temporary, divided or incomplete leadership, with chairpersons holding simultaneous charge of two or three other institutions and nominated positions for eminent scientists lying vacant. The institutions were created to give students an intellectually vibrant research environment and prize autonomy as an essential ingredient of good science, which sits against a statutory Board structure dominated by government officials and nominees.

    What are the Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research?

    1. Why they were created: The Indian government created the Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research (IISERs) to offer students an intellectually vibrant research environment and to bring them into research at a relatively early stage by the standards of the Indian system.
    2. What they prize: They treat autonomy as an essential ingredient of good science, specifically the ability of scientists to decide which questions are worth pursuing and with what resources, and top down control is inimical to that vision.
    3. Their statutory basis: They were brought within the framework of the National Institutes of Technology, Science Education and Research Act, 2007.
    4. How many there are: Seven IISERs are in operation, each with its own Board of Governors.

    How are IISER Boards of Governors constituted?

    1. The statutory requirement: The 2007 Act requires each IISER to have a Board of Governors that includes senior government officials and other government nominees.
    2. Named ex officio positions: The IISER statutes specify, among others, the secretary of higher education and the director of the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bengaluru.
    3. The accountability rationale: Publicly funded science should be publicly accountable, which is the justification for the government presence on the Boards.
    4. Where the rationale runs out: Suboptimal appointments or outright vacancies are objectionable because they lead to policy paralysis at best, which is a failure of accountability rather than an exercise of it.

    What does the current composition of the seven Boards show?

    1. The IISc director’s spread: The director of the Indian Institute of Science is an ex officio member of most IISERs.
    2. IISER Pune: The chair of its Board is also the chairperson of the Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology, Nagpur.
    3. IISER Berhampur: Its Board chair was given additional charge while also chairing the Board of the Indian Institute of Information Technology, Guwahati. Nominated positions on the same Board lie vacant, including one for an Indian Institute of Technology director and two for eminent scientists.
    4. IISER Bhopal: Its current director is listed as director in charge, after the previous director left to join NITI Aayog in June.
    5. IISER Thiruvananthapuram: Its chairperson simultaneously chairs the Boards of the Indian Institute of Information Technology, Kottayam and the Indian Institute of Information Technology, Design and Manufacturing, Kurnool.
    6. The cumulative position: Interim appointments are routine and vacancies arise during transitions, and ex officio positions change when officials move between posts, but taken together several IISERs are operating under temporary or incomplete leadership.

    Who is leading India’s basic science institutions?

    1. IISER Pune’s chairperson: A retired Indian Administrative Service officer whose educational background is in commerce and journalism.
    2. IISER Pune’s director: A chemical engineer by training, whereas the IISERs have little focus on engineering.
    3. IISER Thiruvananthapuram’s chairperson: A surgeon.
    4. IISER Tirupati’s chairperson: A chemical engineer and the co founder of an industrial group.
    5. IISER Berhampur’s chairperson: An executive in the footwear industry.
    6. The measurable outcome: Going by awards, fellowships or global achievement and recognition, there are few outstanding scientists in positions of authority on the IISER Boards today.

    Why does the professional background of a chairperson matter for a basic science institution?

    1. There is no legal bar: No rule requires that the chairperson of a scientific institution must be a scientist.
    2. Why it matters regardless: It bears on each institution’s credibility and on its vision, both of which rest on who is seen to be setting the research direction.
    3. What the Boards do gain from outsiders: Expertise in administration, industry, finance and public policy is genuinely useful to a Board.
    4. What the case for scientists rests on: Institutions focused on basic science should draw their leadership from the scientific community, where many people combine distinguished research careers with substantial experience in running academic and research organisations.
    5. The practice that was dropped: The government had earlier appointed the finest scientists to the IISERs’ helm before discontinuing the practice.
    6. The question that actually arises: It is not whether the current leaders are competent, it is why India’s many accomplished scientists are not being asked to lead institutions whose central purpose is basic science.

    How does divided and interim leadership weaken institutional autonomy?

    1. Attention divided across institutions: Leaders whose attention is already split between two or three institutions cannot supply sustained direction to any one of them.
    2. Control shifting away from scientists: With outsiders and divided attention at the top, scientists have less control over decisions that affect their own work.
    3. Rotation instead of recruitment: The availability of a research cadre calls into question the practice of moving the same people between institutions rather than recruiting from the scientific community.
    4. Administration falling behind: People familiar with the IISERs’ functioning describe an administration losing its ability to keep up with students’ needs in respect of a good education in basic science.
    5. The internal assessment: A senior scientist at one of the IISERs described the position as one in which there is no vision or imagination and no sense of leadership propelling the institution towards its core goals of carrying out high quality frontier research in and teaching basic science at an international level.
    6. The powers that go unused: By design, the directors and the Board hold the power to institute positive changes, so the deficit is one of direction rather than of authority.

