Content :
The Changing Landscape of Employment
Climate Change and Rural India: A Silent Displacement Crisis
India’s Open Ecosystems: Rethinking ‘Wastelands’
India’s Opportunity to Repay Green Revolution Debt
How is Mizoram Handling the Refugee Crisis?
India’s FGD Rollback: Implications of Exempting 78% of Thermal Power Plants
The changing landscape of employment
Core Insight:
India’s demographic dividend risks turning into a disaster as lakhs of graduates enter the job market without being job-ready, amidst rising automation and a shrinking formal job base.
Relevance : GS-3 (Indian Economy) – Issues related to employment, skill development, and job market reforms.
Alarming Statistics
Indicator
Data
Youth Share in Unemployment
83% of unemployed are youth – India Employment Report 2024 (ILO + IHD)
Formal Workforce (EPFO)
>7 crore members; 18–25 age group = 18–22% of new additions
Informal Workforce
90% of total employment remains informal
Digital Illiteracy Among Youth
– 75% can’t send email with attachment – 60% can’t copy-paste files – 90% lack basic spreadsheet skills
Job Displacement vs. Creation (2030)
– 170M new jobs to be created (14%) – 92M jobs displaced (8%) ➡ Net gain = 78M jobs (7%) – Future of Jobs Report 2025, WEF
Core Challenges
Unemployability > Unemployment
Only 50% of Indian graduates are job-ready – Economic Survey 2023–24
Skill mismatch in digital, professional, and interpersonal domains
AI and Automation Threat
AI adoption is putting low-to-mid-level IT roles at risk
Traditional service jobs in India may not survive next-gen tech transitions
Job Quality Crisis
Surge in contractual and gig employment without security or benefits
Lack of long-term wage growth and poor financial security
Skill Infrastructure Deficit
Higher education and vocational institutes not aligned with job market needs
Few formal linkages between academia and industry
Strategic Policy Recommendations
Pillar
Action Needed
Education-Industry Link
– Mandatory partnerships for colleges with industry – Accountability for placements, not just degrees
Skill-First Curriculum
– Universal presence of Idea Labs & Tinker Labs – Compulsory digital + soft skill + foreign language training at all levels
Global Skilling Strategy
– Design courses aligned with ageing workforce needs in EU, Japan, etc. – Align with initiatives like EU’s Link4Skills, tapping migration corridors
Institutional Reform
– Create Indian Education Services (IES), equivalent to IAS, to attract top talent into education leadership
Open Education Ecosystem
– Invite industry professionals to teach/mentor in institutions to bridge theory-practice divide
EPFO Data: Formalisation vs. Stability
Rise in 18–25 age group enrolments in EPFO indicates push for formal employment.
But unclear if these jobs are:
Secure
Well-paying
Long-term
Job creation ≠ job quality. The data must be paired with studies on job retention and income growth.
The Cost of Inaction
Wasted potential: India produces millions of graduates annually, many unemployable.
Rising frustration: Educated youth without jobs fuels social unrest, migration, and mental health issues.
Lost opportunity: Without global skill alignment, India risks missing out on exporting talent to ageing nations.
Vicious cycle: Lack of jobs ➝ underemployment ➝ informal work ➝ no savings ➝ no upward mobility
Conclusion
India’s employment problem is not just about creating more jobs — it’s about creating relevant, high-quality, future-proof employment.
Climate Change and Rural India: A Silent Displacement Crisis
Key Observation:
Climate change is no longer a future threat — it is actively transforming where and how millions of Indians live, work, and survive.
Relevance : GS-1 & GS-3 – Geography (climate impact) and Economy (migration, livelihoods).
