Content
Is India’s 8.2% Growth Sustainable?
Satellites, Science, and the New Fight for Spectrum in Space
Russia’s Su-57 Offer and India’s Tepid Response
Appointment of the Chief Information Commissioner
Deepavali Enters UNESCO’s Intangible Heritage List
Western Tragopan Breeding Project Gives the Endangered Species Breathing Space
Top 10% Earners in India Get 58% of National Income – World Inequality Report 2026
Is India’s 8.2% Growth Sustainable?
Why is it in News?
India reported 8.2% GDP growth, with quarterly output rising to ₹48.63 lakh crore — significantly higher than last year.
The IMF simultaneously assigned India a ‘Grade C’ for the quality of national income statistics, flagging systemic data issues.
This combination raises the core question: Is high growth masking deeper structural weaknesses?
Relevance
GS-III – Indian Economy
GDP measurement accuracy; statistical system reforms
Structure of growth: sectoral composition & productivity
External vulnerabilities: CAD, exports, geopolitical risks
Inflation management & monetary stability
Fiscal consolidation; tax buoyancy; quality of expenditure
Demand patterns: PFCE, rural–urban divergence
Employment vs growth mismatch
Institutional capacity in economic governance
GS-II – Governance
Data quality & transparency in public institutions
Federal fiscal data gaps; state-level accountability
Role of RBI and independent institutions in economic oversight
Basics: What Does 8.2% GDP Growth Represent?
Indicators of genuine momentum
Manufacturing: +9.1% → factories closer to capacity, rising industrial demand.
Services (60% of GDP): +9.2% → financial services +10.2% → strong credit flow, urban demand.
Real GVA: ↑ from ₹82.88 lakh cr → ₹89.41 lakh cr → growth not driven by inflation alone.
Nominal GDP: up 8.8% → implies inflation subdued.
PFCE: +7.9% → households spending more.
Agriculture: +3.5% → better reservoirs, horticulture; slight rural recovery.
Inflation: slipped below RBI target by end-2024-25 → macro stability.
Banking: strong credit growth, clean balance sheets, high capital buffers.
Fiscal side: consolidation continues; GST + direct taxes strong.
External sector: small CAD, robust services exports, diversified FX reserves.
Conclusion:
Short-term growth is broad-based, stable, and non-inflationary. India is outpacing most major economies.
The IMF’s ‘Grade C’: Why It Matters
The IMF was not grading the growth rate, but the statistical architecture behind the numbers.
Key deficiencies
Base year outdated (2011–12) → distortions in measuring structural shifts.
Use of WPI, not Producer Price Index, for deflators → inaccurate measurement of real output.
Excessive single deflation → cyclical biases in GDP estimates.
Large discrepancy between production vs expenditure GDP → weak coverage, especially informal sector.
No seasonally adjusted data → unreliable quarter-on-quarter interpretation.
Missing consolidated data for States/local bodies post-2019.
Implication:
Even if the economy is performing well, the statistical foundations are not strong enough to inspire high global confidence.
What the RBI Quietly Points Out
The RBI Annual Report (2024–25) accepts that growth is strong but flags structural constraints:
a) External vulnerabilities
Global trade protectionism rising.
Tariff uncertainty in key export markets.
Geopolitical tensions reducing global demand.
b) Weak goods export engine
Services + remittances cushion the CAD,
but India still lacks a scaled-up manufacturing exports base.
c) Currency pressures
Rupee stable only due to RBI intervention.
Underlying pressure from strong USD + volatile foreign capital flows.
d) Sectoral imbalances
Mining: 0.04%
Electricity: 4.4%
Agriculture: 3.5%
These employ millions, yet contribute modestly to output → weak productivity.
Structural Vulnerabilities Behind the High Growth Number
1. Mismatch between employment and output structure
Tertiary sector = 60% of GVA
But majority of workforce still in agriculture + low-wage services → low productivity trap.
2. Uneven industrial recovery
Electricity and mining sluggish due to weather anomalies, but they expose deeper issues:
Low diversification
Slower core sector momentum
Inadequate infrastructure in resource sectors
3. Weak institutional capacity
Data quality gaps reflect broader governance constraints.
Inconsistent state-level fiscal data post-2019 implies weak transparency.
4. Export competitiveness
Lacks strong integration into global value chains.