    Challenges to institutional autonomy in India’s basic science institutions

    1. Lagging decline masked by reputation: An institution whose governance has begun to decline can remain scientifically productive for years as long as the people who built its reputation remain and the institutional label is still valuable, which delays any corrective response. e.g. the IISERs continue to attract strong entrants through the joint admission route while several Boards run without full leadership.
    2. Concentration of authority: Weak collegial governance shifts decisions towards a small group at the top, reducing faculty participation in academic direction. e.g. the flagging of a risk of concentration of authority as a consequence of the IISERs’ present leadership arrangements.
    3. Risk averse research culture: Where leadership lacks a research background, funding and hiring decisions favour safe incremental work over frontier problems. e.g. the expectation of an increasingly risk averse institutional culture as the cumulative effect of the IISERs’ governance decline.
    4. Vacancies in nominated positions: Seats reserved for eminent scientists and institute directors go unfilled, removing the very expertise the statute intended the Board to carry. e.g. the IISER Berhampur Board, with one Indian Institute of Technology director position and two eminent scientist positions vacant.
    5. Interim leadership without a mandate: A director in charge cannot commit an institution to long horizon research investments. e.g. IISER Bhopal, run by a director in charge after the previous director left for NITI Aayog in June.
    6. Government nominee dominance: The statutory requirement of senior officials and nominees on the Board makes institutional direction dependent on the postings cycle of the civil service. e.g. the ex officio membership of the secretary of higher education on IISER Boards under the 2007 Act statutes.
    7. Underfunding of basic research: India’s gross expenditure on research and development remains below one per cent of gross domestic product, so institutional autonomy is further constrained by dependence on annual government grants. e.g. the persistent share of roughly 0.64 per cent of gross domestic product against the two per cent and above spent by comparable research economies.
    8. Faculty attrition to better resourced systems: Weak governance and uncertain research support push early career scientists towards positions abroad or in the private sector. e.g. the reliance of schemes such as Ramanujan and Ramalingaswami fellowships on reversing exactly this outflow.

    Conclusion

    The IISERs were created on the premise that scientists deciding their own research questions produces better science than top down direction, and the statutory Board structure was the accountability counterweight to that autonomy. The counterweight has become the whole of it, with chairpersons drawn from outside the scientific community, ex officio members spread across several institutions, and seats reserved for eminent scientists left vacant. Restoring the earlier practice of appointing distinguished scientists to the helm, and filling the nominated positions the statutes already provide, requires no change in the law.

    Basic Scientific Research in India

    1. What it covers: Basic research is investigation directed at understanding fundamental phenomena without a specified application, distinguished from applied research and from experimental development.
    2. Institutional spread: It is conducted through the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research laboratories, the Department of Atomic Energy and Department of Space institutions, the Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research, the Indian Institute of Science, the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research and the central universities.
    3. Scale of national spending: India’s gross expenditure on research and development stands at roughly 0.64 per cent of gross domestic product, against about two per cent or more in most comparable research economies.
    4. Composition of that spending: The government accounts for the larger share of research spending in India, whereas in most leading research economies the private sector accounts for the bulk of it.
    5. Global standing on output: India ranks among the top three countries in the world by annual volume of scientific publications, and its citation impact remains below that publication rank.
    6. The IISER model: The IISERs were designed as a distinct category from the Indian Institutes of Technology, combining a five year integrated science programme with a research faculty, so that undergraduates enter laboratories early.
    7. The funding reform: The Anusandhan National Research Foundation, established under the Anusandhan National Research Foundation Act, 2023, is intended to fund research across universities and colleges, with a substantial share of its corpus expected from non government sources.