Bundelkhand: Droughts, Heat, and Exodus
Parameter
Status
Location
13 districts in Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh
Climate Impact
🔻 Rainfall, 🔺 Temperature (+2 to +3.5°C by 2100)
Drought Frequency
9 droughts (Datia, 1998–2009); 8 in Lalitpur, Mahoba
Result
Massive male-dominated migration to cities like Delhi, Surat, Bengaluru
Impacts:
Agricultural failure and indebtedness
Occupational shift: from farming to mining & construction
Family separation and rising vulnerability of women and children
Erosion of village social fabric and school dropout rates
“Migration in Bundelkhand is not adaptation — it is a form of crisis-induced displacement.” – Dr. S.S. Jatav, BBAU
Charpauli, Bangladesh: Floods and Erosion
Parameter
Status
Location
Along the Jamuna river
Climate Impact
🔺 Floods & erosion due to rising river discharge
Riverbank Erosion
Left bank: -12m/year; Right bank: -52m/year (1990–2020)
Migration Pattern
Permanent displacement to Dhaka, nearby towns
Impacts:
Entire villages vanish annually into the Jamuna
Families move first inland, then migrate completely
Shift to agriculture in new villages or informal jobs in cities
“Migration becomes the last-resort adaptation when resilience fails.” – Jan Freihardt, ETH Zürich
Vidarbha & Marathwada: Heat Stress and Debt Cycles
Parameter
Status
Region
Rain shadow zone of the Western Ghats
Temperature
>50°C in peak May months (Satellite data, 2024)
Rainfall
Erratic: fewer rainy days, intense bursts, long dry gaps
Livelihood Impact
Seasonal migration to sugar cane farms in Western Maharashtra & Karnataka
Cane Cutter Migrant Life:
4–6 month migration, hired as “koita” couples (husband: cutter, wife: stacker)
Advance wage: ₹50,000–₹5 lakh (debt cycle begins)
Output requirement: ₹50,000 ÷ ₹367/tonne = 136 tonnes sugar cane to cut
Live in makeshift plastic tents, with no water, sanitation, or electricity
Seniors (70+) now migrate due to labour shortages
“Climate change is pushing people into debt bondage and worsening intergenerational precarity.” – Ankita Bhatkhande, Asar
Scale of the Crisis
Indicator
Data
Global Climate Migrants (2022)
~20 million/year (Internal migration) – International Refugee Assistance Project
India’s Sugarcane Production (2021)
50 crore tonnes, ₹20,000+ crore revenue
Protection for Migrants
Weak; migrants face wage theft, health crises, and legal invisibility
India lacks a dedicated legal framework for climate-induced internal migration.
Adaptation or Displacement?
Adaptation (Ideal Scenario):
Diversified livelihoods
Climate-resilient cropping
Social security safety nets
Displacement (Current Reality):
Loss of land + livelihoods = forced migration
Women and elderly disproportionately burdened
Children drop out of school or face malnutrition
“Migration may appear adaptive, but for many in India, it reflects a collapse of resilience.” — Sayantan Datta
Policy Recommendations
Area
Action Needed
Legal Framework
Recognize climate migrants as a vulnerable group under national policy
Housing & Rights
Ensure safe shelters, portable social security, and labour protections
Livelihood Resilience
Invest in climate-smart agriculture, water access, and MGNREGA coverage
Data & Planning
Real-time climate–migration data to inform policy at district/state levels
Interstate Coordination
Protect rights of migrants across source and destination states
Bottom Line
India is living through a rural climate migration crisis — slow, silent, and scattered.
Without urgent legal and policy recognition, millions risk falling into permanent precarity.
India’s Open Ecosystems: Rethinking ‘Wastelands’
What Are Open Ecosystems?
Open ecosystems refer to grasslands, deserts, scrublands, savannas, and open woodlands — landscapes characterized by low tree cover but high ecological and cultural value.
These areas naturally support sparse vegetation due to arid climates or seasonal rainfall patterns.
Unlike forests, they are not degraded forests, but distinct biomes with unique ecological functions.
Relevance : GS-3 – Environment and Ecology; Land degradation, biodiversity, and sustainable land use.
