China’s response is a ‘dual circulation’ strategy for self-reliance and military-technological prowess to surpass the U.S.
The global governance role of the U.S. is already reduced.
The U.S. now exercises power with others, not over them.
Despite its military ‘pivot’ to Asia, the U.S. needs India in the Quad, to counterbalance the spread of China’s influence through land-based trade links.
India, like others in the Quad, has not targeted China and also has deeper security ties with Russia.
With the ASEAN ‘code of conduct’ in the South China Sea, both the security and prosperity pillars of the U.S.-led Indo-Pacific construct will be adversely impacted.
Leveraging proven digital prowess to complement the infrastructure of China’s Belt and Road Initiative will win friends as countries value multi-polarity.
Atmanirbhar Bharat and Challenges
‘Atmanirbhar Bharat’ will leverage endogenous technological strength, data and population.
With the Rafale aircraft purchase, India has recognised that there will be no technology transfer for capital equipment.
Military Theatre Commands should be tasked with border defence giving the offensive role to cyber, missile and special forces based on endogenous capacity, effectively linking economic and military strength.
The overriding priority should be infrastructure including electricity and fibre optic connectivity; self-reliance in semiconductors, electric batteries and solar panels; and skill development.
Conclusion
There are compelling geopolitical and economic reasons for shaping the building blocks of the Asia-led order, which is not yet China-led, to secure an ‘Atmanirbhar Bharat’, and place in the emerging triumvirate.
The Gulf region offers new possibilities of cooperation to India. The article explains these possibilities.
Context
External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar’s visit to Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates recently is a good moment to reflect on the structural changes taking place in the Gulf and the region’s growing influence in the Indian Ocean.
Issues in approach towards the region
For decades, India’s mercantilism saw the Gulf as a source of oil and a destination for labour exports.
India’s bureaucratic approach to the Gulf was incapable of a political engagement with the region’s interests.
The Indian elite has long viewed the Gulf as a collection of extractive petro-states run by conservative feudatories.
Although the Gulf kingdoms were eager to build strong and independent political ties with India without a reference to Islamabad, India viewed them through the prism of Pakistan.
Influence in the Indian Ocean
Delhi’s traditional focus in the Indian Ocean was riveted on Mauritius and the large Indian diaspora there.
P.M.s visit to Mauritius and Seychelles in March 2015 saw the articulation of a long-overdue Indian Ocean policy and an acknowledgement of the strategic significance of the island states.
Since then, India has brought Madagascar and Comoros along with Mauritius and Seychelles into the Indian Ocean Division.
India also unveiled a maritime strategic partnership with France, a resident and influential power in the Western Indian Ocean.
Earlier this year, Delhi became an observer at the Indian Ocean Commission — the regional grouping that brings France’s island territory of Reunion together with Comoros, Madagascar, Mauritius, and Seychelles.
India has also become an observer to the Djibouti Code of Conduct — a regional framework for cooperation against piracy between the states of the Gulf, the Horn of Africa and East Africa.
5 Areas of new possibilities with the Gulf
1) Protecting India’s interests
First is the immediate need to shield India’s interests in the post-pandemic turbulence that is enveloping the region.
As the Gulf considers cutting back on foreign labour, Delhi would want to make sure its workers in the region are insulated.
Delhi is also eager to improve the working conditions of its large labour force — close to eight million — in the Gulf.
2) New and long-term economic cooperation
As the Gulf looks at a future beyond oil, they have embarked on massive economic diversification and are investing in a variety of new projects including renewable energy, higher education.
India must get its businesses to focus on the range of new opportunities in the Gulf.
India also needs to tap into the full possibilities of Gulf capital for its own economic development.
3) Financial power translating into political influence
The Gulf’s financial power is increasingly translating into political influence shaping political narrative in the Middle East.
The influence has been manifest in their successful transformation of the debate on Arab relations with Israel.
