Content Cabinet Approval for Alteration of Name from “Kerala” to “Keralam” 40 Years of DBT & Launch of “SUJVIKA” AI-Driven Biotech Portal Cabinet Approval for Alteration of Name from “Kerala” to “Keralam” Relevance : GS II – Polity & Governance Article 3 and Article 4: Parliament’s power to alter name of States; simple majority; President’s recommendation mandatory. Quasi-federal structure: Consultation with State Legislature is advisory, not binding. Federalism debates: Balance between State identity aspirations and Parliamentary supremacy. Precedents: Odisha (2011), Karnataka (1973), Tamil Nadu (1969) Static Constitutional Background A. Article 3 – Power of Parliament Article 3 of the Constitution of India empowers Parliament to form new States, alter boundaries, increase or diminish area, and alter the name of any existing State, thereby making territorial reorganisation a Union legislative competence. The Proviso to Article 3 mandates that any Bill affecting the name, area, or boundaries of a State must be introduced only on the recommendation of the President, ensuring executive scrutiny before legislative initiation. Before introduction of such a Bill in Parliament, the President must refer the proposal to the concerned State Legislature for expressing its views within a specified period, although those views are advisory in nature. B. Article 4 – Nature of Amendment Laws enacted under Article 3 may amend the First Schedule and Fourth Schedule of the Constitution, which respectively list States/UTs and allocate Rajya Sabha seats, thereby enabling technical constitutional modifications without invoking Article 368. Importantly, Article 4 clarifies that such amendments shall not be deemed constitutional amendments under Article 368, meaning they require only a simple majority of members present and voting in Parliament. C. Linguistic Reorganisation Background The reorganisation of States was institutionalised through the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, based on recommendations of the States Reorganisation Commission (1953) chaired by Fazl Ali, which prioritised linguistic homogeneity for administrative efficiency. Kerala was formed on 1 November 1956 (celebrated as Kerala Piravi Day) by merging Travancore-Cochin and the Malabar district of the erstwhile Madras State, reflecting the culmination of the “Aikya Kerala” linguistic movement. Current Development  The Union Cabinet chaired by Narendra Modi approved the proposal to rename the State of Kerala as “Keralam,” initiating the formal constitutional process under Article 3. The Kerala Legislative Assembly had earlier passed a unanimous resolution on 24 June 2024, urging the Union Government to amend the First Schedule to reflect the Malayalam linguistic form “Keralam.” The proposal was processed by the Ministry of Home Affairs under Amit Shah, and vetted by the Department of Legal Affairs and Legislative Department, ensuring constitutional conformity. Constitutional and Federal Implications The alteration of a State’s name highlights India’s quasi-federal structure with a strong Centre, where Parliament retains decisive authority, even though consultation with the State Legislature is procedurally mandatory. The Supreme Court in Babulal Parate v. State of Bombay (1960) upheld the wide discretion of Parliament under Article 3, clarifying that State consent is not constitutionally binding. The amendment will require modification of the First Schedule of the Constitution, but will not trigger Article 368 procedures, reinforcing the flexible nature of India’s territorial federalism framework. Governance and Administrative Implications Renaming necessitates comprehensive updates across Central and State government records, including Gazette notifications, Aadhaar, PAN, GSTN databases, electoral rolls, and census documentation, requiring coordinated bureaucratic execution. International implications include updates in ISO country subdivision codes, UN cartographic records, RBI financial reporting systems, and diplomatic documentation, ensuring consistency in global administrative references. Past renaming exercises such as Orissa to Odisha (2011) involved significant logistical restructuring and incurred multi-crore administrative expenditure, indicating fiscal implications despite symbolic objectives. Economic Dimension Kerala contributes approximately 3.8–4% of India’s Gross Domestic Product, according to recent Economic Survey estimates, and has one of the highest per capita incomes among major Indian States at around ₹2.4 lakh or above. The State has a substantial overseas diaspora of over 2.5 million migrants, whose remittances form a crucial component of Kerala’s economy, accounting for a significant share of State domestic income. The renaming is unlikely to have structural macroeconomic consequences, but may strengthen cultural branding in sectors such as tourism, ayurveda, and diaspora engagement. Social and Cultural Significance “Keralam” represents the authentic Malayalam linguistic expression of the State’s name, aligning constitutional nomenclature with regional linguistic identity and correcting colonial-era anglicised forms. The demand reflects the historical “Aikya Kerala” movement that sought unification of Malayalam-speaking regions, reinforcing linguistic federalism as a foundational principle of Indian State formation. Similar precedents include Orissa to Odisha (2011), Mysore to Karnataka (1973), and Madras to Tamil Nadu (1969), all executed through Article 3 procedures without constitutional amendment under Article 368. Political and Federal Considerations Since the proposal concerns only nomenclature and not territorial alteration, it is relatively less contentious compared to boundary disputes or bifurcation demands that typically generate inter-state political friction. However, the episode rekindles debates regarding whether States should possess stronger consent mechanisms under Article 3, especially in matters affecting identity and territorial integrity. Challenges and Criticisms Administrative transition costs, including updating official records, signage, and digital systems, may impose short-term fiscal burdens that critics argue could be better allocated toward developmental priorities. There may be temporary confusion in legal documents, contracts, and inter-state correspondence during the transition period, necessitating careful regulatory guidance and phased implementation. Way Forward The transition should be executed through a digitally integrated, time-bound implementation plan to minimize costs and ensure uniformity across Union and State databases. A single consolidated Gazette notification mechanism and public awareness campaign can ensure clarity among citizens, institutions, and international stakeholders during the transition phase. The process must reinforce cooperative federalism by respecting State aspirations while preserving constitutional supremacy of Parliament under Article 3. Practice Question “Article 3 reflects India’s flexible federalism while reinforcing parliamentary supremacy.” Examine in the context of the proposed renaming of Kerala to ‘Keralam’.(250 Words) 40 Years of DBT & Launch of “SUJVIKA” AI-Driven Biotech Portal Why is it in News?  