    Government Initiatives for Science Education and Research

    1. Anusandhan National Research Foundation: Established under the Anusandhan National Research Foundation Act, 2023 as the apex body for seeding, growing and promoting research across the natural sciences, engineering, mathematics, environmental and earth sciences, health and agriculture, with a mandate to fund university and college research.
    2. INSPIRE: The Innovation in Science Pursuit for Inspired Research programme of the Department of Science and Technology offers scholarships to school students, undergraduate and postgraduate scholarships in the basic and natural sciences, and faculty fellowships.
    3. Kishore Vaigyanik Protsahan Yojana: A fellowship programme to identify and support students with an aptitude for research careers in the basic sciences, since merged into the INSPIRE stream.
    4. Ramanujan and Ramalingaswami Re entry Fellowships: Offered by the Science and Engineering Research Board and the Department of Biotechnology respectively to bring Indian scientists working abroad back into Indian institutions.
    5. PM Research Fellowship: Provides doctoral fellowships at institutions of national importance with an enhanced stipend and a research grant, to retain top undergraduates within the domestic research system.
    6. National Research Professorship and J.C. Bose Fellowship: Recognise and support distinguished scientists to continue active research beyond conventional retirement.
    7. Vigyan Jyoti and Women in Science and Engineering KIRAN: Target the participation of girls and women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics education and research careers.

    Key Facts about the IISERs

    1. Number and locations: Seven institutes, at Kolkata, Pune, Mohali, Bhopal, Thiruvananthapuram, Tirupati and Berhampur.
    2. Year of first establishment: The first two, at Kolkata and Pune, were established in 2006, followed by Mohali in 2007, Bhopal and Thiruvananthapuram in 2008, Tirupati in 2015 and Berhampur in 2016.
    3. Statutory status: They are Institutes of National Importance under the National Institutes of Technology, Science Education and Research Act, 2007.
    4. Administering ministry: The Department of Higher Education in the Ministry of Education.
    5. Flagship programme: A five year BS-MS dual degree in the basic sciences, with admission through the IISER Aptitude Test and other channels.
    6. Governance structure: A Board of Governors chaired by a chairperson, with a director as the chief executive, and a Senate for academic matters.
    7. Named ex officio Board members: The secretary of higher education and the director of the Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, among others.

    Back2Basics: National Institutes of Technology, Science Education and Research Act, 2007

    1. What it is: A central Act that declares certain institutions to be Institutes of National Importance and provides for their incorporation, governance and funding.
    2. Enacted: 2007, originally covering the National Institutes of Technology, and later extended to the IISERs and to the Indian Institutes of Engineering Science and Technology.
    3. What Institute of National Importance status confers: Autonomy to award its own degrees, direct central funding, and exclusion from the University Grants Commission’s affiliation framework.
    4. Governance it prescribes: Each institute has a Board of Governors as the principal executive body, a Senate for academic decisions, a chairperson, a director and a registrar.
    5. Composition requirement: The Board must include senior government officials and other government nominees, which is the provision that places the secretary of higher education and the Indian Institute of Science director on IISER Boards through the institute statutes.
    6. The Council: The Act also creates a Council for the institutes it covers, chaired by the Union Minister in charge, to coordinate across them.
    7. Why it governs this item: It is the statutory source of both the IISERs’ autonomy and the government dominated Board structure that the present appointments have made the operative feature.

    Way Forward

    1. Restore scientist leadership at the helm: Reviving the earlier practice of appointing distinguished scientists as chairpersons and directors requires no amendment to the 2007 Act, only a change in the selection practice.
    2. Fill the vacant nominated seats: Appointing to the eminent scientist and institute director positions already provided in the statutes restores the scientific expertise the Board structure was designed to carry.
    3. Bar simultaneous multiple chairmanships: A rule against holding the chair of more than one Institute of National Importance would end the divided attention that leaves several IISERs without sustained direction.
    4. Time bound filling of directorships: A fixed outer limit on how long an institute may run under a director in charge would prevent interim leadership becoming the standing arrangement.
    5. Publish selection criteria and search process: A transparent search committee process, with published criteria for research standing and institution building experience, would make appointments contestable on merit.
    6. Build a leadership pipeline from the research cadre: Structured administrative training for mid career scientists would widen the pool beyond the same individuals rotated between institutions.
    7. Strengthen Senate authority over academic direction: Vesting curriculum, faculty recruitment and research priorities firmly with the Senate would insulate scientific decisions from Board level turnover.
    8. Raise and stabilise research funding: Multi year block grants through the Anusandhan National Research Foundation would reduce the dependence on annual allocations that constrains long horizon research.

  • Transmission Constraints Emerge as the Binding Limit on India’s Renewable Expansion

    Why in the News

    Insufficient transmission lines have emerged as a major obstacle to India’s renewable energy expansion, with many solar projects being curtailed during daylight hours, a rating agency assessment released on 19 August 2026 found. The constraint has shifted the binding limit on India’s energy transition from how fast capacity can be built to how much of it the grid can actually carry, and new project bidding has collapsed in response.

    What is curtailment of renewable power?