4) Influence on regional conflicts
The Gulf’s ability to influence regional conflicts from Afghanistan to Lebanon and from Libya to Somalia has increased.
The Gulf today delivers economic and security assistance to friendly states.
The UAE currently chairs the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) and has been eager to work with India in developing joint infrastructure projects.
India needs to bring scale and depth to its regional initiatives on connectivity and security in the Indian Ocean.
5) Reforms taking place in the region
The Gulf seek to reduce the heavy hand of religion on social life, expand the rights of women, widen religious freedoms, promote tolerance, and develop a national identity that is not tied exclusively to religion.
The UAE has been the leader in this regard.
Consider the question “India’s engagement with the Gulf countries has been limited in several aspects. However, the region offers new possibilities of strategic and cooperation to India. Evaluate these possibilities.”
Conclusion
As India seeks to recalibrate it’s ties with the Gulf, the real challenge for South Block is to get the rest of the Indian establishment to discard outdated perceptions of the Gulf and seize the new strategic possibilities with the region.
Reviews will be provided in a week. (In the order of submission- First come first serve basis). In case the answer is submitted late the review period may get extended to two weeks.
*In case your answer is not reviewed in a week, reply to your answer saying *NOT CHECKED*. If Parth Sir’s tag is available then tag him.
For the philosophy of AWE and payment, check here: Click2Join
China is preparing to launch an unmanned spacecraft to bring back lunar rocks, the first attempt by any nation to retrieve samples from the moon in four decades.
Try this PYQ:
Q.What do you understand by the term Aitken basin:
(a) It is a desert in the southern Chile which is known to be the only location on earth where no rainfall takes place
(b) It is an impact crater on the far side of the Moon
(c) It is a Pacific coast basin, which is known to house large amounts of oil and gas
(d) It is a deep hyper saline anoxic basin where no aquatic animals are found
Chang’e-5 Probe
The Chang’e-5 probe, named after the mythical Chinese moon goddess, aims to shovel up lunar rocks and soil to help scientists learn about the moon’s origins, formation and volcanic activity on its surface.
The goal of the mission is to land in the Mons Rumker region of the moon, where it will operate for one lunar day, which is two weeks long.
It will collect 2 kg of surface material from a previously unexplored area known as Oceanus Procellarum — or “Ocean of Storms” — which consist of vast lava plain.
The original mission, planned for 2017, was delayed due to an engine failure in China’s Long March 5 launch rocket.
If successful, China will be only the third country to have retrieved samples from the moon, following the U.S. and the Soviet Union in the 1960s and 1970s.
Significance of the mission
As per the Lunar and Planetary Institute, rocks found on the Moon are older than any that have been found on Earth and therefore they are valuable in providing information about the Earth and the Moon’s shared history.
Lunar samples can help to unravel some important questions in lunar science and astronomy, including the Moon’s age, its formation, the similarities and differences between the Earth and the Moon’s geologic features.
For instance, the shape, size, arrangement and composition of individual grains and crystals in a rock can tell scientists about its history, while the radioactive clock can tell them the rock’s age.
Further, tiny cracks in rocks can tell them about the radiation history of the Sun in the last 100,000 years.
A developing cyclonic disturbance in the Bay of Bengal is expected to become a ‘severe cyclonic storm’ and make landfall in Tamil Nadu.
Cyclone Nivar
The IMD has forecasted the development of a cyclone in the Southwest region of the Bay of Bengal, off Tamil Nadu coast.
It has said that it will strengthen into a cyclone. Once intensified, it would acquire its name ‘Nivar’, proposed by Iran.
After cyclone Gaja in 2018, this will be the second cyclone to cross Tamil Nadu in the last two years.
Try this PYQ:
In the South Atlantic and South-Eastern Pacific regions in tropical latitudes, cyclone does not originate. What is the reason?
(a) Sea surface temperatures are low
(b) Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone seldom occurs
(c) Coriolis force is too weak
(d) Absence of land in those regions
Tropical Cyclone
A Tropical cyclone is an intense circular storm that originates over warm tropical oceans and is characterized by low atmospheric pressure, high winds, and heavy rain.