On 24 February 2026, marking the 40th Foundation Day (1986–2026) of the Department of Biotechnology, the Union Government launched “SUJVIKA” — an AI-driven Biotech Product Trade Intelligence Portal, signalling a strategic shift toward data-driven bioindustrial policy. The announcement assumes importance because India’s bioeconomy has expanded to USD 165.7 billion (2024) and the government has articulated a target of achieving a USD 1 trillion bioeconomy by 2047, positioning biotechnology as a core growth engine. The event also highlighted implementation of the BioE3 Policy (Biotechnology for Economy, Environment and Employment) and the launch of a ₹2,000 crore RDI national call under the ₹1 lakh crore innovation initiative, strengthening industrial-scale biotech capabilities. Relevance GS III – Science & Technology Role of Department of Biotechnology (est. 1986). SUJVIKA: AI-driven biotech trade intelligence platform. GenomeIndia (10,000 genomes, 99 populations). Indigenous gene therapy success (Hemophilia A trial). Institutional & Static Background A. Department of Biotechnology (DBT) The Department of Biotechnology (DBT) was established in 1986 under the Ministry of Science & Technology, mandated to promote research, infrastructure development, innovation ecosystems, and biotechnology-led economic transformation. DBT operates through implementing agencies such as BIRAC (Biotechnology Industry Research Assistance Council) and BRIC (Biotechnology Research and Innovation Council), bridging laboratory research with industrial application and startup incubation. Over four decades, DBT has transitioned from primarily grant-based scientific funding to a comprehensive innovation ecosystem builder integrating policy, entrepreneurship, and translational biotechnology. SUJVIKA Portal – Strategic Significance Launched by Jitendra Singh, SUJVIKA is an AI-enabled Trade Statistics Digital Intelligence Platform developed in collaboration with Association of Biotechnology Led Enterprises, providing structured biotechnology import analytics. The portal presents authenticated import data on biochemical products, industrial enzymes, and biotech intermediates, enabling identification of high-value import dependencies and facilitating prioritised indigenisation strategies. By linking trade intelligence with R&D planning, SUJVIKA strengthens evidence-based policymaking and supports public–private partnerships in high-performance biomanufacturing. Economic Dimension – India’s Bioeconomy Growth India’s bioeconomy has grown 16-fold in a decade, from approximately USD 10 billion in 2014 to USD 165.7 billion in 2024, reflecting expansion in vaccines, diagnostics, agri-biotech, and industrial biotechnology. The number of biotech startups has risen from fewer than 100 in 2014 to over 11,000, indicating deepening innovation capacity and improved access to incubation and funding mechanisms. The government’s vision aims at a USD 1 trillion bioeconomy by 2047, aligning biotechnology growth with long-term industrial transformation under the Viksit Bharat framework. Governance & Policy Architecture A. BioE3 Policy The BioE3 Policy seeks to integrate biotechnology with economic growth, environmental sustainability, and employment generation, promoting advanced biomanufacturing clusters and indigenous value chains. Implementation through DBT, BIRAC, and BRIC focuses on strengthening scale-up infrastructure, technology transfer mechanisms, and domestic manufacturing of critical biotech inputs. B. Research Financing & Infrastructure A ₹2,000 crore national call under the ₹1 lakh crore Research, Development and Innovation initiative aims to accelerate commercialization and scale-up of biotech enterprises. The National Biofoundry Network includes 6 biofoundries and 21 advanced bio-enabler facilities, enabling rapid prototyping and reducing time-to-market for biotech innovations. Science & Technology Convergence Integration of Artificial Intelligence with biotechnology enhances research precision in gene sequencing, diagnostics, and drug discovery, reducing timelines and improving predictive analytics capabilities. The GenomeIndia Project has generated whole genome sequencing data of 10,000 individuals from 99 diverse populations, strengthening indigenous genomic databases and personalised medicine prospects. India’s first human gene therapy trial for Severe Hemophilia A, supported by DBT and BIRAC, demonstrated sustained Factor VIII production, showcasing translational research capability. Social & Strategic Importance India is among the leading global vaccine manufacturers, reinforcing biotechnology’s strategic role in public health security and global pharmaceutical supply chains. Expansion of 95 bio-incubators across 21 States and UTs, supporting over 1,800 incubatees, enhances regional innovation ecosystems and high-skilled employment generation. Biotechnology’s role extends to frontier domains such as space biotechnology and space medicine, through collaboration between DBT and ISRO, strengthening India’s scientific leadership. Challenges & Gaps Persistent import dependency in high-end enzymes, reagents, and specialised biotech equipment poses supply-chain vulnerabilities and underscores the need for domestic production incentives. Regulatory fragmentation across biosafety, drug approval, and environmental clearances may delay commercialization, requiring harmonised single-window regulatory reforms. Deep-tech biotechnology faces capital constraints due to long gestation cycles and high risk, limiting private venture participation compared to digital technology startups. Way Forward Institutionalise SUJVIKA analytics into industrial policy frameworks to directly link trade deficit identification with targeted R&D grants and PLI-type incentives for biotech manufacturing. Strengthen regulatory coherence among DBT, CDSCO, and environmental authorities to ensure biosafety while reducing approval delays for startups and research institutions. Expand incubation and biofoundry infrastructure to emerging innovation clusters beyond metropolitan centres, promoting inclusive and geographically balanced bioeconomic growth. Enhance global collaboration in genomic research, bio-manufacturing standards, and ethical governance to position India as a leading biotechnology hub by 2047. Practice Question India’s bioeconomy is emerging as a critical pillar of Viksit Bharat 2047. Examine the role of DBT and SUJVIKA in strengthening indigenous biomanufacturing.(250 Words)