The ‘Wasteland’ Misclassification: A Colonial Legacy
Official Label
Ecological Reality
“Wasteland” (as per Wasteland Atlas of India)
Functional ecosystems with biodiversity, soil carbon, and pastoralist activity
~55.76 million hectares (16.96% of India’s land)
Includes deserts, grasslands, scrub, coastal sand dunes
Wastelands = ‘land to be fixed’
Actually = land to be preserved and stewarded
Policy contradiction: While private real estate glorifies open green spaces (e.g., “Savana Villas”), India’s natural open landscapes are ignored or targeted for conversion.
Why Deserts and Open Lands Matter
Global Significance:
Deserts cover ~33% of Earth’s land area.
Host ancient civilizations (e.g., Indus Valley, Mesopotamia).
Enable climate resilience through adapted flora and fauna.
India-Specific Examples:
Thar Desert (Rajasthan): Indigenous species like the Great Indian Bustard, caracal, desert fox.
Banni Grasslands (Gujarat): Among Asia’s largest, now degraded by afforestation and invasive species.
Pastoralist Communities: Stewards of Open Lands
Community
Region
Dhangars
Maharashtra
Rabaris
Gujarat
Kurubas
Karnataka
Raikas
Rajasthan
Over 13 million pastoralists in India depend on open ecosystems for seasonal grazing.
Their mobility and grazing cycles contribute to regenerative land use, seed dispersal, and biodiversity conservation.
Afforestation on grasslands and fencing off commons disrupts both ecology and livelihoods.
Greenwashing Concerns: Tree Planting ≠ Restoration
Risks of Monoculture Afforestation:
Reduces native biodiversity
Alters hydrology and groundwater
Converts carbon-rich soil systems into carbon-poor plantation zones
Promotes Prosopis juliflora and eucalyptus, which degrade open biomes
Instead, Promote:
Rotational grazing
Natural regeneration
Check dams & water harvesting
Pastoralist land governance
Policy Roadmap: Recognising Open Ecosystems
Priority
Recommendation
Reclassify lands
Replace “wasteland” with “open ecosystem” in land-use maps
Protect rights
Recognize community tenure of pastoralist groups
Incentivize carbon
Reward soil carbon storage over tree carbon
Embrace traditional knowledge
Promote indigenous water and land management
Reframe global language
Change “World Day to Combat Desertification” to “World Day to Combat Land Degradation”
Bottom Line
“Deserts are not empty — they are alive, thriving, and culturally rich. Preserving them is not anti-development, but a climate-smart, justice-based environmental policy.”
India’s Opportunity to Repay Green Revolution Debt
From Recipient to Contributor
India, once a major beneficiary of foreign agricultural assistance during the 1960s Green Revolution, now possesses the institutional and technological capacity to become a global contributor in agricultural R&D.
With self-sufficiency achieved in wheat production, India is in a position to support international efforts—especially in developing countries facing similar challenges.
Relevance : GS-2 & GS-3 – International Relations (South-South cooperation) and Agriculture R&D.
Leadership in Wheat Innovation
Indian agricultural research institutions have developed and scaled multiple high-yielding wheat varieties.
Varieties like DBW187, DBW303, HD2967, HD3086 now dominate cultivation across millions of hectares.
Research hubs such as IIWBR (Karnal), PAU (Ludhiana), and ICAR institutes play a leading role in this transformation.
Strategic Opportunity for India
As global funding for agricultural research declines, India has an opportunity to:
Strengthen partnerships with international institutions like CIMMYT and IRRI
Support research on climate-resilient crops and food security in the Global South
Expand its soft power through agri-diplomacy and development cooperation
Key Implications
Transitioning from aid recipient to knowledge donor improves India’s global development profile.
Agricultural assistance programs can be an extension of India’s South-South cooperation model.
Investment in global research ensures preparedness against future food and climate crises.
Policy Recommendations
Create a formal International Agricultural R&D Support Mission led by Indian institutions.
Allocate strategic funding to global wheat and rice research, especially in Africa and South Asia.
Leverage public-private partnerships to commercialize and share India-developed crop innovations globally.
How is Mizoram Handling the Refugee Crisis?
