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

Civilsdaily

Login

Search results for: “”

  • [14th August 2026] The Hindu OpED: Europe’s Al rules may become India’s opportunity

    PYQ Relevance
    [UPSC 2023]     Introduce the concept of Artificial Intelligence (AI). How does AI help clinical diagnosis? Do you perceive any threat to privacy of the individual in the use of AI in healthcare?
    Linkage: The PYQ examines AI’s applications and its implications for privacy and individual rights. The EU AI Act shows how risk-based AI regulation can address privacy, safety and accountability concerns.

    Mentor’s Comment

    The European Union Artificial Intelligence Act becoming applicable creates an opportunity for India’s technology services. Its compliance demands could generate work Indian firms can supply.

    What is the EU AI Act?

    1. Risk-based law: The European Union Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act regulates AI systems by risk category.
    2. Applicability: It came into force in 2024 and its key obligations apply from 2 August 2026.
    3. High-risk systems: These require a conformity assessment before deployment.
    4. Extraterritorial reach: The Act can apply to entities outside the EU when their AI systems or models are placed on the EU market, used in the EU, or affect people in the EU.

    Risk Categories

    1. Unacceptable risk: Systems like social scoring or manipulative/exploitative AI are completely banned.
    2. High risk: Critical sectors like biometrics, employment, and healthcare require rigorous data governance, logging, and conformity assessments.
    3. Transparency (Limited) risk: Chatbots and deepfakes must clearly disclose to users that they are interacting with AI or synthetic media.
    4. Minimal risk: Most everyday utilities like video games or spam filters face no mandatory rules.

    Why does the EU regulate AI?

    1. Fundamental rights: Prevent discrimination, manipulation and unlawful surveillance.
    2. Safety: Ensure reliable and safe deployment of high-risk AI.
    3. Transparency: Help users distinguish AI-generated content from human-generated content.
    4. Trust: Create a predictable regulatory environment for responsible AI adoption.

    Why does it challenge India’s IT model?

    1. Bespoke services: India’s IT-services firms build customised systems, and any “substantial modification” can trigger a fresh assessment.
    2. Compliance cost: Repeated conformity checks raise the cost of serving EU clients.
    3. Data governance: High-risk AI requires stronger data quality, traceability, record-keeping and governance, requiring firms to upgrade systems.
    4. Talent gap: Compliance requires professionals combining AI, law, cybersecurity, risk assessment and auditing skills.
    5. Shift in competitive advantage: India’s traditional cost-based IT model must evolve towards trusted, auditable and regulation-ready AI services.

    Where is the opportunity?

    1. Compliance services: Demand rises for legal, technical, and audit services to meet the Act.
    2. Notified bodies: The India-EU Free Trade Agreement could let Indian conformity assessment bodies be recognised as EU “notified bodies”.
    3. First-mover edge: Early compliance capability positions India as a preferred AI-services partner.
    4. AI Assurance: Indian firms can offer AI risk assessment, algorithmic auditing, testing, documentation and certification support to global clients.
    5. Compliance-by-design: Indian IT companies can build EU-compliant AI systems from the development stage, turning regulatory expertise into a new export advantage.

    What are the challenges to capturing the opportunity?

    1. Standards gap: India lacks a mature domestic AI conformity-assessment ecosystem.
    2. Mutual recognition: Recognition of Indian bodies depends on the FTA’s regulatory-cooperation terms.
    3. Talent: Specialised AI-audit skills are scarce.
    4. Regulatory clarity: India’s own AI governance framework is still evolving.

    Conclusion

    The Act raises compliance costs but also creates a services market India can serve. Capturing it depends on the India-EU FTA delivering mutual recognition of conformity assessment bodies.

  • Has the Supreme Court drifted from its environmental legacy?

    Why in the News

    A recent reflection has revisited the Supreme Court’s four-decade legacy of environmental jurisprudence. This raises questions over whether recent rulings are departing from its established environmental doctrines.

    What are the core doctrines of Indian environmental law?

    1. Absolute liability: An enterprise engaged in a hazardous activity is fully liable for harm, established after the Bhopal disaster.
    2. Polluter pays principle: The cost of pollution and remediation falls on the polluter.
    3. Precautionary principle: Lack of scientific certainty is no reason to defer measures against environmental harm.
    4. Public trust doctrine: The state holds natural resources as a trustee for the public.

    Where do these doctrines come from constitutionally?

