The World Economic Forum (WEF) has announced the launch of an Essential Digital Infrastructure and Services Network (EDISON) Alliance.
The peculiarity of name ‘EDISON Alliance’ creates a hotspot here for prelims. UPSC may either crate confusion over purpose or parent organization. The alliance is yet to take shape completely; hence there is an ambiguity over its members.
EDISON Alliance
Geneva-based World Economic Forum (WEF), which describes itself as an international organization for public-private partnership, will serve as the secretariat and platform for the EDISON Alliance.
A wider group of ‘Champions Leaders’ will advise and support the Alliance, the WEF said while announcing the launch.
Alliance aims to work towards ensuring global and equitable access to the digital economy.
Its prime goal is to ensure an unprecedented level of cross-sectoral collaboration between the technology industry and other critical sectors of the economy, according to the WEF.
Why need such an alliance?
Access to digital technologies has enabled many to work, learn and live during the COVID-19 pandemic.
However, the pandemic has exposed and exacerbated existing gaps and inequalities in almost half of the global population.
Some 3.6 billion people, remain offline and broadband services are too expensive for 50 percent of the population in developed countries, the WEF said.
This hampers access to health, education, and economic inclusion.
The Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) has launched the National Marine Turtle Action Plan.
Do you know?
Most people use the term “turtle” to reference any reptile with a shell on its back, but there are several differences between these two unique creatures. In actual sense tortoises are turtles, but not all turtles are tortoises.
Tortoises have more rounded and domed shells where turtles have thinner, more water-dynamic shells. Turtle shells are more streamlined to aid in swimming. One major key difference is that tortoises spend most of their time on land and turtles are adapted for life spent in water.
National Marine Turtle Action Plan
Aim: To strengthen and sustain collective and collaborative sea turtle conservation through the monitoring of key sites and a network of partners in the Indian sub-continent
Project details
The project contains ways and means to not only promote inter-sectoral action for conservation but also guide improved coordination amongst the government, civil society and all relevant stakeholders.
It highlights actions to be taken for handling stranded animals on the shore, stranded or entangled animals in the sea or on a boat, reducing threats to marine species and their habitats, rehabilitation, etc.
Why need such a project?
India has rich marine biodiversity along a vast coastline of over 7,500 km.
It has significant nesting and feeding grounds for four species of marine turtles, namely leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), green (Chelonia mydas), hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) and olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea)
Even though all four species are listed under Schedule I of the Indian Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, their populations in the Indian waters are under threat.
Chad has become the first country to officially request a debt restructuring under a new common framework “G20 Common Framework” introduced by China and other Group of 20 countries last year with the help of the Paris Club.
What is G20 Common Framework?
G20 Common Framework is the Common Framework for Debt Treatments beyond the Debt Service Suspension Initiative (DSSI).
It was announced in November 2020 to deal with the issue of unsustainable debts faced by various countries as an impact of COVID-19.
What is the news?
This official request of Chad for debt restructuring under the G20 common framework was notified by the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
The creditors will now soon begin discussions on the first test of the new framework.
The creditors will also ask China and other private-sector creditors to participate as agreed last year.
A new four-year programme of Chad worth about $560 million under the Extended Credit and Extended Fund facilities was announced by IMF.
Chad is under high debt like many other African countries.
Significance of the move
This is the first time that a country has requested debt restructuring under the framework and the investors will now look at how the framework can work.
Participation in China is also a question. Last year, G20 Common Framework brought non-members of the Paris Club- India, China, and Turkey to join the framework.
Back2Basics: Paris Club
Paris Club is a club or group of officials from major creditor countries.
It was established in the year 1956.
It aims to find sustainable solutions to the difficulties faced by debtor countries in payments.
The article discusses the features in the fifth Science, Technology and Innovation policy and also suggests the areas that needs attention.
Draft Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy
The new policy envisages technological self-reliance and aims to position India among the top three scientific superpowers.
For that to happen, the draft policy says, we need to attract our best minds to remain in India by developing a people-centric science, technology, and innovation ecosystem.
It aims at doubling private sector’s contribution to the Gross Domestic Expenditure on Research and Development every five years.
Following are the highlights of the policy
1) Funding issue
Raising our R&D investment in science (about 0.6% now) to 2% of the GDP has been a national goal for a while.