Cyclones are formed over slightly warm ocean waters. The temperature of the top layer of the sea, up to a depth of about 60 meters, need to be at least 28°C to support the formation of a cyclone.
This explains why the April-May and October-December periods are conducive for cyclones.
Then, the low level of air above the waters needs to have an ‘anticlockwise’ rotation (in the northern hemisphere; clockwise in the southern hemisphere).
During these periods, there is an ITCZ in the Bay of Bengal whose southern boundary experiences winds from west to east, while the northern boundary has winds flowing east to west.
Once formed, cyclones in this area usually move northwest. As it travels over the sea, the cyclone gathers more moist air from the warm sea which adds to its heft.
The Italian Culture Ministry announced the discovery of well-preserved remains of two men, who perished during the volcanic eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 AD.
Try this PYQ:
Q.Consider the following statements:
The Barren Island volcano is an active volcano located in the Indian Territory.
Barren Island lies about 140 km east of Great Nicobar.
The last time the Barren Island volcano erupted was in 1991 and it has remained inactive since then.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 3 only
(d) 1 and 3 only
Mount Vesuvius
Located in southern Italy near the coastal city of Naples, the 4,203-ft (1,281 metres) tall Vesuvius is the only active volcano in mainland Europe.
Vesuvius has been classified as a complex volcano (also called a compound volcano), one that consists of a complex of two or more vents.
It typically has explosive eruptions and pyroclastic flows –– defined as a high-density mix of hot lava blocks, pumice, ash and volcanic gas.
It has erupted more than 50 times and is considered among the most dangerous volcanoes in the world due to its proximity to Naples and surrounding towns.
Its last serious eruption, lasting two weeks, was in 1944 during World War II, which left 26 Italian civilians dead and around 12,000 displaced.
The eruption of 79 AD
In 79 AD, the Roman Empire-era sister cities of Pompeii and Herculaneum were destroyed and buried during a catastrophic eruption of Vesuvius.
It was a catastrophic event that destroyed the ancient Roman city of Pompeii and killed around 16,000 people.
Pompeii, 8 km away from Vesuvius, served as a resort town on the Bay of Naples for Rome’s elite citizens, consisting of villas, cafes, marketplaces and a 20,000-seat arena.
In 63 AD, a major earthquake rattled the city, serving as a warning for the eruption to come. However, few residents bothered to abandon the region, known for its volatility.
India’s decision to stay out of the China-backed Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, or RCEP, Asia’s mega free-trade agreement (FTA), has been met both with a sense of approval and disappointment and divided economists on the issue.
Context
Last week, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) was signed by 15 countries led by China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and the 10-country ASEAN group.
It is billed as one of the world’s largest Free Trade Agreement (FTA), accounting for nearly 30% of the global GDP covering 30% of the world’s population.
After long negotiations, India exited the grouping last November, saying it wanted to protect its economy from rising trade deficits with a number of RCEP members.
India’s decision is still the subject of much debate, and the RCEP has left a special window open for India to rejoin at a future date.
Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is a free trade agreement (FTA) between –
The 10 members of ASEAN = Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam
Additional members of ASEAN +3 = China, Japan, South Korea
Members with which ASEAN countries have FTA = Australia, New Zealand
What is the objective of RCEP?
RCEP aims to create an integrated market with 15 countries, making it easier for products and services of each of these countries to be available across this region.
The negotiations are focused on the following:
Trade in goods and services, investment, intellectual property, dispute settlement, e-commerce, small and medium enterprises, and economic cooperation.
China in RCEP
RCEP was pushed by Beijing in 2012 in order to counter another FTA that was in the works at the time: The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
The US-led TPP excluded China. However, in 2016 US President Donald Trump withdrew his country from the TPP.
Since then, the RCEP has become a major tool for China to counter the US efforts to prevent trade with Beijing.