    1. Article 48A: Directs the state to protect and improve the environment.
    2. Article 51A(g): Makes environmental protection a fundamental duty of citizens.
    3. 42nd Amendment, 1976: Inserted both provisions into the Constitution.
    4. Article 21: Read to include the right to a clean environment.

    What is the tension?

    1. Development pull: Recent rulings are read as leaning toward clearing infrastructure over precaution.
    2. Amnesty concern: Environmental amnesty for past violations is questioned as inconsistent with the polluter pays principle.
    3. Consistency critique: The Court is charged with applying its own doctrines unevenly across cases.

    Conclusion

    The central claim is that the Court built strong environmental doctrine but now applies it inconsistently. What remains unresolved is whether the Court restores precaution as the default in development disputes.

    Back2Basics

    Foundational Context: environmental jurisprudence in India

    1. Judicial origin: Much of Indian environmental law is judge-made through public interest litigation.
    2. Landmark cases: M.C. Mehta cases, Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum, and the Bhopal litigation shaped the doctrines.
    3. Sustainable development: The Court fused environmental protection with development as a constitutional balance.
    4. Expansion of Article 21: The Supreme Court progressively interpreted the right to life to include the right to a clean, healthy and pollution-free environment

    Landmark Cases

    1. M.C. Mehta cases: Developed principles of environmental liability and protection.
    2. Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996): Recognised the precautionary principle and polluter pays principle as essential features of sustainable development.
    3. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak, 1987): Established the doctrine of absolute liability.
    4. M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath (1997): Strengthened the public trust doctrine.

    PYQ Relevance

    “[2010] Sustainable development is described as the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. In this perspective, inherently the concept of sustainable development is intertwined with which of the following concepts?

    (a) Social Justice and Empowerment

    (b) Inclusive Growth

    (c) Globalization

    (d) Carrying capacity

  • Seven-judge Bench to weigh privileges against free speech

    Why in the News

    A seven-judge Constitution Bench will hear from 6 October 2026 whether legislative privileges override the freedom of speech. The reference revives a dispute from the 2003 attempt by the Tamil Nadu Assembly to arrest journalists over a critical editorial.

    What is the constitutional question?

    1. Privilege versus speech: Whether privileges under Article 194 can override Article 19(1)(a) free speech.
    2. Interplay of Articles: The case engages Articles 194(3), 19, and 21 together.
    3. Origin: It stems from a 2003 Assembly resolution to arrest newspaper journalists.

    What are legislative privileges?

    1. Definition: Special rights of a legislature and its members to function without external interference.
    2. Article 194: Grants privileges to state legislatures, mirroring Article 105 for Parliament.
    3. Uncodified: Privileges remain largely uncodified, drawing on British parliamentary practice.

    Why is the tension unresolved?

    1. Two rights collide: A legislature’s authority to punish for contempt sits against a citizen’s free speech.
    2. Judicial review scope: Whether courts can review a House’s exercise of privilege is itself disputed.
    3. Chilling effect: Broad privilege can deter press criticism of legislatures.

    “[2023, GS2, 10] Discuss the role of Presiding Officers of state legislatures in maintaining order and impartiality in conducting legislative work and in facilitating best democratic practices.”

    [2017] Which one of the following statements is correct?

    [A] Rights are absolute and can never be restricted by the State.

    [B] Rights are legally enforceable claims that individuals have against the State

    [C] Rights are privileges granted by the government that can be revoked at any time.

    [D] Rights are moral values that do not require legal protection.

  • FCRA Bill goes to a Joint Parliamentary Committee

    Why in the News

    The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026 was referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC). The referral has renewed attention on how parliamentary committees shape legislation.

    What is a Joint Parliamentary Committee?

    1. Ad hoc committee: A JPC is set up for a specific bill or inquiry and dissolves after it reports.
    2. Composition: Members are drawn from both Houses, in proportion to party strength.
    3. Recommendations: Its recommendations are advisory, not binding on the government.

    Why does the committee route matter?

    1. Scrutiny space: Committees allow detailed, less partisan examination away from the floor.
    2. Declining use: Bills referred to committees fell from about 71% in the 15th Lok Sabha to about 16% in the 17th.
    3. Delay lever: Referral can also defer a contentious bill.

    What is contested in the FCRA amendment?

    1. Foreign funding control: The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 governs foreign donations to NGOs and associations.
    2. Civil society concern: Tighter rules are opposed as constraining non-governmental organisations and religious bodies.

    Conclusion

    The referral subjects a contested bill to committee scrutiny without settling it. The current status is examination by the JPC, with its report the next milestone.