Context: Refugee Influx from Myanmar
Since February 2021, Myanmar has witnessed a military coup, triggering a civil war and ethnic conflicts.
Over 40,000 refugees have crossed into Mizoram, especially from the Chin State of Myanmar, with recent influxes seen in Champhai district.
The latest wave (July 2025) brought ~4,000 more refugees due to clashes between two anti-junta armed groups:
Chin National Defence Force (CNDF)
Chinland Defence Force-Hualngohm (CDF-H)
Relevance : GS-2 – Polity and Governance; refugee management, Centre-State relations, and internal security.
Why Mizoram?
Ethnic Affinity: The refugees (Chins) share ethnic ties with Mizos; culturally and linguistically similar.
Geographic Proximity: Chin State borders Mizoram; proximity to the conflict zones enables easier crossing.
Humanitarian Tradition: Mizoram has historically sheltered fleeing ethnic groups from Bangladesh, Myanmar, and Manipur (Kuki-Zos).
Timeline of Refugee Movements & Policy Evolution
1. Historic Background
1968–2004: Free Movement Regime (FMR) allowed cross-border travel up to 16 km; it was reduced from 40 km in 2004.
2016: FMR regulated; further restrictions imposed.
2024: MHA announced FMR suspension citing security concerns.
2. Post-2021 Influx
Massive inflow post-coup; Chin National Army lost ground to pro-democracy forces → civilians fled.
As of July 6, 2025:
3,890 Myanmar nationals recorded in Zokhawthar
Spread across Zokhawthar, Khawmawi, Saisihnuam
Central vs State Dynamics
Aspect
Mizoram Government
Central Government
Position
Pro-refugee, citing ethnic and humanitarian grounds
Restrictive, citing national security
Actions
Cash, relief camps, housing, refusal to evict refugees
28 crore aid, warning to stop refugee intake
Conflict
Ignored MHA order to evict refugees
Accused Mizoram of altering demographics
Civil society and organisations like Young Mizo Association (YMA), Churches, and student bodies have provided significant ground-level support.
Refugee management is mostly local, decentralized, and supported by donations and voluntary contributions.
Legal and Administrative Framework
India is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol.
No national refugee law — refugees are treated under the Foreigners Act, 1946.
Lack of clear refugee identification and rights creates legal ambiguity.
Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) retains control over international migration; states have limited jurisdiction.
Ground-Level Realities in Mizoram
Displacement hubs: Champhai, Zokhawthar, and border towns have seen the highest numbers.
Living conditions:
Improvised shelters, local integration, school access (in some cases), but high dependency on aid.
Security risks:
Intelligence reports warn about armed groups’ presence.
Border militarisation may affect India-Myanmar ties.
Broader Strategic Implications
Domestic
Strains Centre-State relations on federal responsibilities in managing cross-border migration.
Highlights need for refugee protection law balancing national security and humanitarian obligations.
Regional
Border policy inconsistency impacts ties with Myanmar, especially with changes in junta control.
Rising refugee influx from Bangladesh (Rohingyas), Myanmar (Chins), and Manipur (Kuki-Zos) reflects worsening stability in the Eastern neighborhood.
Key Policy Recommendations
Codify a National Refugee Law:
Define refugee status
Lay down rights and responsibilities
Establish standard operating procedures
Institutional Coordination:
Create joint task forces between MHA and northeastern states for managing cross-border flows.
Reinstate a Humanitarian FMR-lite:
Controlled, tech-monitored travel for cross-border ethnic kin during crises.
Leverage International Aid:
Coordinate with UNHCR/ASEAN for refugee assistance, without compromising sovereignty
Invest in Border State Capacities:
Infrastructure, healthcare, digital ID systems for refugees, and local employment schemes.
Key Numbers (as of July 2025)
Indicator
Value
Total Refugees (post-2021)
~40,000
Latest influx (July 2025)
~4,000
Myanmar nationals in Zokhawthar (Champhai)
3,890
Government relief fund
₹28 crore
Official camps with FGDs
Very few – mostly informal, community-led
India’s FGD Rollback: Implications of Exempting 78% of Thermal Power Plants
Context
The Union Environment Ministry has exempted 78% of India’s 600 thermal power plant (TPP) units from installing Flue Gas Desulphurisation (FGD) systems.