Significance for China
The beginning of RCEP is a major development that will help China and trade in the Asia-Pacific region in the post-Covid-19 scenario.
It will give China access to Japanese and South Korean markets in a big way, as the three countries have not yet agreed on their FTA.
While China already has a number of bilateral trade agreements, this is the first time it has signed up to a regional multilateral trade pact.
RCEP and India
India ended negotiation on RCEP over terms that were perceived to be against its interests.
The ties with China in recent months have been disturbed by the military tension in eastern Ladakh along the LAC.
In the meantime, India has also held a maritime exercise with Japan, Australia, and the United States for the “Quad” that was interpreted as an anti-China move.
Why did India walk out?
India decided to exit RCEP negotiations over “significant outstanding issues”.
Its decision was to safeguard the interests of industries like agriculture and dairy and to give an advantage to the country’s services sector.
The current structure of RCEP still does not address these issues and concerns.
(1) Escalated tensions with China
Escalated tension with China is considered to be a major reason for India’s decision.
Major issues that were unresolved during RCEP negotiations were related to the exposure that India would have to China.
(2) Surge in imports
This included India’s fears that there was “inadequate” protection against surges in imports.
It felt there could also be a possible circumvention of rules of origin— the criteria used to determine the national source of a product.
In the absence of this, other partner countries could dump their products by routing them through other countries that enjoyed lower tariffs.
(3) Rules of origin criteria
Its concerns on a “possible circumvention” of rules of origin — the criteria used to determine the national source of a product — were also not addressed.
Current provisions in the deal reportedly do not prevent countries from routing, through other countries, products on which India would maintain higher tariffs.
This is anticipated to allow countries like China to pump in more products.
(4) Inability for countermeasures
India was unable to ensure countermeasures like an auto-trigger mechanism to raise tariffs on products when their imports crossed a certain threshold.
It also wanted RCEP to exclude most-favoured-nation (MFN) obligations from the investment, especially to countries with which it has border disputes.
(5) No assurance of market access to India
RCEP also lacked clear assurance over market access issues in countries such as China and non-tariff barriers on Indian companies.
The agreement would have forced India to extend benefits given to other countries for sensitive sectors like defence to all RCEP members.
(6) Trade balances paradox
India’s stance on the deal also comes as a result of learnings from unfavourable trade balances that it has with several RCEP members, with some of which it even has Free Trade Agreements.
Taking the current scenario, India only exports 20% to the RCEP countries, while the import is accounted for 35%.
Furthermore, RCEP members like China are well known for using non-tariff barriers against Indian products in the past, preventing India from growing its export to these countries.
(7) Protecting domestic industries
Several sections of the Indian industry have raised concerns over RCEP.
They have argued that some domestic sectors may take a hit due to cheaper alternatives from other participant countries.
For instance, the dairy industry was expected to face stiff competition from Australia and New Zealand. Similarly, steel and textiles sectors have also demanded protection.
The global hoax of FTAs
Our External Affairs Minister has inferred that the mantra of an open and globalised economy was used to justify unfair trade and production practices against India.
In the name of openness, we have allowed subsidised products and unfair production advantages from abroad to prevail.
The effect of past trade agreements has been to de-industrialize some sectors, said EAM without mentioning RCEP directly.
The consequences of future ones would lock us into global commitments, many of them not to our advantage.
Gains from opting out
India comprises half of the world population and accounts for nearly 40% of global commerce and 35% of the GDP. Without India, the RCEP does not look as attractive as it had seemed during negotiations.
(1) A Diplomatic win
ASEAN has been keen on a diversified portfolio so that member states can deal with major powers and maintain their strategic autonomy. Without India, the ASEAN has no major partner except China.
India signalled that, despite the costs, China’s rise has to be tackled both politically and economically.
(2) Not becoming China’s dumping ground
China provides enormous subsidies to its domestic products and goods. Consequently, this makes it vulnerable to the Indian market which becomes a dumping station.