    Back2Basics: Parliamentary Committees

    1. Standing committees: Permanent bodies such as the Public Accounts Committee and departmental committees.
    2. Ad hoc committees: Temporary bodies such as a JPC or a Select Committee.
    3. Financial committees: Public Accounts Committee, Estimates Committee, and Committee on Public Undertakings.

    “[2023, GS2, 15] Explain the structure of the Parliamentary Committee system. How far have the financial committees helped in the institutionalization of Indian Parliament?”

    [2018] With reference to the Parliament of India, which of the following Parliamentary Committees scrutinizes and reports to the House whether the powers to make regulations, rules, sub-rules, by-laws etc. conferred by the constitution of delegated by the Parliament are being properly exercised by the Executive within the scope of such delegation ?

    (a) Committee on Government Assurances

    (b) Committee on Subordinate Legislation

    (c) Rules Committee

    (d) Business Advisory Committee

  • Can Parliament remove a judge who has resigned?

    Why in the News

    A parliamentary inquiry committee found all three charges proved against a former High Court judge, including failure to explain cash recovered from his residence and interference with evidence. The issue is whether the removal process can continue after his resignation.

    Removal of Judges: Constitutional Framework

    1. Article 124(4): Supreme Court judges can be removed only for proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
    2. Article 217: Deals with the tenure and removal of High Court judges.
    3. Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968: Provides the inquiry mechanism and formulation of charges.
    4. Parliamentary approval: Removal requires a special majority in each House, in the same session.
    5. Final step: After Parliament passes the address, the President issues the removal order.

    What did the Inquiry Committee Find?

    • All three charges were proved.
    • The judge failed to satisfactorily explain the cash recovered from his residence.
    • The committee found attempts to interfere with evidence.

    Key Constitutional Issue After Resignation

    • Removal is primarily linked to holding judicial office.
    • Resignation ends the judge’s tenure, creating a question about whether Parliament can still complete the removal process.
    • Possible consequences involving pension or future disqualification make the issue constitutionally significant.
    • There is no settled precedent on completing the removal process against a judge who has already resigned.

    Prelims Facts

    • Ground for removal → Proved misbehaviour or incapacity
    • High Court judge → Article 217
    • Supreme Court judge → Article 124
    • Inquiry procedure → Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968
    • Removal requires → Special majority in both Houses
    • Final removal order → President
    • Policy disagreement → Not a ground for removal
    • Historical fact → No Indian judge has so far been removed after completion of the parliamentary removal process.

    “[2025, GS2, 15] “Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike…” In view of the above observation of the Supreme Court, explain the concept of constitutional morality and its application to ensure balance between judicial independence and judicial accountability in India.”

    [2021] With reference to Indian Judiciary, consider the following statements:
    1. Any retired judge of the Supreme Court of India can be called back to sit and act as a Supreme Court judge by the Chief Justice of India with prior permission of the president of India.
    2. A High Court in India has the power to review its own judgement as the Supreme Court does.
    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

  • The constitutional limits on arrest, reaffirmed

    Why in the News

    An explainer revisits the constitutional limits on arrest after a 2025 Supreme Court ruling. It reaffirms that an arrested person must be meaningfully informed of the grounds of arrest.

    What does Article 22 guarantee on arrest?

    1. Grounds of arrest: Article 22(1) requires that grounds be communicated meaningfully, not as a formality.
    2. Legal counsel: The arrested person has the right to consult a lawyer of choice.
    3. Production before magistrate: Article 22(2) requires production within 24 hours of arrest.
    4. No prolonged custody: Continued detention beyond 24 hours requires Magistrate’s authorisation.
    5. Exception: These safeguards under Article 22(1) and 22(2) do not apply to enemy aliens and persons detained under preventive detention laws under Article 22(3).

    What did the recent ruling and precedents establish?

    1. Vihaan Kumar (2025): The Court held that failure to communicate grounds vitiates the arrest.
    2. Arnesh Kumar (2014): Arrest must be the exception for offences carrying up to seven years, not routine.
    3. D.K. Basu (1997): The Court prescribed safeguards including an arrest memo, informing relatives and medical examination to prevent custodial abuse.
    4. Arrest memo: Procedural safeguards require a documented arrest memo.

    What did the Supreme Court Rule in Vihaan Kumar Case?

    The judgment of the Supreme Court of India (Supreme Court) in the case of Vihan Kumar vs. State of Haryana (2025) marked a crucial milestone in protecting the fundamental rights of arrested persons.