Despite strong recommendations in the past by several scientific bodies and leading scientists and policymakers, we are still well short of that goal.
The 2020 draft policy blames this on “inadequate private sector investment” and adds that “a robust cohesive financial landscape remains at the core of creating an STI-driven Atmanirbhar Bharat.”
Government is trying to shift the responsibility of financing R&D to different agencies such as the States, private enterprises, and foreign multinational companies.
But it is doubtful if the various funding models that are presented are workable or practical, especially during a pandemic.
Private sector cannot be expected to pay for basic research as return on investment in basic research takes too long from a private sector perspective.
The fact is that basic science research in India is suffering from the lack of adequate funding despite grand proclamations.
We need to implement the self-financing revenue model proposed in the Dehradun Declaration for the CSIR labs back in 2015.
2) A decentralized institutional mechanism
Policymakers are considering alternative mechanisms of governance of the financial landscape.
The issue of the administrative burdens of researchers and the problem of journal paywalls is also being considered.
Policymakers are also exploring international best practices of grant management.
The draft policy visualises a decentralized institutional mechanism for a robust STI Governance.
This intention is in fact defeated in the document itself, where several new authorities, observatories and centres have been proposed.
Decentralisation of administrative architecture is essential, but we need to explore the practical option of providing more autonomy to research and academic centres for financial management.
3) Steps to tackle the discrimination
The number of suicides of students is on the increase in the IITs.
In 2019, more than 2,400 students dropped out from the 23 IITs in just two years, over half of them belonging to the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe and Other Backward Classes.
Caste discrimination could be one of the reasons for these tendencies.
As a part of inculcating an inclusive culture in academia, the document promises to tackle discriminations “based on gender, caste, religion, geography, language, disability and other exclusions and inequalities”.
It mentions more representation of women and the LGBTQ community.
Way forward
The document should prioritise important issues and amplify first the problems which have cultural and administrative dimensions.
The document does not mention how to stem the rot within, although it speaks extensively about science communication and scientific temperament.
There is need to facilitate an environment that encourages a mindset that constantly challenges conventional wisdom as well as open-minded inquiry among the students.
Consider the question “As India aspires to be the scientific superpower, suggest the areas which the new Science, Technology and Innovation policy should focus on”
Conclusion
With the advent of new disruptive technologies, global competitiveness will be increasingly determined by the quality of science and technology, which in turn will depend on raising the standard of Indian research/education centres and on the volume of R&D spending. India has no time to waste.
The third Decimate Prelims Open(free) Test 2021 has been scheduled for 31st Jan.
To help you understand your current preparation level before the start of our DECIMATE PRELIMS 2021 program three Free prelims tests were scheduled on 17th Jan, 24th Jan, and 31st Jan 2021.
If you haven’t attempted the first two tests yet, attempt them. Test solutions and explanations will be emailed to you as soon as you submit the test. Check your All India Ranking.
Quickly go through the solutions. Join us on this (click) Habitat group for the discussions and for doubts. We’ll discuss on how to proceed from there.
The article highlights the issues with the system of Budget presentation and suggest the areas to focus on.
Issues with expenditure and revenue estimates
Experience shows revenues being much less than the Budget projections: each year, this mistake is repeated and even amplified.
The expenditure estimates are even more disingenuous because they understate the actual expenditures that should be counted.
This concern has been repeatedly brought up by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG).
A CAG report in 2018 identified at least three methods of reducing the stated expenditure:
1) Not paying for the full fertilizer subsidy.
2) Not paying the central government’s dues to the Food Corporation of India (FCI) for the food subsidy, and forcing the FCI to borrow from the market.
3) Using other special purpose vehicles to pay for infrastructure investment, like the Long Term Irrigation Fund.
In 2017-18, just those three items amounted to ₹1,29,446 crore or 1.8% of GDP.
These strategies are problematic because they are non-transparent and they also force other agencies (like State governments and public sector enterprises) to go in for expensive commercial borrowing.
What CGA data reveals
The data from the Controller General of Accounts show that between April and November 2020, revenues of the central government predictably collapsed, by around 18%, or ₹181,372 crores, compared to the same period of the previous year.
But despite that, expenditures should have gone up, because the lockdown-induced collapse in an economic activity meant that public spending would be the only thing keeping the economy afloat.