Protectionist global climate hits Indian goods harder.
5. Domestic demand concentration
Growth driven by urban, formal, credit-linked sectors.
Rural consumption recovery is mild; income divergence persists.
So, Is 8.2% Growth Sustainable?
Short-term sustainability: YES
Supported by:
Low inflation
Strong financial system
Fiscal consolidation
High services momentum
Rising consumption
Stable external account
This momentum can continue 2–3 years if global conditions do not deteriorate sharply.
Long-term sustainability: UNCERTAIN
Because:
Productivity growth is weak in agriculture + informal services.
Manufacturing exports remain insufficient to support long-run high growth.
Statistical system needs modernisation.
Institutional and state-level fiscal capacities remain uneven.
Employment-generation does not match GDP performance.
External environment is becoming more hostile to trade.
Core argument from the article:
India’s pace of growth is high, but the architecture supporting growth is still catching up.
Satellites, science, and the new fight for spectrum in space
WHY IS IT IN NEWS?
A new global race has emerged—not to reach the Moon, but to secure radio frequencies (spectrum) and orbital slots necessary for low-Earth-orbit (LEO) satellite megaconstellations.
With over 50,000 satellites expected by 2030, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is under pressure as existing governance mechanisms struggle with congestion, interference, and debris.
ITU reforms (WRC-23, ITU-R 74) aim to address spectrum coordination and space sustainability, but compliance remains limited (70% deorbiting rate).
Megaconstellations are transforming global Internet access but risk deepening inequality and intensifying geopolitical competition.
Relevance
GS-II – International Relations & Global Governance
ITU as a global institution; Global Commons governance
Spectrum allocation disputes & geopolitics
Power asymmetry: developed vs emerging nations in space rule-making
Space as a strategic domain: communication, navigation, surveillance
GS-III – Science & Technology
Satellite megaconstellations & LEO technology
Space debris, orbital sustainability (ITU-R 74)
Space economy growth & innovation
Interference, spectrum congestion, orbital slot management
WHAT IS “SPECTRUM” AND WHY DOES IT MATTER?
a) Spectrum
Electromagnetic frequencies used for wireless communication.
Satellites need dedicated frequencies to transmit/receive signals without interference.
b) Most valued frequency bands
Ku-band (12–18 GHz) → high-speed Internet
Ka-band (26–40 GHz) → high-capacity broadband
L-band (1–2 GHz) → GPS, navigation
Radio frequencies are so vital that spectrum = oxygen for space communication.
c) Orbital slots
Precise physical positions in Earth’s orbit from which satellites can broadcast efficiently.
Scarce resource → intense competition → strategic race.
d) Why both spectrum + orbit matter
Spectrum prevents signal overlap
Orbit ensures correct coverage footprint
MEGACONSTELLATION BOOM: SCALE OF THE RACE
Major players
Starlink (SpaceX): 8,000+ satellites; plans for 42,000
OneWeb: 648 satellites
Amazon Project Kuiper: ~3,200
China’s GuoWang: ~13,000
Market expansion
$4.27 billion (2024) → $27.31 billion (2032)
25.5% CAGR driven by global broadband demand and lower launch costs.
Strategic dimensions
Nations view megaconstellations as key for:
Technological sovereignty
Secure communications
Intelligence and navigation
Digital infrastructure dominance
WHY REGULATION STRUGGLES: ITU AND THE SPECTRUM–ORBIT CRUNCH ?
a) ITU’s role
UN agency coordinating spectrum and orbital slots.
Works on principle:
“Limited natural resources must be used rationally, efficiently, and economically.”
b) First-come, first-served system
Favors wealthy operators who can file early applications.
Late entrants (developing nations) risk losing access to prime bands/orbits.
c) WRC-23 (World Radiocommunication Conference) reforms
Key decisions:
Resolution 8:
Operators must notify deviations between planned vs actual deployment.
Prevents spectrum hoarding.
Mandatory deployment milestones:
10% in 2 years
50% in 5 years
100% in 7 years
Reduces speculative filings by companies seeking to lock future rights.
d) ITU under stress
Framework designed for hundreds of satellites → now facing tens of thousands annually.
80% of ITU agenda today is satellite-related, revealing overload.