    1. Forced reduction of output: Curtailment occurs when a power generator is forced to reduce or stop producing electricity because of oversupply and grid congestion, even though the plant is capable of generating.
    2. Why solar is hit hardest: Solar output peaks in the middle of the day, when several projects on the same corridor feed in simultaneously and demand is not correspondingly high, so the surplus cannot be evacuated.
    3. What it costs the generator: A curtailed unit is generation permanently lost, since sunlight cannot be stored without additional storage capacity, and the fixed cost of the asset continues to accrue against a smaller output.
    4. Scale of the problem: Around 37% of renewable energy capacity at substations affected by curtailment in the northern, western and southern regions operates under short term access arrangements, and this capacity faces 30% to 50% curtailment during the day.

    What is Temporary General Network Access?

    1. Short term use of spare grid capacity: Temporary General Network Access (T-GNA) is a short term arrangement that allows a renewable energy project to use available capacity on the inter-State transmission system, typically for periods ranging from a single time block to about 11 months.
    2. Why it is precarious: T-GNA gives no firm entitlement to evacuate power, so projects operating under it are particularly vulnerable to curtailment, which raises their operational costs and, on prolonged use, reduces the supplier’s revenues.

    What is the inter-State transmission system?

    1. The national transmission backbone: The inter-State transmission system is the network of high voltage lines and substations that carries power across State boundaries, planned centrally and operated as a single national grid, on which access rights are allotted separately from generation approvals.

    What is a Power Purchase Agreement?

    1. The contract that makes a project bankable: A Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) is the long term contract under which a distribution company or intermediary agrees to buy a defined quantity of power from a generator at an agreed tariff, and without a signed PPA a project has no assured revenue stream against which lenders will disburse.

    What is firm and dispatchable renewable energy?

    1. Renewable power with an assured supply obligation: Firm and dispatchable renewable energy (FDRE) is renewable generation contracted with an obligation to supply a specified quantum during specified hours, achieved by combining solar, wind and storage, so that the buyer receives a guaranteed profile rather than whatever the weather delivers.

    What is round the clock renewable power?

    1. Renewable supply across all 24 hours: Round the clock (RTC) power is a contracting structure in which the developer commits to supply renewable energy across every hour of the day at a specified availability, again by combining complementary sources with storage.

    How severe is the curtailment, region by region?

    1. The affected regions: Curtailment at substations has been recorded in the northern, western and southern regions, the three regions carrying the bulk of India’s solar and wind capacity.
    2. Share on temporary access: Around 37% of renewable capacity at affected substations across these three regions operates under T-GNA.
    3. The daily loss: Capacity operating under T-GNA faces 30% to 50% curtailment during daylight hours.
    4. Western region: About 55% of the affected capacity in western India was under T-GNA, and peak curtailment reached 8,617 MW as of 6 August 2026.
    5. Northern region: The corresponding peak curtailment figure for the northern region was 5,573 MW.
    6. What the concentration means: The western region, which hosts the largest solar and wind clusters, is also the region most dependent on temporary access, so the two vulnerabilities compound rather than offset.

    Why has new capacity bidding collapsed even as construction continues?

    1. Construction pipeline remains large: More than 150 GW of renewable projects were under construction as of 30 June 2026.
    2. Awards have fallen sharply: After 40.6 GW was awarded in 2024-25, awards fell to 14.7 GW in 2025-26 and stood at only 4.7 GW through 10 August 2026.
    3. Contracts awarded but not signed: Between 40 GW and 45 GW of capacity with bids already awarded remained without signed PPAs as of April 2026.
    4. Delays in firming PPAs: Delays in converting awarded bids into signed PPAs are identified as an impediment independent of the transmission constraint.
    5. Land acquisition: Land acquisition for both generation sites and transmission corridors continues to stall projects.
    6. Distribution company finances: The financial position of distribution companies limits their willingness to sign long term purchase obligations at all, since a new PPA adds a fixed payment liability to a stressed balance sheet.
    7. The bidding mix is changing: New bidding is shifting toward firm and dispatchable renewable energy and round the clock power, which require storage and therefore carry a higher tariff than plain solar.

    Is the binding constraint on India’s energy transition generation capacity or grid capacity?