In three rounds of stimulus packages government claimed to inject amounts of ₹1.7-lakh crore in March, ₹20-lakh crore in May, and then ₹2.65-lakh crore in November
However, the public accounts show that the total spending of the central government increased by only ₹86,301 crores.
That was only a 4.6% increase — not even enough to keep pace with inflation.
In other words, the central government reduced its real spending over the period of the pandemic and economic crisis.
This fiscal stance obviously affects people and also adds to contractionary tendencies in the economy, and prolongs the severe demand recession.
Policies that destroy informal economic activities eventually come to harm the formal enterprises as well.
Consider the question “There has been growing concerns that expenditure estimates presented in our Budget fail to represent the actual expenditure of the government. What are the reasons for that and how it could affect the reliability of government finances?”
Conclusion
The Budget this year needs to focus on moving to a more expansionary fiscal stance that prioritizes employment generation and public service provision.
The ongoing stand-off between the Union government and protesting farmers does not show any signs of a resolution at the moment. Farmers, especially in Punjab and Haryana, have been protesting against the three agriculture laws enacted by the central government.
The situation is extremely volatile since the farmers are determined not to leave Delhi and camp therein for months for further protests.
The Three Contentious Laws: A quick recap
(1) Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 2020:
It expands the scope of trade areas of farmers produce from select areas to “any place of production, collection, and aggregation”. It allows electronic trading and e-commerce of scheduled farmers’ produce.
It prohibits state governments from levying any market fee, cess or levy on farmers, traders, and electronic trading platforms for trade of farmers’ produce conducted in an ‘outside trade area’.
(2) Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020:
It creates a national framework for contract farming through an agreement between a farmer and a buyer before the production or rearing of any farm produce.
It provides farmers engaging with Agri-business firms, processors, wholesalers, exporters or large retailers for farm services and sale of future farming produce by a mutually agreed price framework.
(3) Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act 2020:
It allows for the center to regulate food items through essential commodities.
It also requires that imposition of any stock limit on agricultural produce be based on price rise
Agitators at the forefront
Farmers in Punjab and Haryana are known for their adamant attitudes. They are heavily dependent on public procurement and assured price through MSP. Nearly 88% of the paddy production and 70% of the wheat production in Punjab and Haryana (in 2017-18 and 2018-19) has been absorbed through public procurement.
Why are farmers fuming over these laws?
Image source: TOI
These bills sought to bring much-needed reforms in the agricultural marketing system. However, farmers are apprehensive that the free market philosophy supported by these bills could undermine the Minimum Support Price (MSP) system and make farmers vulnerable to market forces.
Let us look at all their concerns one by one:
(1) Fear against the end of Mandi System
The APMC regulates the mandi (marketplace) where farmers bring their produce, and therefore, guarantees that they receive the MSP.
Since the state governments will not be able to regulate the trade outside the APMC markets, farmers believe the laws will gradually end the mandi system and leave farmers at the mercy of corporates.
(2) Fear over MSPs and procurement guarantee
Farmers believe that dismantling the mandi system will bring an end to the assured procurement of their crops at MSP.
Similarly, farmers believe the price assurance legislation may offer protection to farmers against price exploitation, but will not prescribe the mechanism for price fixation.
They are demanding the government guarantee MSP in writing, or else the free hand given to private corporate houses will lead to their exploitation.
(3) Fear of Arhatiyas
The arhatiyas (commission agents) and farmers enjoy a friendship and bonding that goes back decades.
On an average, at least 50-100 farmers are attached with each arhatiyas, who takes care of farmers’ financial loans and ensures timely procurement and adequate prices for their crop.
Farmers believe the new laws will end their relationship with these agents and corporates will not be as sympathetic towards them in times of need.
(4) Fear over the end of subsidised electricity
Farmers concerns are also fuelled by the proposed Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2020 which might end their access to subsidised electricity.
The bill seeks to create an Electricity Contract Enforcement Authority (ECEA), a move aimed to further centralization.
Another concern is the transfer of subsidies through DBT. Farmers will have to pay first from their own pocket, after which they will get subsidies.
(5) Fear over Contract Farming
The FAPA Act formalizes contract cultivation through a “national framework” and explicitly prohibits any sponsor firm from acquiring the land of farmers through purchase, lease or mortgage.