    1. Mandatory information about the reasons for arrest: The Supreme Court has made it clear that the person arrested must be informed of the reasons for his arrest immediately. This is
      a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution.
    2. Arrest is invalid: If the accused is not informed of the reasons for the arrest, the arrest becomes illegal and unconstitutional.
    3. Cancellation of further proceedings: If fundamental rights are violated during the arrest process itself, subsequent remand orders issued by the courts or charge sheets filed by the police cannot rectify that mistake (Vitiated).
    4. Language awareness: The reasons for the arrest should be communicated in a language that the accused understands, and should not be a mere formality.

    Human rights and dignity (Article 21)

    1. Ban on shackles in hospitals: The Supreme Court has strongly condemned the practice of shackles and chains on Vihan Kumar when he was admitted to the hospital due to medical reasons.
    2. Right to Life: The court held that the right to live with dignity is part of Article 21 , and chaining the accused to a hospital bed falls under the category of human rights violation.

    How is preventive detention different?

    1. Without trial: Preventive detention permits custody without a charge to prevent an anticipated act.
    2. Advisory Board: Detention beyond three months requires review by an Advisory Board.
    3. Narrow safeguards: Several ordinary arrest protections under Article 22 do not apply to preventive detention.
    4. Preventive: Unlike ordinary detention, it is not punitive. It is intended to prevent an anticipated act prejudicial to specified interests.
    5. No 24-hour Magistrate requirement under Article 22(3).
    6. Grounds of detention must generally be communicated, subject to non-disclosure in public interest.

    What is the “Golden Triangle”?

    1. Articles 14, 19, 21: Together they form the core of personal liberty jurisprudence.
    2. Maneka Gandhi (1978): Established that a law depriving personal liberty must prescribe a procedure that is just, fair and reasonable.
    3. Article 22: Provides specific procedural safeguards against arbitrary arrest and detention, complementing the broader protection under Article 21.

    Conclusion

    The ruling restates settled safeguards and closes an enforcement gap on communicating arrest grounds. It sharpens the line between lawful arrest and arbitrary detention.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2023] “The Constitution of India is a living instrument with capabilities of enormous dynamism. It is a constitution made for a progressive society.” Illustrate with special reference to the expanding horizons of the right to life and personal liberty.

    Linkage: The PYQ examines the expanding scope of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. Arrest safeguards and preventive-detention limits show how judicial interpretation strengthens protection against arbitrary deprivation of liberty.

  • Anti-paper-leak law amended amid exam-integrity protests

    Why in the News

    The Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill, 2026 seeks to strengthen the 2024 law against organised cheating and examination paper leaks amid concerns over NEET and recruitment examination irregularities.

    What is the Public Examination Act, 2024?

    1. Objective: Criminalises organised cheating, paper leaks, impersonation and other unfair means.
    2. Coverage: Applies to major public examinations conducted by bodies such as UPSC, SSC and NTA.
    3. Penalties: Provides imprisonment and heavy fines for organised examination malpractice.
    4. Focus: Targets organised networks rather than genuine candidate errors.

    Why was it amended?

    • Exam-leak crisis: Repeated paper leaks and irregularities exposed weaknesses in examination governance.
    • Enforcement gaps: Strengthening was considered necessary after experience with the 2024 framework.
    • Public trust: Fair examinations are essential for merit-based recruitment and equal opportunity.

    What does the crisis reveal?

    • Aspiration-opportunity gap: Large numbers of candidates compete for limited government jobs.
    • Institutional trust deficit: Repeated leaks undermine confidence in recruitment institutions.
    • Governance challenge: Legal punishment alone cannot ensure examination integrity without secure technology, accountable agencies and speedy investigation.

    Prelims Pointers

    • Act: Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024
    • Ministry/Department: Department of Personnel and Training
    • Targets: Organised cheating, paper leaks and impersonation
    • Important distinction: The Act does not automatically cover all university or State board examinations unless the concerned government adopts the framework.

    “[2024, GS2, 15] What are the aims and objects of the recently passed and enforced, The Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024? Whether University/State Education Board examinations, too, are covered under the Act?”