Content India’s trade strategy in a multipolar world Attracting talent positioned abroad India’s trade strategy in a multipolar world Source : The Hindu Why in News?  India signed the India–EU Free Trade Agreement on 27 January 2026, after nearly two decades of negotiations, creating a trade space covering ~2 billion people and nearly one-fourth of global GDP (EU ~14–15%, India ~7% in PPP terms). In February 2026, India and the U.S. agreed on an interim framework toward a broader Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA); the U.S. accounts for ~18% of India’s total exports, making it India’s largest single-country export destination. As per the Department of Commerce Year-End Review 2025, India’s total exports (merchandise + services) reached USD 825.25 billion, registering 6.05% annual growth, despite global trade slowdown (~3% global trade growth). Relevance GS II – International Relations India–EU FTA (2026) and India–U.S. interim trade framework as tools of economic diplomacy. Effect of policies of developed countries on India’s trade interests. Strategic autonomy in a multipolar global order. GS III – Indian Economy (External Sector) Export performance: USD 825.25 billion (2025); 6.05% growth. FTP 2023 target: USD 2 trillion exports by 2030. FTA coverage expansion: 22% (2019) to 71% (2026 projected). Global Value Chain integration and MSME competitiveness. Practice Question “In a multipolar world, trade agreements have become instruments of strategic statecraft.” Examine in the context of India–EU FTA (2026) and the evolving India–U.S. trade framework.(250 Words) I. Structural Context: Shift in Trade Philosophy From Defensive to Strategic Integration India opted out of RCEP (2019) fearing import surges (especially from China), trade deficits, and inadequate safeguard mechanisms. Post-2019, India adopted a dual-track approach: Domestic capacity building via 14 PLI schemes across 14 sectors, with a financial outlay of ₹1.97 lakh crore. Aggressive FTA negotiations with advanced economies (UAE CEPA 2022, Australia ECTA 2022, EU 2026, U.S. framework 2026). India’s FTA-linked export coverage projected to rise from 22% (2019) to ~71% by 2026, marking a structural reorientation of trade geography. II. Quantitative Trade Performance India’s merchandise exports: ~USD 450+ billion; services exports: ~USD 375+ billion (IT services, business services, financial services). Services exports now account for ~45% of total exports, reducing vulnerability to merchandise trade volatility. Target under Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2023: USD 2 trillion exports by 2030 Districts as Export Hubs initiative Emphasis on e-commerce exports (target: USD 200 billion by 2030). India’s share in global merchandise exports remains ~2%, indicating significant untapped export potential. III. India–EU FTA: Economic Significance Market Access & Tariff Liberalisation EU is India’s second-largest trading partner, with bilateral trade exceeding USD 120 billion+ annually. The agreement eliminates or reduces tariffs on over 90% of traded goods, covering key labour-intensive sectors: Textiles and garments (EU imports worth ~USD 200+ billion annually). Pharmaceuticals (India is the world’s 3rd largest pharma producer by volume). Marine products and chemicals. EU’s advanced machinery and capital goods exports to India can reduce production costs in electronics and green manufacturing sectors. Strategic Impact EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) could affect Indian exports in steel, cement, and aluminium; FTA negotiations provide a platform to address such regulatory barriers. Preferential access enhances competitiveness vis-à-vis Bangladesh and Vietnam, both of which enjoy favourable EU tariff regimes. IV. India–U.S. Interim Framework: Strategic Depth India–U.S. bilateral trade crossed USD 190+ billion in 2024, making the U.S. India’s largest trading partner. Strategic cooperation in rare earths and semiconductors aligns with India’s ₹76,000 crore Semiconductor Mission and electronics manufacturing expansion (electronics exports crossed USD 25+ billion in 2024–25). Progressive tariff reductions can improve India’s competitiveness in pharmaceuticals, engineering goods, and IT-enabled services in the U.S. market. V. Integration into Global Value Chains (GVCs) India’s GVC participation remains lower than East Asian economies; FTAs reduce tariffs on intermediate goods, improving competitiveness in: Electronics assembly Automotive components Pharmaceuticals and APIs Lower logistics costs under the National Logistics Policy (target: reduce logistics cost from ~14% of GDP to ~8–9%) can amplify FTA benefits. VI. MSME & Employment Linkages MSMEs contribute nearly 30% to GDP and ~45% to exports; improved market access enhances labour-intensive employment. Textiles, leather, and agri-processing sectors employ millions in semi-skilled labour; tariff elimination can stimulate cluster-based employment growth. Export expansion supports formalisation and productivity gains under schemes like RoDTEP and RoSCTL. VII. Diplomatic & Strategic Dimensions Trade agreements strengthen India’s voice in WTO reform debates and global trade norm-setting (digital trade, sustainability standards). Diversification reduces overdependence on any single geography; India’s exports are distributed across the U.S., EU, UAE, ASEAN, and Africa. Economic interdependence enhances geopolitical leverage in a multipolar system marked by U.S.–China rivalry and supply chain fragmentation. VIII. Governance & Policy Synergy Alignment with domestic reforms: PLI schemes (₹1.97 lakh crore outlay). Infrastructure push under PM Gati Shakti. Digitisation of customs under ICEGATE. Digital trade expansion leverages India’s services strength; IT exports already exceed USD 200 billion annually. IX. Challenges & Risks India runs trade deficits with several FTA partners; risk of widening merchandise deficits without export diversification. Compliance with EU environmental and labour standards increases certification costs for MSMEs. Exposure of sensitive sectors (dairy, agriculture, small manufacturing) to competitive pressures. CBAM and green trade barriers could erode competitiveness in carbon-intensive sectors. X. Way Forward Move up the value chain in electronics, green hydrogen, semiconductors, and EV supply chains. Increase manufacturing share in GDP from ~17% to 25% (long-standing policy target). Institutionalise FTA impact assessments with sectoral dashboards tracking trade balance, employment, and value addition. Expand trade diplomacy expertise to address next-generation issues: digital trade norms, sustainability-linked trade measures, and supply-chain security frameworks. Core Insight India’s trade strategy reflects a calibrated shift from protection-led regionalism to competitive integration with advanced markets. With exports at USD 825.25 billion and FTA coverage nearing 71%, the next phase depends not merely on market access but on domestic productivity, logistics efficiency, and technological upgrading. Prelims Pointers Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2023 target: USD 2 trillion exports by 2030. India’s total exports (2025): USD 825.25 billion; 6.05% annual growth. FTA coverage projected to increase from 22% (2019) to 71% (2026). India opted out of RCEP in 2019. India–EU FTA signed 27 January 2026. Attracting talent positioned abroad Source : The Hindu Why in News?  In 2025, Washington imposed a one-time $1,00,000 fee on new H-1B visa petitions, significantly raising entry costs for foreign skilled workers and directly affecting Indian technology professionals. In FY 2024, 71% of total 3,99,395 H-1B approvals were granted to Indian nationals, making India disproportionately sensitive to U.S. immigration policy shifts. The policy shift coincides with India’s renewed push to attract overseas professionals through programmes such as GATI, eMigrate V2.0, VAJRA Faculty Scheme, and Know India Programme, signalling a strategic opportunity to convert “brain drain” into “brain circulation.” Relevance GS II – Indian Diaspora 71% of H-1B approvals (FY 2024) to Indian nationals. Impact of $1,00,000 H-1B fee (2025) on skilled migration. Diaspora engagement initiatives: GATI, VAJRA, eMigrate. Structural Background: India & the H-1B Ecosystem The H-1B visa programme has historically functioned as a primary channel for high-skilled Indian migration, particularly in technology, engineering, and research domains, linking India’s human capital ecosystem with the U.S. innovation economy. In FY 2024, 71% of H-1B approvals were Indian nationals, reflecting India’s unparalleled dominance and deep integration into U.S. high-skilled labour markets. The educational profile of H-1B holders has shifted upward: master’s degree holders increased from 31% in 2000 to 57% in 2021, while bachelor’s-only holders declined from 57% to 34%, indicating rising skill intensity. Nature of the 2025 H-1B Disruption The imposition of a $1,00,000 filing fee on new petitions substantially raises hiring costs for U.S. firms, potentially reducing demand for fresh overseas applicants while incentivising domestic talent substitution. Limited exemptions were introduced for applicants transitioning from F-1 student visas to H-1B, offering short-term relief to U.S.