FGD systems are critical for reducing sulphur dioxide (SO₂) emissions, a precursor to acid rain and particulate matter (PM2.5) pollution.
Only about 11% of thermal plants — those in high-density/population areas — are still mandated to install FGD systems.
Relevance : GS-3 – Environment and Energy; air pollution, public health, and emission standards.
What are FGDs and Why Do They Matter?
Feature
Description
Purpose
Reduces SO₂ emissions by up to 95% from coal combustion
Mechanism
Uses limestone slurry or seawater to scrub sulphur oxides from flue gas
Relevance
SO₂ contributes to PM2.5 formation, acid rain, respiratory and cardiac diseases
Global Practice
Mandatory in China, US, EU for all coal-fired plants since early 2000s
India’s Thermal Power Pollution Profile
Indicator
Value
Total TPPs
~180 (comprising 600+ units)
Share in electricity
~72% of total generation (as of 2025)
Share in SO₂ emissions
~51% of all industrial SO₂
Plants with FGD installed
Only 8% (mostly NTPC-run)
Exempted units post-policy
~468 units (78%)
Key Policy Update (July 2025)
Category
Criteria
FGD Mandate
Category A
Within 10 km of NCR or Tier-1 cities
Mandatory
Category B
Within 10 km of Critically Polluted Areas (CPAs) or Non-Attainment Cities (NACs)
Case-by-case
Category C
All others
Exempted
Result: Only ~11% (Category A) will remain under FGD norms.
Basis for Exemption: What Experts Said
The government relied on recommendations of a scientific panel led by Principal Scientific Adviser Ajay Sood:
Claimed Indian coal has low sulphur content
Found no major SO₂ difference in areas with or without FGDs
Argued that sulphates suppress warming, so removing SO₂ may increase net radiative forcing
Counterarguments by Public Health & Environmental Experts
Argument
Response
“Indian coal is low in sulphur”
But still emits enough SO₂ to drive PM2.5 in hotspots
“FGDs don’t improve local air quality”
Air quality impact depends on meteorology; long-range transport of SO₂ is well documented
“Sulphates cool the planet”
True — but co-benefits of SO₂ do not outweigh public health costs (respiratory illness, strokes)
“FGDs are costly”
Health costs of SO₂ are 5x higher than installation costs (per WHO/ICMR studies)
Global Standards vs India’s Position
Country
FGD Mandate
Implementation
China
Mandatory since 2005
95%+ compliance
USA
Under Clean Air Act
Applied to >90% of coal plants
Germany
FGD since 1983
Complete compliance
India
First mandated in 2015, now diluted in 2025
78% exempted
Implications of the Decision
Environmental:
Higher SO₂ emissions → elevated secondary particulate matter (sulphates)
Weakens India’s commitment to air quality improvement under NCAP
Potential rise in acid rain impacting crops, soil, monuments
Public Health:
Risk of increased respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses
Higher disease burden in rural areas near exempted plants
Economic:
Disincentivises green tech investment in the power sector
Short-term relief for discoms & thermal producers, but long-term cost-shifting to health sector
Global Commitments:
May impact India’s COP pledges on emissions intensity
Could weaken diplomatic stance on climate finance and clean tech if domestic credibility erodes
Way Forward: Balancing Power and Pollution
Reprioritise Targeted FGDs: Mandate for plants near dense populations, agricultural belts, and ecological hotspots.
Subsidised Technology Deployment: Viability gap funding for older plants; tie to ESG-linked financing.
Integrated Emissions Tracking: Mandatory online SO₂, NOx, PM reporting on public dashboard.
Health Cost Valuation: Incorporate externalities into tariff-setting by CERC.
Accelerate Renewables: Reduce dependence on coal by scaling solar-wind-battery hybrids.