But farmers fear over the big corporate players’ monopoly over food processing industry and its supply chain dynamics.
They fear that their ownership rights would be at risk as the Act provides for debt instruments for the companies which have their own recovery mechanisms.
(6) Fear over dispute resolution
The FAPA Act provided for a three-level dispute settlement mechanism by the conciliation board, Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Appellate Authority.
Since the highest level of appeal for the farmer against any private entity was the Appellate Authority, the farmer is effectively prevented from moving the Court.
Thus, they claim that the Act was highly skewed in favor of private entity as the individual farmers did not have the resources that private companies had.
(7) Fear over EC Amendment Act
The original EC Act de-regulated food items including cereals, pulses, potato, onion, edible oilseeds, and oils, and could only be regulated in the extraordinary circumstances.
The new law states that government regulation of stocks will be based on rising prices.
This stock-limiting puts farmers at the peril of the government and thus prevent them from making from any profit during any extra-ordinary circumstances as most of the time they only have to bear losses. (Ex. Onion farmers in Maharashtra).
What are the broader concerns?
Agriculture per se deals with everything that a farmer does — right from field preparation and cultivation to also the sale of his/her own produce.
(1) The centre has overreached
Article 246 of the Constitution places “agriculture” in entry 14 and “markets and fairs” in entry 28 of the State List.
But entry 42 of the Union List empowers the Centre to regulate “inter-State trade and commerce”.
While trade and commerce “within the State” are under entry 26 of the State List, it is subject to the provisions of entry 33 of the Concurrent List – under which the Centre can override.
The Centre, in other words, has passed a law that removes all impediments to both inter-and intra-state trade in farm produce, while also overriding the existing state APMC Acts. The FPTC Act does precisely that.
(2) States authority grossly surpassed
The act of primary sale at a mandi by the farmer is as much “agriculture” as production in the field.
“Trade” begins only after the product has been “marketed” by the farmer.
Going by this interpretation, the Centre is within its rights to frame laws that promote barrier-free trade of farm produce (inter-as well as intra-state) and do not allow stockholding or export restrictions.
But these can be only after the farmer has sold. Regulation of the first sale of agricultural produce is a “marketing” responsibility of the states, not the Centre.
(3) A totalitarian move
There is a debate around the constitutional provisions with regard to the respective domains of the State and the Union with regard to agricultural marketing,
However, issues affecting the farming community have a far greater bearing on the States relative to the Centre.
While enacting the Bills, the Centre extended little consideration to the sensitivity or consultations of the States who are busy fighting the pandemic this hour.
(4) Media insensitivity
Punjab and Haryana farmers have been at the forefront of this struggle and the other regions were slow to catch up.
The media terming it as a movement of ‘middlemen’ carried out by opposition parties and covertly supported by the ‘Khalistanis’ is the most distressing aspect.
This claim, for which no evidence has been offered, has been amplified by many news channels.
Wait! Before you make up your mind ….. Ever wonder, why did the govt intervene through these legislations?
(1) Flawed argument over MSP
These bills do not mention to do away with MSPs. Moreover APMCs have never assured that farmers get MSPs (which itself has no legal backings).
Over 80% of all land holdings were small and marginal with less than 2 hectares of farm land and hence, most of them, far from selling, end up buying food for even their own consumption.
In such cases, the rise in MSP actually hurts these farmers instead of helping them. The government assured price only helps a few large farmers.
(2) Food security is no more an issue
The roots of state intervention in agriculture, from government procurement to rationing and restrictions on private traders are to found in recurring food shortages in the period after Independence.
Many experts believe that these incentives are not needed today because India is a food-surplus country now.
This is what the current reforms seek to abolish. The sharp rise in India’s agriculture exports is often cited as evidence of this fact.
(3) An equalizing move for all
The average nutritional intakes in India are much lower than just developed countries and, the purported food surplus seems to be the result of inadequate food consumption due to affordability issues.
There still exists malnutrition as most of the public cannot afford good diets.
According to research by the International Food Policy Research Institute, 63.3% of people in rural India could not afford the Cost of a Recommended Diet (CoRD).
(4) Protesting farmers are better off than the rest
Data from a 2013 survey carried out by the National Statistical Office (NSO) shows that farmers from Punjab and Haryana had the highest incomes in the country.