-educated Indian graduates but maintaining barriers for direct overseas hires. Reports suggest a 30% increase in Ivy League Indian graduates exploring opportunities in India, alongside senior executives reassessing long-term U.S. prospects due to visa uncertainty. India’s Policy Response: Talent Re-Engagement Architecture The Government of India has launched structured outreach initiatives such as Global Access to Talent from India (GATI), aimed at leveraging overseas Indian expertise for domestic innovation ecosystems. eMigrate V2.0 seeks to digitise and regulate overseas employment systems while strengthening data-driven migration governance. The VAJRA Faculty Scheme (Visiting Advanced Joint Research Faculty) enables global Indian researchers to collaborate with Indian institutions, strengthening research networks and knowledge transfer. The Know India Programme promotes diaspora engagement and cultural reintegration, strengthening soft-power linkages alongside economic participation. Economic & Innovation Implications A. Opportunity for Brain Circulation India hosts over 1,600 Global Capability Centres (GCCs) employing 1.66 million professionals, providing an expanding domestic high-skilled employment ecosystem capable of absorbing returning talent. Rising U.S. visa costs, combined with expanding domestic tech clusters and PLI-backed manufacturing, create favourable conditions for reversing long-term talent outflows. Return migration can enhance entrepreneurial dynamism, deepen venture capital networks, and accelerate technology diffusion into domestic startups and research institutions. B. Structural Constraints India’s R&D expenditure stands at only 0.64% of GDP, significantly below the U.S. (3.47%), China (2.41%), and Israel (5.71%), limiting absorptive research capacity for high-end scientific talent. Limited private-sector R&D participation and the dominance of low-to-mid value manufacturing reduce opportunities for cutting-edge innovation careers within India. State-Level Absorptive Capacity: Empirical Insights A. Maharashtra Maharashtra remains India’s largest startup cluster with a Startup, Entrepreneurship, and Innovation Policy (2025), yet high housing costs, school access constraints, and absence of spouse-employment support deter long-term reintegration. Firm-level incentives such as incubators and seed capital exist, but household-level integration costs remain high, limiting broad-based return migration. B. Delhi Delhi attracts returnees due to proximity to national laboratories, ministries, and policy networks, serving as an institutional gateway rather than a purely entrepreneurial hub. However, high housing costs and recruitment networks favour individuals with pre-existing institutional capital, restricting accessibility for broader talent pools. C. Karnataka Karnataka’s Beyond Bengaluru and Skill Development Policy (2025–32) aims to decentralise growth to Mysuru and Mangaluru through Global Capability Centres. Nevertheless, limited global research infrastructure, healthcare, and international schooling facilities constrain “family readiness,” reducing long-term retention prospects. Governance & Social Dimension Migration research indicates that while wages drive initial relocation decisions, long-term retention depends on social networks, spouse employment, educational opportunities for children, and quality-of-life factors. Indian States primarily compete for firms through infrastructure incentives but often neglect holistic relocation ecosystems that support families of high-skilled returnees. Without integrated urban planning, education reforms, and housing support, return migration risks remaining temporary rather than structural. Strategic & Geopolitical Implications The H-1B policy shift reflects broader geopolitical recalibrations under U.S. immigration tightening, reinforcing the fragility of relying heavily on external labour markets. Diversifying talent opportunities domestically strengthens India’s strategic autonomy and reduces vulnerability to unilateral visa policy changes. Reintegrating diaspora professionals enhances India’s capacity in frontier sectors such as semiconductors, AI, advanced manufacturing, and defence technology. Challenges High urban living costs in major metros reduce affordability for mid-career returnees despite competitive salaries. Weak university–industry linkages limit research commercialisation, constraining opportunities for high-end innovation careers. Policy fragmentation between Centre and States results in uneven absorptive capacity and inconsistent relocation incentives. Way Forward Increase R&D expenditure toward at least 1% of GDP in the medium term, with targeted tax incentives to catalyse private-sector research participation. Develop “Returnee Integration Packages” at the State level including housing subsidies, guaranteed school access, and spouse-employment facilitation mechanisms. Strengthen Global Capability Centres and semiconductor missions to create high-value innovation jobs aligned with diaspora expertise. Promote distributed urban growth models combining innovation clusters with livability infrastructure to convert short-term return into permanent reintegration. Prelims Pointers FY 2024 H-1B approvals: 3,99,395 total; 71% Indian nationals. India’s R&D expenditure: 0.64% of GDP. Educational shift: Master’s degree holders among H-1B beneficiaries increased from 31% (2000) to 57% (2021). India hosts 1,600+ GCCs employing 1.66 million professionals. Practice Question The 2025 tightening of the H-1B visa regime presents India with a strategic opportunity. Examine how diaspora engagement policies can convert this disruption into long-term national advantage.(250 Words)