China also needs greater access to the Indian market as Chinese companies have been suffering because of the US-China trade war that affected Chinese manufacturing companies in the past 2 years.
So, it could have proven to be a detriment to the Make in India initiative.
(3) Relief for Indian Farmers
Farmers opine that RCEP deal could have aggravated the agrarian crisis.
The input prices are heavily taxed in India and thus the Indian farmers are not being provided with the profitable prices which result in significant losses and also throwing farmers into a debt trap.
India after green revolution emerged as a self-sufficient country in agricultural product. It could have brought India’s ‘food sovereignty’ at stake as opening markets.
Limited benefits that RCEP would have offered
(1) Boosting the existing ties
Clubbing with the ASEAN has always been a principal policy priority for India’s Act East Policy.
The RCEP agreement would have complimented India’s existing FTAs with the ASEAN and some of its member countries.
It would have also helped achieve its goal of greater economic integration with countries East and South East of India through better access to a vast regional market ranging from Japan to Australia.
(2) Expansion of services sector
The RCEP would have created opportunities for Indian companies to access new markets.
India is well placed to contribute to other countries in RCEP through its expertise in services.
(3) Counterbalancing China
Both geopolitically and geo-economically, China now looks set to dominate the Indo-Pacific.
India’s allies in Southeast Asia, as well as Australia, wanted India to join it to balance China.
Some of these are founded on opacity that surrounds the Chinese government’s decision making.
Wait! Did we miss the bus?
(1) Capturing Foreign Markets
Trade with RCEP nations was a chance for Indian service, IT, health and education sectors to prove its leverage. That is to say, India’s service sector had huge export potential in RCEP.
‘Rules of origin’ could have also provided a possible chance for India to become a major hub in coordinating with the regional partners and establishing a trustable value chain.
(2) Could have helped boost exports
Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) has called for signing RCEP agreement, as India could have also served as a major market for final good.
RCEP could have helped India in further export to the 3rd world nations, and primarily to West Asia, Africa and few European countries.
(3) Isolation from global value chain
India’s absence in integrating with global value chains will impact India’s internal and external ambitions.
India’s own evidence shows that jobs linked to global value chains earn one-third more than those jobs focused on the domestic market.
The inability to accede to the RCEP and ensure India’s integration into these emerging global value chains means India will lose out on a key opportunity to create such high-quality, high-paying jobs.
Moreover, India’s absence in both of Asia’s two key economic architectures will take away from India’s goals as a regional and Indo-Pacific power, as well as a prospective global power.
(4) Missed opportunity with ASEAN
The large size of the Indian economy and its negotiating heft would pose a valuable counterpoint to China within the grouping.
Several RCEP countries still hope India will reconsider its decision of staying out.
For ASEAN countries that led the RCEP negotiations, India’s presence would provide weight to the centrality of the ASEAN grouping in the region.
It is for this reason that Japan led the drafting of the special statement on India, which would waive the 18-month mandatory waiting period if India applied formally to rejoin the group.
Why should India review its decision?
The COVID-19 pandemic has left the global economy in a state of disarray. For the first time in 60 years, nearly every country in the RCEP grouping is facing a recession.
(1) For a speedy economic recovery
With global trade and the economy facing a steep decline due to Covid-19 pandemic, RCEP could serve as a bulwark in containing the free fall of the global economy and re-energizing economic activity.
Further, the RCEP presents a unique opportunity to support India’s economic recovery, inclusive development and immediate job creation even as it helps strengthen regional supply chains.
(2) Rhetoric vs reality
While deficits have increased for India in all foreign trade, India’s FTAs or PTAs (Preferential Trade Agreements) do not account for a bigger chunk of the trade deficit than they did before.
The growing trade deficits come from the downturn in India’s GDP since 2016, and the decline in manufacturing.
It is said that imports from China would have flooded had India entered RCEP, but haven’t they already flooded the country?