SUSTAINABILITY CHALLENGE: SPACE DEBRIS AND ITU-R 74
2023 resolution for sustainable spectrum-orbit use:
Mandatory deorbit within 25 years post-mission.
Compliance is only ~70%, meaning debris accumulates faster than removal.
Current orbital conditions
40,000 tracked objects in orbit
27,000+ pieces of debris (>10 cm)
By 2030 → 50,000+ new satellites expected
Growing risk:
Collision cascade (Kessler syndrome)
Loss of space access for all
DIGITAL DIVIDE: PROMISE VS REALITY OF SATELLITE INTERNET
Why megaconstellations matter
LEO satellites (150–2,000 km)
Latency: 20–40 ms
Suitable for telemedicine, online education, remote work
But affordability is the bottleneck
Starlink terminal: ~$600 (₹53,000)
Monthly subscription charges → unaffordable for rural communities.
ITU estimates $2.6–2.8 trillion needed to close global digital divide by 2030.
Connectivity inequality
Global Connectivity Index:
Switzerland: 34.41
India: 8.59
A four-fold disparity
2.6 billion people still offline (2025).
Without subsidies or universal service mandates, LEO Internet may widen inequality rather than solve it.
WHERE DOES INDIA STAND?
a) India’s strategic strengths
GSAT-N2: 48 Gbps throughput; covers remote regions (A&N Islands, Northeast).
OneWeb: Bharti owns 39% → India embedded in global LEO ecosystem.
b) Spectrum allocation debate
TRAI recommends administrative allocation, not auctions, for satellite spectrum.
Rationale:
Satellite spectrum is inherently non-exclusive and shared.
Auctions could raise costs → reduce affordability → defeat universal access goals.
c) India’s dual challenge
Secure spectrum & orbital resources internationally
Ensure affordability domestically
Without both, India risks losing out in the new space economy.
MACRO TRENDS SHAPING THE NEXT DECADE
A. Commercial imperatives
Internet markets + remote-region connectivity
Real-time applications (IoT, autonomous systems)
B. Geopolitical imperatives
Nations competing for:
Strategic communication
Surveillance
Navigation independence
C. Governance imperatives
Need for global rules on:
Spectrum equity
Orbital sustainability
Fair access for emerging nations
D. Risk of future conflict
Without reform →
“Spectrum wars” → overcrowded space → unsafe, unequal, unusable orbital environment.
Su-57
WHY IS IT IN NEWS?
Ahead of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s recent India visit, Moscow aggressively pitched major defence platforms:
Su-57 fifth-generation stealth fighter
S-500 air defence system
Geran (Shahed-136 variant) kamikaze drones
Submarines and long-range UAVs
India responded lukewarmly, signalling no major defence procurements despite 19 agreements signed during the visit.
The muted response reflects India’s accelerating shift toward self-reliance (Aatmanirbharta) and declining appetite for large-ticket foreign hardware.
Relevance
GS-II – International Relations
India–Russia defence relations: continuity & change
Strategic autonomy; diversification of partners (US, France, Israel)
Impact of Ukraine war on Russian export capacity
CAATSA sanctions & geopolitical constraints
GS-III – Defence & Security
Indigenous defence manufacturing & Aatmanirbhar push
Evaluation of 5th-gen aircraft, drones, missile systems
Tech transfer issues; reliability of foreign suppliers
Naval capability building: submarines, UAVs, air defence
INDIA–RUSSIA DEFENCE RELATIONSHIP
Russia has been India’s largest defence supplier for decades (50–60% of inventory legacy).
Key platforms:
Su-30MKI, MiG-29
T-90 and T-72 tanks
S-400 air defence
Kilo-class submarines
BrahMos (joint development)
Historically based on technology transfer and long-term maintenance frameworks.
Over the past decade, however, India is diversifying suppliers and building domestic capability.
WHAT EXACTLY DID RUSSIA OFFER? WHY?
a) Su-57 (5th-gen stealth fighter)
Russia’s flagship stealth platform; export version Su-57E.
Earlier joint Indo-Russian FGFA project (based on Su-57) collapsed in 2018 due to Indian concerns over:
Stealth quality
Sensor fusion
Engine performance
Cost
Technology transfer limitations
b) S-500 “Prometey”
Next-gen long-range missile defence system (higher-tier than S-400).
c) Geran (Shahed-136 type) kamikaze drones
Key to Russia’s low-cost attrition strategy in Ukraine.