Content Centre to roll out free HPV vaccination drive Union Cabinet nod for ‘Kerala’ to become ‘Keralam’ The evolving nature of trade agreements Does the Data Act dilute the Right to Information Act? Exercise ‘Vayu Shakti-26’: Indian Air Force Full Dress Rehearsal Central India’s Elephant Crisis: Habitat Shrinkage & Human–Wildlife Conflict Centre to roll out free HPV vaccination drive A.   Issue in Brief Union Health Ministry to launch nationwide free HPV vaccination targeting 14-year-old girls, aiming to prevent cervical cancer, India’s 2nd most common cancer among women. Vaccine used: Gardasil (Quadrivalent) covering HPV 16, 18 (oncogenic) and 6, 11 (wart-causing) strains; aligned with WHO single-dose recommendation (2022 update). Programme implemented through Ayushman Arogya Mandirs, PHCs, CHCs, District Hospitals, ensuring pan-India public facility coverage under structured medical supervision. Procurement secured via partnership with Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, ensuring quality-assured global supply chains and cold-chain compliance. India records nearly 80,000 new cervical cancer cases annually (ICMR estimates), contributing almost 20% of global burden. Relevance GS II (Health, Governance, Social Justice) – Public health policy, preventive healthcare, cooperative federalism in health delivery. GS III (Human Resource & Inclusive Growth) – Health as human capital; demographic dividend protection. B. Static Background  Article 21 (Right to Life) judicially expanded to include Right to Health (Paschim Banga case, 1996), imposing positive obligations on the State. Article 47 (DPSP) mandates State to improve public health standards, forming normative basis for preventive immunisation programmes. Entry 6, State List: Public health under States, requiring cooperative federalism for uniform vaccination rollout. Under World Health Organization 2020 strategy, countries must achieve 90–70–90 targets for cervical cancer elimination by 2030. India’s Universal Immunisation Programme (UIP) is world’s largest, vaccinating 2.9 crore pregnant women and 2.6 crore infants annually (MoHFW data). C. Key Dimensions 1. Public Health & Epidemiology Persistent HPV 16 & 18 infections cause ~70% of cervical cancers globally, making targeted vaccination epidemiologically efficient (WHO data). HPV vaccine shows 93–100% effectiveness against vaccine-covered strains; over 500 million doses administered globally since 2006 with strong safety record. Vaccination at 14 years ensures pre-sexual exposure immunogenic advantage, maximizing long-term antibody persistence. India’s age-standardised incidence rate ~18 per 100,000 women (GLOBOCAN 2020), higher than many developed nations. 2. Economic Dimension Average cervical cancer treatment costs range ₹1.5–3 lakh per patient, imposing catastrophic expenditure on low-income families. WHO classifies HPV vaccination as “highly cost-effective”, particularly in LMICs with high disease burden. Preventive approach reduces productivity loss in women aged 15–49, critical demographic for India’s demographic dividend. Long-term reduction in oncology burden eases fiscal pressure on Ayushman Bharat–PMJAY insurance outlays. 3. Governance & Administrative Use of Ayushman Arogya Mandirs (1.6 lakh+ operationalised) strengthens primary healthcare-based immunisation delivery. Procurement through Gavi ensures stringent global quality benchmarks and uninterrupted supply chains. Single-dose schedule reduces logistical complexity, cold-chain burden, and dropout rates, enhancing scalability. Post-vaccination monitoring under AEFI protocols critical to prevent misinformation and vaccine hesitancy. 4. Social & Gender Justice Cervical cancer disproportionately affects low-income, rural women, reflecting intersection of poverty and gender inequity. Free vaccination ensures horizontal equity, reducing access disparities across socio-economic groups. Supports SDG 3 (Health) and SDG 5 (Gender Equality) through women-centric preventive intervention. Potential to normalise adolescent reproductive health awareness in socially conservative settings. 5. Ethical & Legal Concerns Vaccination declared voluntary, respecting informed consent and parental autonomy. Past controversies in HPV trials highlight need for transparent safety surveillance and ethical oversight. Exclusion of boys may limit herd immunity effects, though WHO prioritises girls in high-burden countries. Sustained financing post-Gavi transition remains a fiscal sustainability challenge. D. Critical Analysis Shift from curative oncology expenditure to preventive public health aligns with UHC and SDG commitments. India’s high burden justifies prioritised rollout; however, screening coverage remains below 30%, limiting comprehensive control. Awareness deficits may generate vaccine hesitancy, especially in rural or conservative communities. Integration with school health programmes under RKSK essential for improving uptake. Without scaling screening and treatment simultaneously, elimination targets remain aspirational. E. Way Forward Integrate vaccination with national cervical screening expansion targeting 70% women per WHO benchmark. Launch structured IEC campaigns to counter misinformation and build community trust. Develop indigenous HPV vaccine manufacturing capacity under PLI to ensure long-term affordability. Expand inclusion to boys in phased manner to enhance herd immunity and gender neutrality. Establish transparent real-time digital immunisation dashboard for accountability and monitoring. F. Prelims Pointers Gardasil → Quadrivalent vaccine covering HPV 6, 11, 16, 18. HPV vaccine is non-live recombinant vaccine, cannot cause HPV infection. WHO (2022) endorses single-dose schedule for girls aged 9–14 years. Cervical cancer linked to persistent high-risk HPV infection. India contributes nearly 1/5th of global cervical cancer cases. G. Practice Question (15 Marks) “India’s nationwide HPV vaccination programme represents a paradigm shift toward preventive public health governance.” Critically examine its constitutional basis, economic rationale, and implementation challenges.(250 Words) Union Cabinet nod for ‘Kerala’ to become ‘Keralam’ A. Issue in Brief Union Cabinet approved proposal to rename “Kerala” to “Keralam”, reflecting the Malayalam linguistic identity of the State. The President will refer the Kerala (Alteration of Name) Bill, 2026 to the State Legislature under proviso to Article 3 for expressing its views. Kerala Legislative Assembly passed unanimous resolution on 24 June 2024, seeking modification of the State’s name in the First Schedule. Proposal examined by Ministry of Home Affairs, with concurrence from Department of Legal Affairs and Legislative Department. Change aligns with linguistic-cultural assertion since State reorganisation on 1 November 1956 (Kerala Piravi Day). Relevance GS II (Polity & Constitution) – Article 3, federalism, First Schedule amendments. GS I (Indian Society) – Linguistic identity, regionalism, cultural assertion. B. Constitutional & Legal Framework Article 3 empowers Parliament to alter names, boundaries, or areas of States, subject to prior Presidential reference to concerned Legislature. State Legislature’s opinion under Article 3 is advisory, not binding, as clarified in the Babulal Parate case (1960, SC). Amendment affects First Schedule of the Constitution, which lists names of States and Union Territories. No need for Article 368 constitutional amendment, as Article 3 provides special procedure. Similar precedents: Odisha (2011), Tamil Nadu (1969), West Bengal proposed “Bangla” (2018, pending). C. Historical & Federal Context States Reorganisation Act, 1956 reorganised States primarily on linguistic basis, following Fazl Ali Commission (1955) recommendations. Demand for “Aikya Kerala” (United Kerala) emerged during national movement to unify Malayalam-speaking regions. Linguistic federalism recognised as core principle of Indian cooperative federalism. Renaming reflects symbolic federal accommodation, not territorial alteration. D. Key Dimensions 1. Constitutional–Federal Reinforces asymmetric yet flexible federalism, permitting symbolic identity corrections within constitutional framework. Demonstrates functioning of consultative federalism, though Parliament retains final authority. Highlights balance between national unity and regional cultural autonomy. 