(3) Learning from allies
In this regard, India can draw inspiration from Japan & Australia, India’s Quad partners.
They chose to bury their geopolitical differences with China to prioritize what they collectively see as a mutually beneficial trading compact.
(4) Balancing the block
It is not just because gains from trade are significant, but the RCEP’s membership is a prerequisite to having a say in shaping RCEP’s rules.
This is necessary to safeguard India’s interests and the interests of several countries that are too small to stand up to the largest member, China.
(5) China is too big to defeat
Even before the RCEP, China was an important player in regional trade and regional supply chains, and RCEP made its position stronger.
Interestingly, even with the Covid-19 pandemic, other countries went ahead and signed the RCEP agreement without India.
China now has an advantage vis-a-vis India in the 14 markets of RCEP. It also has more bilateral agreements in the region than India.
(6) Doing away with Protectionism
It has been argued that Indian industry has hidden behind a wall of protectionism for far too long, and must open itself to global competition.
There is a tendency in Indian industry to seek protection, whenever any steps towards globalization are taken.
However, it is an acknowledged fact that globalization did benefit the Indian economy; it brought in newer technology and made Indian industry far more competitive.
Way forward
India, as an original negotiating participant of RCEP, has the option of joining the agreement without having to wait 18 months as stipulated for new members in the terms of the pact.
A possible alternative for India is to review its existing bilateral FTAs with some of these RCEP members as well as newer agreements with potential for Indian exports.
There is also a growing view that it would serve India’s interest to invest strongly in negotiating bilateral agreements with the US and the EU, both currently a work in progress.
Nor is the problem only China, because India has a trade deficit with virtually every country in the Asia-Pacific.
The problem is a broader one, of India’s competitiveness, which has to be improved so that opening up leads to more benefits than costs, to industrialisation and not it’s opposite.
Conclusion
Economic isolation can never be a not an option for India. It does not seem a good idea for India to be out of the agreement from its inception, only to join it later.
Given India’s own ambitions to generate growth and jobs within India, and becoming a key player and rule-maker on the world stage, India’s decision to withdraw from the RCEP is debatable.
India must now translate this withdrawal into a commitment for domestic reforms to prepare itself for the next opportunity to integrate itself into the global value chains and unleash Indian manufacturing.
However, having no deal is far more prudent than signing up for a bad one.
It is easy to succumb to the rapturous sound of global applause, but far tougher to make a tactical retreat in the larger national interest.
As India and China continue to grow demographically as well as economically amid increased consumption among its citizenry, both nations face water constraints.
China, which is home to close to 20 per cent of the world’s population, has only 7 per cent of its water resources.
Severe pollution of its surface and groundwater caused by rapid industrialisation is a source of concern for Chinese planners.
China’s southern regions are water-rich in comparison to the water-stressed northern part.
The southern region is a major food producer and has significant industrial capacity as a consequence of more people living there.
India is severely water-stressed as well.
Similar to China, India has 17 per cent of the world’s population and 4 per cent of water.
As in China, an equally ambitious north-south river-linking project has been proposed in India.
Impact on downstream states
The construction of several dams along the Yarlung (Brahmaputra) river on the Chinese side has been a repeated cause for concern for Indian officials and the local people.
China has an ambitious plan to link its south and north through canals, aqueducts and linking of major rivers to ensure water security.
In pursuit of these goals, China, being an upper riparian state in Asia, has been blocking rivers like the Mekong and its tributaries, affecting Southeast Asian countries like Thailand, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.
It has caused immense damage to the environment and altered river flows in the region.
China sees these projects as a continuation of their historic tributary system as the smaller states have no means of effectively resisting or even significant leverage in negotiations.
Challenges for India
There are now multiple operational dams in the Yarlung Tsangpo basin with more dams commissioned and under construction. These constructions present a unique challenge for Indian planners.
1) Dams will eventually lead to degradation of the entire basin:
Silt carried by the river would get blocked by dams leading to a fall in the quality of soil and eventual reduction in agricultural productivity.