    [2021] With reference to the Union Government, consider the following statements:
    1. N. Gopalaswamy Iyengar Committee suggested that a minister and a secretary be designated solely for pursuing the subject of administrative reform and promoting it.
    2. In 1970, the Department of Personnel was constituted on the recommendation of the Administrative Reforms Commission, 1966, and this was placed under the Prime Minister’s charge.
    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

  • Parliament clears renaming of Kerala to “Keralam”

    Why in the News

    Both Houses passed a Bill to rename Kerala as “Keralam”, its name in Malayalam. The change follows two resolutions of the Kerala Assembly and routes through the constitutional process for altering a state’s name.

    How is a state renamed under the Constitution?

    1. Parliament’s power: Under Article 3, Parliament can alter the name of a state by law.
    2. Presidential referral: Such a Bill needs the President’s recommendation and the views of the affected state legislature.
    3. Simple majority: The change is passed by ordinary legislative majority, not a constitutional amendment.

    Why “Keralam”?

    1. Linguistic identity: “Keralam” is the state’s name in Malayalam, and the change aligns official usage with local usage.
    2. Assembly resolutions: The Kerala Assembly twice sought the change unanimously.

    Why does the process matter?

    1. Union primacy: Only Parliament, not the state, can effect the legal renaming.
    2. Federal courtesy: The state legislature’s view is sought, but its resolution is not binding.

    Back2Basics: Article 3 of the Constitution

    1. Scope: Formation of new states and alteration of areas, boundaries, or names of existing states.
    2. Initiation: Only on the President’s recommendation, after seeking the state legislature’s views.
    3. Nature: Treated as an ordinary law, reflecting the “indestructible states” feature of Indian federalism.

    “[2022, GS1, 15] The political and administrative reorganization of states and territories has been a continuous ongoing process since the mid-nineteenth century. Discuss with examples.”

    [2025] Consider the following pairs :
    State:Description
    1. Arunachal Pradesh: The capital is named after a fort, and the state has two National Parks
    2. Nagaland: The State came into Existence on the basis of a Constitutional Amendment Act.
    3. Tripura: Initially a Part ‘C’ State, it became a centrally administered territory with the reorganization of State in 1956 and later attained the status of a full-fledged State
    How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?

    [A] Only one

    [B] Only two

    [C] All the three

    [D] None

  • Parliament curbs states’ power to tax minerals

    Why in the News

    Parliament passed the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026. It bars states from imposing specified levies on mineral rights except on terms set by the Centre, reopening a fiscal federalism dispute.

    What does the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2026 do?

    1. Levy restriction: States cannot impose specified taxes on mineral rights or mineral-bearing land except as the Centre prescribes.
    2. Dues extinguished: Pre-amendment dues estimated near 2 lakh crore rupees stand extinguished.
    3. Scope: The Bill applies to major minerals such as iron ore, coal, bauxite, manganese, and copper.

    Why is this a fiscal federalism flashpoint?

    1. 2024 ruling reversed in effect: The Supreme Court in 2024 upheld states’ power to tax mineral rights, which the Bill now constrains.
    2. Revenue dependence: Mining was 84.9% of Jharkhand’s non-tax revenue in 2024-25.
    3. Mineral-rich states hit: States holding large mineral reserves lose an expected revenue stream.

    What is the Centre’s justification?

    1. Uniform rates: The government argues uniform mineral rates prevent a patchwork of state levies.
    2. No revenue loss claim: The Centre states that states retain powers over minor minerals.
    3. Investment climate: Predictable levies are framed as protecting mining-sector investment.

    What are the major debates surrounding it?

    1. Tax versus royalty: The dispute turns on whether a levy on minerals is a tax or a royalty, which the 2024 ruling addressed.
    2. Tribal concerns: Mineral belts overlap with Scheduled Areas, raising questions of local benefit-sharing.
    3. Divisible resource control: Centralising mineral levies shifts fiscal power toward the Union.

    Conclusion

    The amendment centralises control over mineral taxation soon after the Supreme Court affirmed states’ taxing power. The immediate stage is enactment, with a likely constitutional challenge the next development.

    Back2Basics

    Constitutional Framework Governing mineral taxation

    1. Entry 50, State List: Taxes on mineral rights, subject to Parliament’s limitations relating to mineral development.
    2. Entry 54, Union List: Regulation of mines and mineral development declared expedient in public interest.
    3. Article 246: Distributes legislative power between Union and states via the Seventh Schedule.

    What did the Supreme Court hold in 2024?

    The Mineral Area Development Authority v. SAIL judgment is the constitutional backdrop to the 2026 amendment. The 9-judge Constitution Bench, by 8:1 majority, held that royalty is not a tax and that States have legislative competence to tax mineral rights under Entry 50, State List. It also recognised the States’ power to tax mineral-bearing land under Entry 49, State List.