    1. The generation side is not the problem: More than 150 GW is under construction and renewable energy including large hydro is projected to account for more than 35% of electricity generation by 2029-30, against 22% in 2024-25.
    2. The evacuation side is: Capacity is being commissioned faster than transmission corridors are being built, which is why up to half of the output of projects on temporary access is being discarded during the hours it is generated.
    3. The market has already priced the constraint: New awards fell from 40.6 GW to 4.7 GW in eighteen months, which is the developer response to a corridor that cannot carry what is already built.
    4. Storage is the second missing input: Timely execution of intra-State and inter-State transmission infrastructure, along with greater storage capacity, is identified as critical to sustaining renewable additions, because a line that is congested at noon is idle at night.
    5. Why this reframes the target: A target expressed in installed capacity measures what has been built, while a target expressed in share of generation measures what actually reaches consumers, and curtailment is precisely the gap between the two.

    How is transmission and renewable infrastructure financed in India?

    Source: Backgrounder, Infrastructure Financing.docx

    1. Why bank lending failed: Commercial banks funded 25 to 30 year infrastructure assets with one to three year deposits, and this asset liability mismatch produced stressed assets crossing Rs 10 lakh crore in Indian banking by 2017.
    2. National Bank for Financing Infrastructure and Development: Established in 2021 under a dedicated Act of Parliament as India’s first dedicated infrastructure development finance institution, providing non recourse long term financing with 20 to 30 year tenors that match infrastructure asset life.
    3. Its scale: As of December 2025 it had sanctioned approximately Rs 3.03 lakh crore and disbursed approximately Rs 1.09 lakh crore.
    4. Partial Credit Enhancement: It partially guarantees bonds issued by infrastructure companies and special purpose vehicles, upgrading their credit rating from BBB to AA or AAA so that insurance companies and pension funds can participate, with the first such facility sanctioned in February 2026.
    5. Sector specific development finance institutions: REC and PFC finance power generation, transmission and distribution by raising long term bonds and lending to State electricity boards and private power companies.
    6. POWERGRID InvIT: The first Infrastructure Investment Trust in the power sector, set up in 2020, with proceeds channelled into new and under construction transmission projects.
    7. How an InvIT recycles capital: The sponsor transfers only the right to collect revenues for a defined concession period and receives upfront capital which it reinvests in new projects, while ownership is never transferred and the asset reverts at the end of the concession.
    8. The SEBI safeguard: SEBI requires a minimum of 80% of InvIT assets to be in completed operational projects, which protects investors from construction risk, and InvITs may raise debt up to 49% of asset value.
    9. Infrastructure Risk Guarantee Fund: Announced in the 2026-27 Budget, it provides partial guarantees to lenders financing infrastructure projects, covering a portion of the loss on default so that lenders extend credit where they previously refused, while the partial cover preserves due diligence incentives.
    10. Sovereign green bonds: Issued by the Government of India since 2022-23 with proceeds ring fenced for renewable energy, clean transport and sustainable water management, establishing a sovereign benchmark for long term green paper.
    11. The recycling logic: The architecture is designed so that the government builds, the asset stabilises and generates revenue, the asset is monetised through an InvIT, and the capital returns to fund the next tranche of the National Infrastructure Pipeline without a fresh budget allocation each cycle.
    12. Monetisation targets: The National Monetisation Pipeline 2.0, announced in February 2026, targets Rs 16.72 lakh crore including private sector investment of Rs 5.8 lakh crore over 2025-26 to 2029-30, nearly three times the first pipeline’s target.

    Challenges to India’s Renewable Energy Expansion

    1. Transmission build lags generation build: A solar park can be commissioned in about a year while a high voltage corridor takes several years, so the two cannot be commissioned in step. e.g. peak curtailment in western India reached 8,617 MW as of 6 August 2026 on capacity that was already generating.
    2. Temporary access gives no firm evacuation right: Projects on T-GNA can be curtailed at the system operator’s discretion, which makes their revenue unpredictable and their debt harder to service. e.g. around 37% of affected capacity across three regions runs on T-GNA and faces 30% to 50% daytime curtailment.
    3. Storage capacity is inadequate to absorb the midday surplus: Without batteries or pumped hydro the same corridor is congested at noon and underused at night. e.g. the shift in new bidding toward firm and dispatchable and round the clock contracts is itself an admission that plain solar without storage no longer clears.
    4. Distribution company finances limit offtake: Loss making distribution utilities avoid signing new long term purchase obligations irrespective of tariff. e.g. 40 GW to 45 GW of awarded capacity remained without signed PPAs as of April 2026.
    5. Right of way and land acquisition for transmission corridors: Transmission lines cross many districts and require sustained land and forest clearances along the whole route. e.g. land acquisition is named alongside transmission constraints as an independent impediment to project completion.
    6. Geographic concentration of resource: Solar and wind resources are concentrated in a few States while demand centres lie elsewhere, so the transition is dependent on long distance evacuation. e.g. the western and northern regions together account for the two largest curtailment figures recorded.
    7. Tariff pressure from cheap early bids: Projects awarded at very low tariffs in earlier competitive rounds have thin margins that curtailment erases entirely. e.g. the collapse of awards from 40.6 GW in 2024-25 to 4.7 GW through August 2026 shows developers withdrawing rather than bidding lower.
    8. Grid stability with high variable renewable share: A grid carrying more than 35% renewable generation needs inertia, frequency response and balancing reserves that thermal plants currently supply. e.g. must run thermal capacity has to be retained and paid for even as it operates at low plant load factors.
    9. Module and cell supply chain dependence: Domestic content requirements raise capital costs while imported modules expose projects to trade policy shocks. e.g. changes in duty on imported solar cells and modules have repeatedly reset project economics after bids were submitted.
    10. Delayed payments to generators: Payment delays by distribution utilities strain developer working capital independently of curtailment. e.g. the late payment surcharge rules had to be framed specifically to enforce a payment discipline that contracts alone did not achieve.