2) The Brahmaputra basin is one of the world’s most ecologically sensitive zones.
It is identified as one of the world’s 34 biological hotspots.
This region sees several species of flora and fauna that are endemic to only this part of the world.
The river itself is home to the Gangetic river dolphin, which is listed as critically endangered.
3) The location of the dams in the Himalayas pose a risk.
Seismologists consider the Himalayas as most vulnerable to earthquakes and seismic activity.
The sheer size of the infrastructure projects undertaken by China, and increasingly by India, poses a significant threat to the populations living downstream.
Close to a million people live in the Brahmaputra basin in India and tens of millions further downstream in Bangladesh.
4) Damming Brahmaputra would result in water security in an era of unprecedented shifting climate patterns.
This security extends beyond water, as there is the potential to significantly change the flow rate during times of standoffs and high tensions.
Way forward
Both sides must cease new constructions on the river and commit to potentially less destructive solutions.
Building a decentralised network of check dams, rain-capturing lakes and using traditional means of water capture have shown effective results in restoring the ecological balance while supporting the populations of the regions in a sustainable manner.
Conclusion
There are alternate solutions to solving the water crisis. It is in the interest of all stakeholders to neutralise this ticking water bomb.
Agriculture’s contribution to air pollution runs deeper than what happens between crop seasons.
The Indo-Gangetic plain is also one of the world’s largest and rapidly-growing ammonia hotspots.
Atmospheric ammonia, which comes from fertiliser use, animal husbandry, and other agricultural practices, combines with emissions from power plants, transportation and other fossil-fuel burning to form fine particles.
Impact of pollution on agriculture
It is important to note that agriculture is a victim of pollution as well as its perpetrator.
Particulate matter and ground-level ozone formed from industrial, power plant, and transportation emissions among other ingredients cause double-digit losses in crop yields.
Ozone damages plant cells, handicapping photosynthesis, while particulate matter dims the sunlight that reaches crops.
Agriculture scientist Tony Fischer’s 2019 estimates of the two pollutants’ combined effect suggest that as much as 30 per cent of India’s wheat yield is missing (Sage Journals, Outlook on Agriculture).
Earlier, B Sinha et al (2015), in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions, found that high ozone levels in parts of Haryana and Punjab could diminish rice yields by a quarter and cotton by half.
Role played by subsidies
The current system of subsidies is a big reason that there is stubble on these fields in the first place.
Free power — and consequently, “free” water, pumped from the ground — is a big part of what makes growing rice in these areas attractive.
Open-ended procurement of paddy, despite the bulging stocks of grains with the Food Corporation of India, adds to the incentives.
Subsidies account for almost 15 per cent of the value of rice being produced in Punjab-Haryana belt.
Fertiliser, particularly urea in granular form, is highly subsidised.
It is one of the cheapest forms of nitrogen-based fertiliser, easy to store and easy to transport, but it is also one of the first to “volatilise,” or release ammonia into the air.
This loss of nitrogen then leads to a cycle of more and more fertiliser being applied to get the intended benefits for crops.
Way forward
We need to shift the nature of support to farmers from input subsidies to investment subsidies.
This could involve the conversion of paddy areas in this belt to orchards with drip irrigation, vegetables, corn, cotton, pulses and oilseeds.
All of the above consume much less water, much less power and fertilisers and don’t create stubble to burn.
A diversification package of, say, Rs 10,000 crore spread over the next five years, equally contributed by the Centre and states, may be the best way to move forward in reducing agriculture-related pollution.
The approach to diversification has to be demand-led, with a holistic framework of the value chain, from farm to fork and not just focused on production.
On the fertiliser front, it would be better to give farmers input subsidy in cash on per hectare basis, and free up the prices of fertilisers completely.
Conclusion
Taken together, these measures could double farmers’ incomes, promote efficiency in resource use, and reduce pollution — a win-win solution for all.