2. Political–Administrative Minimal administrative disruption; however, requires changes in official records, seals, currency references, statutes, maps, and digital databases. Financial implications limited compared to creation of new States. Centre–State coordination essential for seamless transition across ministries and agencies. 3. Cultural–Identity Dimension Corrects perceived colonial anglicised nomenclature, restoring native linguistic form “Keralam”. Strengthens sub-national cultural pride without affecting sovereignty. Similar pattern seen in Bombay→Mumbai (1995) and Calcutta→Kolkata (2001). 4. Economic & Developmental Impact No direct impact on GDP, fiscal transfers, or devolution under Finance Commission formula. Branding implications for tourism and global recognition may require phased communication strategy. Kerala contributes ~4% to India’s GDP and leads in HDI indicators, ensuring continuity of developmental identity. 5. Legal–Procedural Aspects After receiving Assembly’s views, Cabinet must secure President’s recommendation before introducing Bill in Parliament. Passage requires simple majority in both Houses of Parliament. Upon enactment, consequential amendments in Central and State laws required. E. Critical Analysis Symbolic assertion of identity must avoid fuelling competitive regionalism. Article 3’s advisory mechanism sometimes criticised for limited State veto power, raising debates on federal balance. Frequent renaming without substantive reforms may attract criticism as symbolic politics over structural governance. F. Way Forward Ensure transparent parliamentary debate reinforcing unity in diversity principle under Preamble. Undertake phased administrative transition to avoid duplication costs. Use occasion to strengthen Malayalam language promotion and cultural preservation initiatives. Maintain clarity that renaming is symbolic correction, not assertion of political exceptionalism. G. Prelims Pointers Article 3: Parliament can alter name of a State; Legislature’s view is advisory. Amendment affects First Schedule, not Article 368 procedure. Kerala formed on 1 November 1956 under States Reorganisation Act. President’s prior recommendation mandatory before introducing Bill in Parliament. H. Practice Question (15 Marks) “Renaming of States reflects India’s evolving federal identity within a constitutional framework.” Examine the constitutional procedure and political implications of the proposal to rename Kerala as ‘Keralam’. The evolving nature of trade agreements A. Issue in Brief U.S. President Donald Trump signed multiple Agreements on Reciprocal Trade (ARTs) with Malaysia, Cambodia, Argentina, Bangladesh under shadow of elevated tariffs. U.S. also announced an India–U.S. trade agreement (interim framework), raising question whether it resembles a standard Free Trade Agreement (FTA) or a novel ART model. ARTs are distinct from WTO-consistent FTAs under Article XXIV of GATT, creating a third typology in global trade governance. Concerns arise regarding WTO compatibility, MFN erosion, data sovereignty, and unilateral security clauses embedded in ART texts. Relevance GS II (International Relations) – WTO, multilateralism, India–U.S. relations. GS III (Economy) – Trade policy, MFN principle, FTAs, tariff negotiations. B. Multilateral Trade Architecture 1. GATT–WTO Framework World Trade Organization (1995) institutionalised the multilateral trade order initiated under GATT 1947. Core principle: Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) — trade concession to one member must extend to all WTO members. WTO expanded trade governance beyond goods to services (GATS) and intellectual property (TRIPS). Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) created binding adjudicatory mechanism, enhancing rule-based predictability. WTO operates on one-country-one-vote principle, offering bargaining leverage to developing countries. 2. Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs) Article XXIV of GATT permits Free Trade Areas (FTAs) and Customs Unions (CUs) as exceptions to MFN rule. FTAs must cover “substantially all trade”, ensuring comprehensive tariff elimination. Customs Unions additionally require common external tariff for non-members. PTAs must be notified to WTO, enabling scrutiny by other members. Example: Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership covering 15 Asia-Pacific economies. C. Agreements on Reciprocal Trade (ART): Features ARTs are not notified under Article XXIV, raising questions of WTO legality. Designed within “America First” trade doctrine, emphasising bilateral leverage over multilateral discipline. Trading partner often required to reduce tariffs drastically, while U.S. retains WTO-inconsistent tariff measures. Contain WTO-plus and WTO-extra provisions, including data flow and national security linkages. Example clause (U.S.–Bangladesh ART): partner must adopt complementary restrictive measures if U.S. invokes economic or national security grounds. Some ARTs restrict data sovereignty, prohibiting customs duties on electronic transmissions. D. Typology of Trade Agreements  Parameter WTO Multilateralism Article XXIV FTAs U.S. ARTs Legal Basis GATT/WTO GATT Art. XXIV Executive-driven bilateral MFN Compliance Core principle Exception allowed Potential MFN erosion WTO Notification Institutional oversight Mandatory Not notified Scope Goods, services, IP Substantially all trade Selective, asymmetric Dispute Settlement Binding DSB Often arbitration panels Bilateral political leverage E. Implications for India–U.S. Trade Deal 1. Legal Dimension If structured as ART, India–U.S. deal may circumvent WTO scrutiny, weakening multilateral accountability. As WTO member since 1995, India has consistently defended rules-based multilateralism. ART-like provisions could challenge India’s data protection and digital taxation policies. 2. Economic Dimension WTO-consistent FTAs provide predictability and legal recourse, whereas ARTs create policy uncertainty. Asymmetric tariff reductions may impact agriculture, MSMEs, and digital sectors. India’s exports to U.S. ~$77 billion (2024 est.), making regulatory asymmetry economically significant. 3. Sovereignty & Strategic Dimension Security-linked clauses may indirectly tie India’s trade policy to U.S. national security determinations. Could constrain India’s strategic autonomy, including trade with third countries. India traditionally prefers balanced FTAs (e.g., EU, UAE CEPA), rather than unilateral concessions. 