The farmers who are protesting outside Delhi’s borders are among the richest among their peers in India.
A disproportional share in government procurement at MSP plays an important role in this.
States where there are no large-scale MSP operations tend to have lower prices in private markets as well. That incentivizes the richer farmers to lobby for the continuation of the status quo.
(5) Contract farming was a long pending issue
Contract farming in India has shown that marginal and small farmers are generally excluded.
The problems they face include the following- highly one-sided i.e. pro-contracting agency contracts, delayed payments, undue rejections and outright cheating among others.
Hence it was necessary for the govt. to bring legislation.
Much of government procurement at MSPs — of paddy, wheat and increasingly pulses, cotton, groundnut and mustard — happens in APMC mandis. In a scenario where more and more trading moves out of the APMCs, these regulated market yards will lose revenues. “They may not formally shut, but it would become like BSNL versus Jio. And if the government stops buying, we will be left with only the big corporates to sell to….
Govt and farmers at crossroads: A timeline
In its first term, the government was forced to retract its proposal to ease the 2014-15 land acquisition norms fearing a political backlash, following massive protests across the country. But the peace it bought with the farmers was short-lived.
Farmers’ angst in nooks and corners of rural India had been simmering, bursting out in spurts of violence like the one witnessed in Madhya Pradesh’s Mandsaur in 2017 where farmers were protesting, demanding loan waiver and higher crop prices.
This was followed by the 2018 farmers’ agitation in Maharashtra. Moved by the poor implementation of the loan waivers, thousands of farmers undertook a march from Nashik to Mumbai demanding redressal. Though then the government decided to fulfil the demands, it, however, retreated.
Why do farmers get on the streets?
It’s not that farmers’ agitation has picked pace only since 2014. But agriculture sector experts say farmers’ grievances have mostly remained unaddressed.
Rural distress has been on the rise, stoking farmers’ anger. Politics has added fuel, making a lethal cocktail.
Even though Punjab and Haryana are not as critical to the country’s food security as they were a few decades ago, they are extremely important in India’s farm economy.
Decades of high farm earnings also mean that the peasantry in these two states has much more in terms of material wherewithal to fight for its interests.
Therefore, the fact that the government’s attempts to undermine their interests by enacting the recent farm laws have triggered a sharp political backlash is hardly surprising.
What do they want?
Farmers would want no restrictions on the movement, stocking and export of their produce.
For example, Maharashtra’s onion growers have vehemently opposed the Centre’s resort to banning on exports and imposition of stock limits whenever retail prices have tended to go up.
But these restrictions relate to “trade”.
When it comes to “marketing” — especially dismantling of the monopoly of APMCs — farmers, especially in Punjab and Haryana, aren’t very convinced about the “freedom of choice to sell to anyone and anywhere” argument.
From the government’s standpoint, the elephant in the room would be if the farmers insist on an additional demand: Making MSP a legal right. That would be impossible to meet, even if the three farm laws get repealed.
What options does the government have?
While the farmers want the three farm laws to be repealed and a new law with a provision that ensures the MSP is not tinkered with, the government has maintained that MSP is not being done away with.
These may be just fears, but they aren’t small.
(1) Repealing the laws
Punjab farmer leaders, including two major political parties, demand repeal of these laws.
Overall, almost 90 per cent of the agri-produce is sold to the private sector. However, repealing would mean bringing back controls, licence raj and the resultant rent-seeking.
Milk, poultry, fishery, etc. don’t go through the mandi system and their growth rates are 3 to 5 times higher than that of wheat and rice.
(2) Legally enforcing the MSPs
Another demand is making the MSP statutory and legally binding even on the private sector.
This is impractical as there are 23 commodities for which MSPs are announced, but in actual practice only wheat and rice enjoy MSPs in any meaningful manner and that too only in 6-7 states.
The FCI is overloaded with grain stocks that are more than 2.5 times the buffer stock norms.
If the government cannot cope up with excess production of just wheat and rice in any meaningful way, think of how it will handle 23 commodities under MSP.
(3) Implementing Price Stabilization Scheme
The third policy option is to use the Price Stabilization Scheme to give a lift to market prices by pro-actively buying a part of the surplus whenever market prices crash.