    Conclusion

    India’s renewable programme has moved past the point where generation capacity is the constraint, and the evidence for that is a 150 GW construction pipeline coexisting with up to 50% daytime curtailment on capacity that is already running. The market has responded not by building more but by bidding less, with awards falling from 40.6 GW to 4.7 GW in eighteen months, and by shifting toward firm and dispatchable contracts that price the constraint into the tariff. Whether renewable energy reaches more than 35% of generation by 2029-30 now depends on the execution of intra-State and inter-State transmission lines and on storage capacity, not on the pace of solar commissioning.

    “[2022, GS3, 15 marks] Do you think India will meet 50 percent of its energy needs from renewable energy by 2030 ? Justify your answer. How will the shift of subsidies from fossil fuels to renewables help achieve the above objective? Explain.”

  • Supreme Court makes school students the instrument for changing household waste behaviour

    Why in the News

    The Supreme Court has directed the Department of School and Higher Education to integrate theoretical and practical instruction on solid waste management so that students train their own family members. The order rejects the assumption that solid waste is a problem for sanitary workers alone, holding that a minuscule number of sanitary workers cannot handle the waste generated by a population of 1.4 billion. The order was passed on 18 August and released on Wednesday.

    What are the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2026?

    1. About: The Solid Waste Management (SWM) Rules, 2026 are the subordinate rules that set the national standards for the segregation, collection, transport, processing and disposal of municipal solid waste.
    2. Benchmark for audit: The Court treated these Rules as the extant standard against which existing waste infrastructure must be completely audited and upgraded.
    3. Where implementation power sits: The Court agreed with the Additional Solicitor General that the true power to implement the Rules lies with householders, local body officers and every direct and indirect contributor of waste, not with the municipal machinery alone.

    What are the five categories of waste the Court identified?

    1. Biodegradable waste: Organic waste from kitchens, markets and gardens that decomposes and is treatable by composting or biomethanation.
    2. Non biodegradable waste: Plastics, metals, glass and packaging that persist and require material recovery or recycling.
    3. Hazardous waste: Waste with toxic, corrosive, reactive or infectious properties requiring specialised handling and treatment.
    4. Electronic waste: Discarded electrical and electronic equipment carrying both recoverable metals and toxic components.
    5. Construction waste: Debris from building, renovation and demolition, which is the heaviest stream by volume in a growing city.
    6. The Court’s conclusion from the set: The volume and complexity of these five streams have outgrown what any single class of workers can be expected to handle.

    Why did the Court call the sanitary worker assumption constitutionally unethical?

    1. The prevailing assumption: The Bench held that the assumption that solid waste is a problem for sanitary workers alone, while the rest of the population remains passive generators, is neither legally correct nor practically sustainable, and is constitutionally unethical.
    2. The general feeling in society: The Court described the regrettable attitude as one where a person is entitled to generate but not to cooperate and control the impact of solid waste management at the threshold.
    3. Arithmetic of the mismatch: Every human being and their activities result in pollution, yet all contributors expect a minuscule percentage of sanitary workers to handle it.
    4. The responsibility it fixed: The Court held that this perception shall be eradicated and that waste management shall be the responsibility of all contributors.
    5. The public health warning: Continued complacency would lead to pandemic and endemic situations.

    What monitoring machinery has the Court already put in place?