4. Developmental Perspective WTO framework offers developing countries coalition-building capacity (e.g., G-33, G-20 agriculture group). ARTs fragment developing country solidarity, promoting bilateral dependency. Weakens collective bargaining on agriculture subsidies and digital trade norms. F. Critical Analysis Multilateral trade under WTO reduced average global tariffs from ~22% (1947) to below 9% today, demonstrating institutional success. ARTs undermine predictability by prioritising executive discretion over treaty-based discipline. Non-notification deprives third countries of opportunity to raise systemic concerns. However, WTO’s appellate paralysis (since 2019) has weakened dispute settlement credibility. India must balance strategic partnership with U.S. against long-term interest in preserving multilateral order. G. Way Forward Ensure India–U.S. deal conforms to Article XXIV standards and is formally notified to WTO. Avoid clauses linking trade concessions to national security determinations of partner country. Protect data sovereignty and digital taxation autonomy under domestic law. Strengthen engagement in WTO reform negotiations to restore Appellate Body functionality. Build coalitions with Global South to defend rule-based multilateralism. H. Prelims Pointers GATT 1947 → precursor to WTO (1995). Article XXIV of GATT permits FTAs and Customs Unions as MFN exceptions. WTO operates on consensus principle and one-country-one-vote system. RCEP entered into force in 2022, largest FTA by GDP share. WTO Appellate Body non-functional since December 2019. I. Practice Question (15 Marks) “Emerging bilateral trade instruments such as the U.S. Agreements on Reciprocal Trade challenge the foundations of WTO-based multilateralism.” Critically examine in the context of India’s trade policy choices. Does the Data Act dilute the Right to Information Act? A. Issue in Brief Petitions challenging Section 44(3) of DPDP Act, 2023 referred to a Constitution Bench of Supreme Court due to constitutional sensitivity. Amendment provides blanket exemption for “personal information” under amended Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, 2005. Critics argue amendment dilutes Right to Information, especially in corruption-related disclosures involving public officials. Challenge alleges amendment is ultra vires Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21 of the Constitution. Relevance GS II (Polity & Governance) – Fundamental Rights (Articles 19, 21), transparency, accountability. GS IV (Ethics) – Privacy vs transparency dilemma. B. Legislative Background Post Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India, Supreme Court declared Right to Privacy a fundamental right under Article 21. Court directed government to establish robust data protection regime balancing privacy and legitimate state interests. Government constituted Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee (2017), which submitted draft Data Protection Bill in July 2018. Parliament enacted Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, establishing framework governing data principals and data fiduciaries. C. Original RTI Framework (Before Amendment) Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, 2005 exempted personal information only if disclosure had no relation to public activity or public interest. Disclosure permitted if “larger public interest” justified intrusion, ensuring proportionality between privacy and transparency. RTI used to access assets and liabilities declarations of public servants, strengthening anti-corruption accountability. RTI recognised by Supreme Court as intrinsic to Article 19(1)(a) – freedom of speech and expression. D. Nature of the Controversy Amended provision removes public interest override, creating absolute bar on personal information disclosure. Statement of Objects and Reasons of DPDP Act silent on rationale for amending RTI Act. Critics argue amendment disrupts proportionality test laid down in Puttaswamy (2017). Potential misuse: Procurement records, audit reports, public spending data may be denied citing “personal information”. Raises concern of executive overreach via “money bill–like legislative bundling” within unrelated statute. E. Constitutional Dimensions 1. Article 19(1)(a): Right to Information Supreme Court in State of Uttar Pradesh vs Raj Narain recognised citizens’ right to know as democratic imperative. RTI Act operationalised transparency, enhancing accountability in governance and reducing information asymmetry. 2. Article 21: Right to Privacy Privacy recognised as intrinsic to dignity, autonomy, informational self-determination under Puttaswamy (2017). However, privacy is not absolute; subject to legality, necessity, and proportionality. 3. Article 14: Reasonableness Blanket exemption may fail reasonable classification and proportionality tests. Removal of public interest balancing mechanism potentially arbitrary. F. Governance & Anti-Corruption Implications RTI instrumental in exposing scams: 2G spectrum, Commonwealth Games, mining allocations. Disclosure of officials’ asset statements previously enabled scrutiny of disproportionate assets cases. Amendment may weaken institutional transparency and deterrence against corruption. Could undermine India’s commitments under UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC). G. Comparative Perspective Global data protection regimes (e.g., EU’s GDPR) retain public interest and accountability exceptions. Democratic systems balance privacy with transparency, especially concerning public officials. Blanket exclusions uncommon in mature transparency frameworks. H. Critical Analysis DPDP Act advances data governance modernisation, but RTI amendment risks democratic regression. Earlier RTI framework already embedded proportional balance mechanism, avoiding excessive intrusion. Amendment tilts equilibrium excessively towards privacy, ignoring public accountability principle. Constitution Bench likely to interpret meaning of “personal information”, shaping future transparency jurisprudence. I. Way Forward Reinstate public interest override clause within Section 8(1)(j), ensuring calibrated disclosure. Supreme Court may evolve structured proportionality guidelines clarifying scope of personal information. Harmonise DPDP and RTI through clear legislative reconciliation framework. Strengthen Data Protection Board’s independence to avoid executive dominance. Ensure parliamentary scrutiny when amending transparency legislation. J. Prelims Pointers DPDP Act, 2023 regulates digital personal data processing in India. RTI Act, 2005 – Section 8(1)(j) relates to exemption for personal information. Puttaswamy (2017) declared privacy fundamental under Article 21. RTI derived from Article 19(1)(a) jurisprudence. Constitution Bench consists of 5 or more judges. K. Practice Question (15 Marks) “The balance between transparency and privacy is central to constitutional democracy.” Examine the constitutional and governance implications of the amendment to the RTI Act through the DPDP Act, 2023. Exercise ‘Vayu Shakti-26’: Indian Air Force Full Dress Rehearsal A. Issue in Brief Indian Air Force conducted full dress rehearsal of Exercise ‘Vayu Shakti-26’ at Pokhran Field Firing Range, Rajasthan. Exercise showcased day-to-dusk-to-night integrated operations, simulating near-realistic combat conditions in desert terrain. Platforms involved included Su-30 MKI, MiG-29, transport aircraft, helicopters including Chinook heavy-lift platforms. Tejas LCA reportedly absent due to technical issues, raising questions on fleet readiness. Main event scheduled for 27 February, reflecting periodic operational capability demonstrations. Relevance GS III (Security & Defence) – Military preparedness, defence modernisation, theatre commands. GS II (IR) – Strategic signalling and deterrence. B. Static Background  Pokhran Field Firing Range located in Thar Desert, historically associated with nuclear tests (1974, 1998). Exercise ‘Vayu Shakti’ is a biennial firepower demonstration, validating air-to-ground strike capability. India maintains ~30–31 fighter squadrons, against sanctioned strength of 42 squadrons. IAF doctrine emphasises air dominance, precision strike, rapid mobility, and network-centric warfare. C. Key Dimensions 1. Operational & Military Preparedness Demonstration of coordinated multi-platform strike capability, integrating fighters, transports, and helicopters. Simulated targeting of enemy runways, armoured columns, and logistics convoys reflects deep-strike doctrine. Desert terrain rehearsal enhances preparedness for western front contingencies. Night operations indicate improved ISR integration and precision-guided munitions capability. 