Farmers can use Commodity Derivatives Exchanges where farmers can buy “put options” at MSP before they even sow their crops.
If the market prices at the time of harvest turn out to be below MSP, government can compensate them partly for lower market prices (which again aren’t feasible for the govt.)
(4) Decentralizing MSPs and other subsidies
Another option is to totally decentralize the MSP, procurement, stocking, and public distribution system (PDS).
The Centre can get off from MSP, PDS, fertilizer subsidy, and MGNREGA and let the states decide it.
So, the whole money on food subsidy can be allocated to states on the basis of their share in all-India poverty/proportion of vulnerable population.
A bigger challenge at the moment
Several farmers said that they had come prepared to dig in for a prolonged struggle.
Farmers are carrying ration that can last months and are in no mood to turn back. Any use of force by the state may lead to a major law and order disruption.
In the current situation, the police have already used water cannons and tear gas to disperse the agitated farmers — but both methods have failed.
This could lead to a severe law and order crisis.
Moreover, international voices are also rising on the credibility of the government to address the farmers concerns, which is not a healthy sign.
Way forward: Give reforms a chance
Reforms in agriculture have been overdue. There has been rhetoric in last 10 years in favour of agricultural but very few concrete steps have been taken.
One rhetoric is very clear now. The APMC mandis were never filled with good samaritans and neither is the MSP religiously enforced everywhere.
Just passing these laws won’t be enough. The success of liberalizing the farm market will hinge on effective implementation, constant monitoring and timely action.
Accelerating research and academic excellence could bring in the ‘best in class’ technologies and can multiply farmers’ incomes.
As far as the APMCs and commission agents are concerned, the governments should work on a clear roadmap to modernize them by facilitating them in providing value-added services.
They could be leveraged to set-up grading and sorting, warehousing, cold chains and food processing infrastructure. This way, it is a win-win-win for the state government, farmers and the commission agents.
While taking the control away from these agents, the government must also ensure that the gap is filled with foolproof mechanisms to ensure timely payments to farmers to avoid any cash crunch.
Don’t fear the competition
When we create competition for their produce, the price improves. There are more buyers, more choices. Farmers can reap the benefits of that.
The COVID-19 crisis opened a window of opportunity to reform the agri-marketing system. Patience and professionalism will bring rich rewards in due course, not noisy politics.
Conclusion
The governments must try to allay the fears of farmers over the Farm Bills and it is never too late to rethink. Unconditional talks with farmers would be an appropriate starting point.
There is genuine uncertainty over what private procurement will mean. Will it mean greater corporate power over farmers, possibly unhealthy monopolies or duopolies?
Leveraging the reforms and moving forward rather is the most feasible solution than to protest amid the pandemic.
What farmers need and are asking for is legally guaranteed remunerative prices. If the Bills are perceived of good intent, then the government should not shy away from proper parliamentary scrutiny of all its details.
Political parties that are opposing these Bills should coordinate better keeping farmers’ interests in the forefront, and not their party politics.
Ahead of the Budget, the article discusses the status of Indian economy and suggests the measures to be adopted in the budget to speed up the recovery.
Estimates of damages and signs of economic recovery
The first advance estimates of national income published on January 7 project a contraction of 7.7% for real GDP.
The Q2 GDP estimates published by the National Statistical Office had suggested an economic recovery in India.
An improvement in the rate of contraction from 23.9% in Q1 to 7.5% in Q2 was seen as the beginning of a sustained recovery.
The Ministry of Finance, in its Monthly Economic Review highlighted it as signifying a ‘V’ shaped recovery and as a reflection of the resilience and robustness of the Indian economy.
The Monetary Policy Statement of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) released on December 4, 2020 also projects positive growth in the remaining quarters of the financial year.
State of the economy before pandemic
Growth rate of the economy had collapsed from 8.2% in Q4 of 2017-18 to a mere 3.1% in Q4 of 2019-20, sliding continuously for eight quarters.
The policy stance against this backdrop was premised on the hope that private corporate investment will pick up momentum sooner than later.
The RBI did the heavy lifting through five consecutive lowering of repo rate along with liquidity infusion programmes.
However, monetary-fiscal linkages are crucial to catalyse the demand.