    1. Trigger for the committee: The imbalance between the volume of waste generated and the infrastructure to collect it alarmed the Court on 25 May, when it constituted a monitoring committee.
    2. Five Union Secretaries: The committee comprises the Secretaries of the Ministries of Housing and Urban Affairs; Environment, Forest and Climate Change; Jal Shakti; and Panchayati Raj and Rural Development; and the Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation.
    3. Pollution regulator: The Member Secretary of the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) is the sixth member.
    4. Design logic of the composition: Urban services, environmental standards, water and sanitation, and rural local government are placed in a single body because waste crosses all four jurisdictions.

    Why did the Court fall back on education rather than penalty?

    1. The limit of law: The Bench accepted the reality that law alone could not induce good civic behaviour, and that the change had to come from within.
    2. The instrument chosen: The Court held that an educated child is the most effective and least coercive instrument for educating a parent or a relative.
    3. The tension this creates: Rules, standards and a five Secretary committee are enforceable instruments with fixed accountability, while behavioural change through schoolchildren has no compliance date and no defaulter.
    4. The reversal of the usual direction: Compliance is being routed through the household rather than through the municipal contractor, which shifts the burden to the very generators the Rules had earlier treated as passive.

    What directions did the Court issue?

    1. Curriculum integration: The Department of School and Higher Education must integrate, with immediate effect, both theoretical and practical knowledge on solid waste management.
    2. Students as trainers: Students are to be equipped to train their own family members in waste handling at the household stage.
    3. Teachers as trainers of trainers: Teachers are to be trained so that they can deliver the practical component.
    4. District level engagement: District Collectors must engage with households and educational institutions.
    5. Infrastructure audit: The waste infrastructure needs a complete audit and upgradation to meet the extant standards of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2026.

    Conclusion

    The Court has reclassified solid waste from a service delivery failure of municipal sanitation into a generation side behavioural failure of 1.4 billion contributors, and has held the passive generator assumption to be constitutionally unethical. Its enforceable directions are the curriculum mandate on the Department of School and Higher Education, the engagement duty on District Collectors and the infrastructure audit against the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2026. The five Secretary committee constituted on 25 May continues to monitor the volume and infrastructure mismatch. The next stage will turn on whether the Department reports a dated curriculum integration plan, since the order carries an immediate effect direction but no separate compliance schedule.

    “[2018, GS3, 10 marks] What are the impediments in disposing the huge quantities of discarded solid wastes which are continuously being generated? How do we remove safely the toxic wastes that have been accumulating in our habitable environment?”

  • Census 2027: rights groups flag gaps in disability categories

    Why in the News

    Disability rights organisations have objected to the nine category disability question proposed for Census 2027, against the 21 specified disabilities recognised in law. The objection turns on a design choice, since the categories printed on the schedule decide which conditions can be counted at all, and a condition without its own box is recorded inside a broader one or not at all.

    What does Census 2027 propose to record on disability?

    1. The nine proposed categories: Seeing, hearing, speech, mobility, intellectual disability, mental illness, disability due to acid attack, disability due to chronic neurological disease, and blood disorder.
    2. What carries over from 2011: Six of the nine, namely seeing, hearing, speech, mobility, intellectual disability and mental illness, are the 2011 Census categories, with “mental retardation” renamed “intellectual disability”.
    3. What is new: Acid attack, chronic neurological disease and blood disorder are the three additions over the 2011 schedule.
    4. Multiple disability recording: The questionnaire allows up to three disabilities to be recorded for one person, entered in the order of severity.

    What are “specified disabilities” under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016?

    1. The statutory list: The Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016 recognises 21 specified disabilities in its Schedule, covering physical, intellectual, mental, blood related and multiple disabilities.
    2. The expansion it made: The Act replaced the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 and raised the recognised types from seven to 21, treating disability as a dynamic and evolving concept.

    Why do rights groups say the nine categories fall short?

    1. The assurance on record: The Union Minister of State for Social Justice and Empowerment stated in March 2026 that Census 2027 would capture data on all 21 disabilities.
    2. Conditions without a distinct box: Autism spectrum disorder, specific learning disabilities, dwarfism, leprosy cured persons and multiple disabilities including deafblindness are not distinctly placed under any proposed category.
    3. Distinct conditions collapsed into one: Thalassemia, haemophilia and sickle cell disease are reduced to the single category “blood disorder”, which erases the difference between three separate conditions with different prevalence and support needs.
    4. Other statutory conditions absent: Cerebral palsy, muscular dystrophy and multiple sclerosis are recognised in the Act but not separately represented in the proposed schedule.
    5. Scale of the objection: The statement of the National Platform for the Rights of the Disabled (NPRD), citing information from the Politics and Disability Forum, was endorsed by more than 400 signatories.