    • Royalty ≠ Tax: Royalty paid under the MMDR Act is consideration for the right to extract minerals and is distinct from a tax.
    • State Taxing Power: States can impose taxes on mineral rights under Entry 50, List II, subject to limitations imposed by Parliament.
    • Mineral-Bearing Land: States can also levy taxes on land under Entry 49, List II.
    • MMDR Limitation: The Court held that the MMDR Act, as it then stood, did not impose a limitation on the States’ taxing power.

    Why is the 2026 Amendment significant?

    The 2026 amendment seeks to alter this position prospectively by restricting State taxation of mineral rights and mineral-bearing lands, except in accordance with conditions or restrictions prescribed by the Centre

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2025] Examine the evolving pattern of Centre-State financial relations in the context of planned development in India. How far have the recent reforms impacted the fiscal federalism in India?

    Linkage: The 2025 PYQ examines the evolution of Centre–State financial relations and their impact on fiscal federalism. The Bill raises fresh concerns over the Union’s role in restricting States’ mineral revenue powers and fiscal autonomy.

  • NITI Aayog wants manufacturing to move beyond assembly

    Why in the News?

    A NITI Aayog report titled Key Sectors to Position India as a Global Manufacturing Hub calls for deeper localisation and value addition across four sectors. It argues that India’s manufacturing remains stuck at assembly, with high import dependence for inputs.

    What does the report cover?

    1. Four focus sectors: Chemicals, telecom and networking equipment, textiles, and solar photovoltaic (PV).
    2. Central diagnosis: India assembles finished goods but imports the high-value inputs, capping domestic value addition.

    What are the sector-specific findings?

    1. Chemicals: The industry stood at $200-220 billion in FY25, roughly 3% to 3.5% of the global market, growing 6% to 8%.
    2. Textiles: About 80% of textile and apparel producers are MSMEs, limiting scale and technology adoption.
    3. Import reliance: Around 35% of mono-ethylene glycol, a key textile input, is imported.
    4. Solar PV: Domestic capacity depends on imported cells and wafers.

    Why does deeper localisation matter?

    1. Value capture: Assembly adds little domestic value, so moving up the chain raises incomes and jobs.
    2. Strategic resilience: Import dependence for inputs exposes India to supply shocks and price volatility.
    3. Trade balance: Substituting imported inputs narrows the manufacturing trade deficit.

    What are the challenges to a manufacturing hub strategy

    1. Scale deficit: An MSME-heavy base struggles to achieve globally competitive scale.
    2. Technology gap: Weak research and development limits movement into complex components.
    3. Logistics cost: High freight and power costs erode cost competitiveness.
    4. Skilling shortfall: A shortage of trained industrial labour slows productivity gains.
    5. Input ecosystem: Absence of a domestic supplier base for critical inputs keeps assembly dependent on imports.

    Conclusion

    The report reframes the manufacturing goal from output volume to domestic value addition. Its recommendations depend on building an input-supplier ecosystem, which the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme alone has not delivered.

    Back2Basics

    Government Initiatives for manufacturing

    1. Make in India: Umbrella programme to raise manufacturing’s share of GDP.
    2. Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme: Output-linked incentives across 14 sectors.
    3. National Manufacturing Mission: Announced to coordinate sectoral manufacturing push.
    4. MUDRA & Credit Guarantee Scheme: Improve access to institutional credit for MSMEs, supporting investment, expansion and employment generation.
    5. Semicon India Programme: Supports semiconductor fabrication, packaging and related ecosystems to build strategic manufacturing capabilities and reduce import dependence.

    Key Concepts

    Assembly vs. Value Addition

    1. Assembly-led model: Importing components and assembling finished products in India.
    2. Value-added manufacturing: Domestic production of components, intermediate goods, technology and final products.
    3. Key concern: High domestic output does not necessarily mean high domestic value capture.

    China+1 Strategy

    1. Global firms are diversifying supply chains beyond China.
    2. India can leverage this opportunity, but competitive costs, reliable infrastructure and deeper localisation are essential.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2025] Discuss the rationale of the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme. What are its achievements? In what way can the functioning and outcomes of the scheme be improved?

    Linkage: The 2025 PYQ examines the role and effectiveness of the PLI scheme in strengthening India’s manufacturing sector. The report highlights the need to move beyond assembly towards deeper localisation, domestic value addition and stronger supplier ecosystems.

More posts