Crucial role played by the RBI
While being cautious of inflation, the RBI has decided to continue the accommodative stance in its latest monetary policy to support growth.
The CPI inflation after crossing 7% has cooled off to 4.6% in December.
Still, the real interest rates remain very low.
The efficacy of the new monetary framework (NMF) — the agreement between the RBI and Government of India in February 2016 to adopt inflation targeting in India — will be reviewed in March 2021, and we flag the need for revising the framework.
The RBI is continuing its liquidity infusion programmes including the on-tap Targeted Long Term Repo Operations (TLTRO).
This programme announced on October 9, 2020 for five stressed sectors has been extended to 26 stressed sectors notified under the Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme (ECLGS 2.0).
The RBI is also continuing its ‘operation twist’ with Open Market Operations (OMO) of ₹10,000 crore scheduled for December 17, 2020.
Nevertheless, the RBI Governor has rightly pointed out that the signs of recovery are far from being broad-based.
Stimulus for targeted state intervention
According to the International Monetary Fund’s Fiscal Monitor Database of Country Fiscal Measures, the fiscal stimulus for India is 1.8% of GDP.
The IMF, in its Fiscal Monitor, highlights the need to scale up public investment to ensure successful reopening, boost growth and prepare economies for the future.
What we need is stimulus not based on “business cycle” but from the perspective of much needed targeted state interventions in public health, education, agriculture and physical infrastructure, and to redress widening inequalities.
As private final consumption expenditure is sluggish, contracting 26.7% and 11% in Q1 and Q2, respectively, a “fiscal dominance” is expected in India for sustained economic recovery.
However, India cannot afford fiscal stimulus at the rates of advanced economies, due to a lack of fiscal space.
Way forward
Plummeting private corporate investment in India is a matter of concern.
The fear of financial crowding out emanating from high fiscal deficit is misplaced in the context of India.
Economic recovery will be determined by the degree of containment of the pandemic and the sustained macroeconomic policies.
Any abrupt withdrawal of ongoing economic policy support, both by the monetary and fiscal authorities, will be detrimental to growth in times of the pandemic.
The fiscal rules at the national and subnational government levels need to be made flexible.
Consider the question “Recovery of Indian economy battered by the pandemic has not been complete. Suggest the fiscal measure to be adopted by the government to speed up the recovery.”
Conclusion
The fiscal stimulus needs to continue in FY 2021-22 to speed up India’s recovery along with the measures suggested above.
The article highlights how climate change impacts the constitutional values and promises by affecting the vulnerable disproportionately and suggest the distinctly Indian paradigm of development.
How democratic values are threatened by climate change
Over the last seven decades, India has made distinct progress, but many core development challenges persist and we are yet to fulfill our constitutional promise.
Climate change will only exacerbate existing inequalities through a range of cascading and coinciding crises.
These words from the Preamble — justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity — serve as reminders of the daunting path to achieving social democracy, especially in a warming world.
B R Ambedkar had said that to maintain democracy not merely in form, but also in fact it was essential not to be content with mere political democracy but to strive for social democracy as well.
How climate change affects democratic values
Climate change is profoundly unjust.
It will increasingly impinge upon our freedom of movement, and that it could deny equality of status and opportunity to millions of disadvantaged citizens like the forest-dwelling communities who have contributed least to the crisis and yet stand to be hit the hardest.
The evidence is clear that unless we rapidly move to reduce planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions, vast swathes of India could be inhospitable due to floods, droughts, heatwaves, and increasingly erratic and unpredictable monsoon rains.
Call for action against climate change
The fraternity can particularly serve as a call to action for the powerful to direct their resources towards shaping India’s response to climate change and “assuring the dignity of the individual”, as framed in the Preamble.
Indian business and philanthropy can play a key role in building resilience by encouraging innovation, complementing the role of the state, and securing citizens’ legislated rights.
Climate philanthropy can help develop and pilot new solutions and inspire ambitious political action.
A plethora of opportunities are currently on the margins but could become mainstream drivers for the three key pillars of jobs, growth, and sustainability.
A distinctly Indian, climate-friendly development paradigm powered by clean energy could play an integral role in fosteringsocial and economic justice by uplifting millions of Indians.
Our nation’s welfare depends on healing the broken relationship between a broken economy and a broken ecology.