    What is the Registrar General’s defence of the design?

    1. Broad categories by design: The nine are described as broader categories that include other detailed specific disabilities within them.
    2. Severity ordering retained: The option to record up to three disabilities in order of severity is offered as the mechanism for capturing multiple disability.
    3. Consultation claimed: Categories were finalised after consultation with the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, and other stakeholders.
    4. Enumerator competence: Field functionaries are not technically qualified to assess or confirm a specific disability, which is the stated reason for keeping categories broad.
    5. Training provided: A three day training covering all aspects of the questionnaire is held for enumerators and supervisors.
    6. Comparison with 2011: The 2027 schedule enumerates a larger number of disabilities than the 2011 schedule did.

    Why does the classification itself decide the count?

    1. The instrument sets the ceiling: An enumerator can only record what the schedule offers, so a condition without a category is absorbed into a broader one and disappears from the published table.
    2. Untrained recognition: Broad categories without a notified training module on which specific disability sits under which head leave the classification to the enumerator’s judgement.
    3. The respondent’s own knowledge: A person who neither communicates nor understands the correct name of their disability cannot correct a wrong entry, which compounds the error.
    4. Self declaration and stigma: Census disability data is self reported, and households under reported disability in earlier rounds because of stigma, which a broad category does nothing to correct.
    5. Downstream consequence: Undercounting a specific group weakens the evidence base for scheme design, budget allocation and reservation entitlements tied to that disability.

    What did the 2011 Census record on disability?

    1. Total count: The 2011 Census counted 2.68 crore persons with disabilities, which was 2.21 percent of the country’s population.
    2. Categories used: The 2011 schedule carried six of the nine categories now proposed.
    3. Concentration of the count: Movement or locomotor, hearing and vision related disabilities together accounted for over half of the country’s population with disabilities.
    4. What the 2011 base implies: A count already limited to six categories in 2011 sets the comparison base against which any 2027 increase will be read.

    Challenges to accurate disability enumeration

    1. Self reporting and stigma: Households conceal disability, particularly mental illness and intellectual disability, to avoid social consequences for marriage and employment. e.g. the 2011 Census figure of 2.21 percent sits well below global disability prevalence estimates of around 15 percent of population.
    2. Untrained enumerators on clinical categories: A three day training cannot equip a field functionary to distinguish autism spectrum disorder from intellectual disability. e.g. specific learning disabilities are invisible without assessment and were absent from the 2011 count entirely.
    3. Severity capping at three: Persons with more than three conditions lose the rest of their profile, which particularly affects multiple disability. e.g. deafblindness combines two sensory disabilities and has no distinct category in the proposed schedule.
    4. No linkage to certification data: Census figures are not reconciled with the Unique Disability ID database, so the two official counts diverge. e.g. UDID certification is issued against the 21 statutory categories while the Census will record nine.
    5. Question placement and time: The disability question sits late in a long household schedule, where fatigue produces default negative answers. e.g. the 2027 self enumeration form is completed by the respondent without any enumerator prompt at all.
    6. Definitional change across rounds: Renaming and regrouping categories between censuses breaks comparability of the time series. e.g. “mental retardation” in 2011 becomes “intellectual disability” in 2027, and three blood conditions are merged into one new head.

    Conclusion

    The dispute is not about whether Census 2027 counts persons with disabilities but about whether its nine category schedule can carry the 21 categories the law recognises. The Registrar General’s position is that the nine are containers holding the specific conditions, and the rights groups’ position is that a container without a notified mapping and enumerator training will not produce disaggregated data. The self enumeration window for snowbound areas is open until 31 August 2026, with the second phase of population enumeration in those areas from 1 to 30 September 2026 and a revisional round from 1 to 5 October 2026. Any change to the disability question must therefore be made before the main enumeration schedule is frozen.

    “[2026] Which of the following statements with regard to the persons with disabilities in India is/are correct?

    1. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, an Act passed by the Parliament of India in 2018, mandates reservation in education and employment, places a legal duty on Governments to ensure accessibility and non-discrimination.

    2. The Sugamya Bharat Abhiyan focuses on achieving universal accessibility for Persons with Disabilities across three key domains, built infrastructure, transport systems and information and communication technology.

    3. The National Divyangjan Finance and Development Corporation (NDFDC) is a public sector organisation set up by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs as a not-for-profit company to promote entrepreneurship among Persons with Disabilities (PwDs).

    (a) 1 and 2

    (b) 2 only

    (c) 1 and 3

    (d) 1 only