2. Strategic & Security Dimension Exercise signals credible deterrence posture amid regional security volatility. Reinforces India’s doctrine of swift punitive response and escalation dominance. Enhances jointmanship prospects under evolving Theatre Command structure. Demonstrates operational readiness to adversaries without crossing conflict thresholds. 3. Technological & Indigenous Capability Participation of Su-30 MKI (Russia-origin multirole aircraft) reflects backbone of IAF fleet. MiG-29 upgrades indicate life-extension and avionics modernisation strategy. Absence of HAL Tejas highlights challenges in indigenous platform reliability perception. Heavy-lift capability via Chinook helicopters strengthens logistics mobility in high-altitude and desert sectors. 4. Governance & Defence Reforms Exercise aligns with Atmanirbhar Bharat in defence, where domestic procurement aims to reach ₹3 lakh crore production target by 2029 (MoD target). Demonstrations support India’s growing defence export ambitions (₹21,000+ crore exports in 2023–24). Reflects capital-intensive modernisation amid constrained fiscal space. 5. Economic & Industrial Linkages Defence expenditure stands at ~2% of GDP, with capital outlay exceeding ₹1.7 lakh crore (2024–25 Budget). Large-scale exercises validate returns on high-value acquisitions like Rafale and S-400 systems. Enhances credibility in global defence markets for indigenous platforms. F. Prelims Pointers Pokhran located in Rajasthan’s Thar Desert; site of Operation Smiling Buddha (1974) and Pokhran-II (1998). IAF sanctioned fighter squadrons: 42; current operational strength around 30–31. Su-30 MKI: Multirole air superiority fighter, jointly developed with Russia. Chinook: Heavy-lift helicopter used for logistics and troop mobility. G. Practice Question (15 Marks) “Military exercises such as ‘Vayu Shakti’ reflect both operational readiness and strategic signalling.” Critically analyse their significance in the context of India’s defence modernisation and regional security environment. Central India’s Elephant Crisis: Habitat Shrinkage & Human–Wildlife Conflict A. Issue in Brief Rising human–elephant conflict (HEC) in central and eastern India, with recent fatalities in Jharkhand, Odisha, West Bengal. India has ~29,446 wild elephants (All India Elephant Census 2017), with nearly 60% concentrated in southern India. Fewer than 8% elephants spread across eastern–central States account for ~50% human casualties in HEC incidents. Triggers include serial droughts, mining expansion, reservoir construction, forest fragmentation, and agricultural expansion. Over 200 crop-dependent elephants now reported in fragmented forest–farmland mosaics of south Bengal. Relevance GS III (Environment & Ecology) – Biodiversity conservation, human–wildlife conflict, EIA issues. GS I (Geography) – Forest fragmentation, climate variability. B. Ecological & Legal Background Asian elephant listed as “Endangered” under International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN Red List). Protected under Schedule I of Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, ensuring highest legal protection. India hosts ~60% of global Asian elephant population, making conservation a global responsibility. Project Elephant launched in 1992, focusing on habitat protection and corridor preservation. Elephant corridors: ~101 identified corridors (MoEFCC report), many under encroachment pressure. C. Key Dimensions 1. Ecological & Environmental Elephant home ranges span 100–500 sq km, requiring contiguous forest landscapes for seasonal migration. Mining in Singhbhum (Jharkhand) and Keonjhar (Odisha) fragmented traditional migratory routes. Drought events, including severe 1982–83 and 1986–87 El Niño years, disrupted natural foraging cycles. Construction of reservoirs in Mahanadi and Brahmani basins submerged quality riverine habitats. Habitat fragmentation forces elephants into cropland-rich landscapes, intensifying conflict frequency. 2. Economic & Developmental Coal mining expansion in Talcher, Jharsuguda, Sundargarh belts altered forest connectivity. Crop-raiding increases farmer losses, affecting small and marginal farmers’ incomes. Compensation payments often delayed, weakening trust in forest administration. Agriculture–forest interspersion increases economic vulnerability in rain-fed regions. 3. Social & Human Security Elephant attacks cause ~500 human deaths annually in India (MoEFCC estimates). Conflict concentrated in Jharkhand, Odisha, West Bengal, Chhattisgarh. Displaced herds breeding in non-traditional areas lack memory of natural foraging routes. Villagers face livelihood insecurity due to recurring crop destruction and night raids. 4. Governance & Administrative Elephant movement now inter-state, demanding multi-State coordination frameworks. Landscape-level planning remains weak due to fragmented forest governance. Joint Forest Management (JFM) regeneration efforts show limited short-term results. Elephant population growth without parallel habitat expansion intensifies ecological stress. 5. Climate Change Linkages Increasing frequency of extreme droughts and erratic rainfall alters fodder availability. Climate variability compounds stress in already degraded forest ecosystems. Anthropogenic pressures amplify ecological carrying capacity imbalance. D. Critical Analysis Elephant population recovery without habitat restoration creates carrying capacity mismatch. Infrastructure projects rarely integrate wildlife corridor impact assessments effectively. Current compensation-centric approach reactive, not preventive. Forest–farmland mosaic landscapes blur conservation–livelihood boundaries. Policy bias towards mining-led growth undermines ecological sustainability. E. Way Forward Prioritise landscape-level corridor restoration, especially across Jharkhand–Odisha–Chhattisgarh belt. Mandate wildlife corridor mapping within EIA processes for mining and linear infrastructure. Deploy early warning systems (SMS alerts, AI tracking collars) to reduce fatalities. Promote crop diversification toward elephant-deterrent crops (chilli, citrus, ginger). Strengthen inter-State coordination under Project Elephant with dedicated funding. Align conservation strategy with SDG 15 (Life on Land) and climate resilience planning. F. Prelims Pointers Asian Elephant → Schedule I, Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. India hosts largest global population of Asian elephants. Project Elephant launched in 1992. Elephant corridors essential for seasonal migration and gene flow. El Niño years (1982–83) linked to severe drought in India. G. Practice Question (15 Marks) “Human–elephant conflict in central India reflects deeper structural issues in habitat governance and development planning.” Critically examine causes and suggest sustainable mitigation strategies.