Constitutional mandate to protect the environment
The right to life enshrined in Article 21 is increasingly interpreted as a right to environment.
When this is read together with Articles 48A and 51A(g), there is a clear constitutional mandate to protect the environment that will only grow more important in the coming decades for citizens and the executive, legislature, and judiciary.
Central to these considerations is the need for a uniquely Indian climate narrative, one that is both by and for Indians.
Consider the question “Our constitutional values must guide us to a distinctly Indian, climate-friendly development paradigm to fulfil the constitutional commitment to its citizens. Comment.”
Conclusion
India can build its own pathway to become a climate leader aiming to secure a future where both people and nature can thrive. Much of this work can be rooted in the constitutional framework that binds together millions of Indians despite their myriad differences — a framework that is progressive in scope and ambitious in vision.
Noted Parliamentarians have filed a dissent to the Parliamentary Standing Committee’s report on DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill 2019.
Q. A statutory protection for private data is necessary for the enforcement of DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, 2019. Critically analyse.
What is the news?
The finalized Draft Report recognizes the potential dangers of indexing the DNA profiles of non- convicts, especially convicts and suspects, it has still retained these objectionable provisions.
These MPs have claimed that the Bill does not take into account public concerns over privacy violations and targets Dalit, Muslims and Adivasis by way of DNA sample collection.
The fear is that the law could be used for caste or community-based profiling.
Other issues
The bill would not be a panacea to the problems of an inadequate criminal justice system, the MPs stressed.
He flagged the example of the United Kingdom, where the number of crimes solved by DNA evidence had been reducing even though the number of profiles in the system was going up.
DNA Technology (Use and Application) Regulation Bill, 2019
The primary intended purpose for the enactment of the bill is for expanding the application of DNA-based forensic technologies to support and strengthen the justice delivery system of the country.
The utility of DNA based technologies for solving crimes, and identifying missing persons, is well recognized across the world.
Other aims include Speedier justice delivery and an Increased conviction rate.
Bill’s provisions will enable the cross-matching between persons reported missing and unidentified dead bodies found in various parts of the country, and also for establishing the identity of victims in mass disasters.
By providing for the mandatory accreditation and regulation of DNA laboratories, the Bill seeks to ensure the data remain protected from misuse or abuse in terms of the privacy rights of our citizens.
The Bill has two major components: the DNA databanks and the DNA Regulatory Board.
Criticisms of the Bill
Matter of Consent
Written consent is required from everyone for their DNA samples to be collected, processed, and included in the database except for those who have committed crimes with a punishment of 7+ years or death.
However, similarly, specific instruction is missing for the collection of DNA samples for civil matters.
Such matters include parentage disputes, emigration or immigration, and transplantation of human organs.
The Bill also doesn’t state that the consent has to be voluntary.
Civil Disputes
It is not clear if DNA samples collected to resolve civil disputes will also be stored in the databank (regional or national), although there is no index specific for the same.
If they will be stored, then the problem cascades because the Bill also does not provide for information, consent, and appeals.
If a person’s DNA data has entered the databank, there is no process specified by which they can have it removed.
All of these issues together could violate the right to privacy.
The authenticity of DNA Labs
There’s also the question of whether the DNA labs accredited by the Regulatory Board are allowed to store copies of the samples they analyze.
And if so, how the owners of those samples can ensure the data is safe or needs to be removed from their own indices.
It’s unclear if the Regulatory Board will oversee other tests performed at the accredited labs.
This could become necessary because, unlike one’s biometric data or PAN number, the human genome contains lots of information about every individual.
Overreaching access to identity
So a test undertaken to ascertain a person’s identity by analyzing her DNA will in the process also reveal a lot of other things about that person, including information about their ancestry i.e. information that the individual has a right to keep private.
The Bill does not specify which parts of an individual’s DNA can be analyzed to ascertain their identity.
The more parts are subjected to analysis, the more conclusively a person’s identity can be established.
But this can’t be used as a license to parse more than is necessary because then the DNA lab is also likely to reveal more information than it has the right to seek.
The way forward: Data protection
The bill can become oppressive without a robust data protection law.
Statutory protection for private data is critical because it provides a mechanism for enforcement of rights, grievance redressal, and independent oversight.
When the data being collected is as sensitive as DNA, it requires additional protection.