Capable of mass-swarm saturation attacks.
d) Submarines & long-range UAVs
Russia seeks revival of conventional submarine deals + naval cooperation.
Why Russia is pushing these platforms
Sanctions + Ukraine war → Russia seeks revenue, market stability, and geopolitical signalling.
India is Russia’s largest defence partner outside CSTO, making it economically important.
WHY INDIA’S RESPONSE WAS TEPID ?
A) Strategic Shift: Aatmanirbhar Bharat in Defence
Defence Minister Rajnath Singh highlighted:
Production: ₹1.51 lakh crore (2024) → up from ₹46,000 crore (2014)
Exports: ₹24,000 crore → up from < ₹1,000 crore (2014)
India wants domestic development, not dependence on imports.
B) Preference for Indigenous Alternatives
Drones → Indian firms already developing:
Loitering munitions
MALE/HALE UAVs
Joint ventures with Israel
Fighters → focus on
LCA Tejas Mk1A
AMCA (5th-gen Indian stealth fighter)
MRFA (where U.S., France, Sweden competitive)
C) Concerns about Russian reliability
War with Ukraine has:
Reduced production capacity
Created delivery delays
Impacted supply chains & spares
CAATSA sanctions risks add further complexity.
D) Technology Transfer Limitations
India wants:
Full transfer of technology
Local manufacturing
Intellectual property access
Russia cannot fully meet these expectations for Su-57/S-500.
E) Cost & Capability Doubts
Su-57 still under limited Russian induction; unclear combat performance.
Geran drones considered low-tech, not aligned with India’s requirement for high-end, survivable UAV systems.
INDIA–RUSSIA DEFENCE MECHANISM UPDATE
23rd India–Russia Working Group Meeting (Oct 29, 2024)
Co-chaired by Secretary (Defence Production) Sanjeev Kumar.
Covered tri-service cooperation + R&D.
Ended with a new Protocol identifying fresh collaboration areas.
However, no big-ticket deals were finalised.
Putin’s visit outcomes
19 agreements signed — mostly trade, energy, connectivity, logistics.
No announcements on Su-57, S-500, submarines, or drones.
BROADER GEOPOLITICAL CONTEXT
India’s diversification
U.S., France, Israel, and domestic suppliers increasingly relevant.
Quad-related tech cooperation rising.
Russia wants to retain strategic foothold.
Russia’s own constraints
Ukraine conflict drains resources.
Export commitments hard to meet.
Sanctioned supply chains delay deliveries.
Chief Information Commissioner
WHY IS IT IN NEWS?
The Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition (LoP) in Lok Sabha, and the Union Home Minister met to finalise appointments to the Central Information Commission (CIC).
The panel has to select a new Chief Information Commissioner and eight Information Commissioners.
The meeting also discussed names for vacant Vigilance Commissioner posts in the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC).
Rahul Gandhi reportedly submitted a dissent note on some proposed names.
The meeting coincided with a Lok Sabha debate on electoral reforms, where concerns were raised regarding appointment processes for independent constitutional/statutory bodies.
Relevance
GS-II – Polity & Governance
Statutory bodies under RTI Act (CIC)
Appointment process; balance between executive & LoP
Transparency, checks & balances, institutional independence
Role of CVC; anti-corruption oversight
Issues of vacancies & backlog in quasi-judicial bodies
GS-II – Separation of Powers
Judicial interventions on appointments (e.g., EC judgment 2023)
Autonomy of oversight institutions
WHAT IS THE CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION (CIC)?
a) Constitutional or statutory?
Statutory body created under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
b) Mandate
Adjudicates appeals and complaints relating to the Right to Information (RTI).
Ensures transparency and accountability of public authorities.
c) Composition
One Chief Information Commissioner
Up to 10 Information Commissioners
d) Appointment mechanism (RTI Act, Section 12(3))
Appointments are made by the President on recommendation of a committee comprising:
Prime Minister (Chair)
Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha
Union Cabinet Minister nominated by PM
In current practice, the Home Minister is often the nominated Cabinet Minister.
e) Tenure
3 years or until age 65, whichever earlier (after 2019 amendment).
WHY ARE THESE APPOINTMENTS SIGNIFICANT?
a) Backlog and vacancies
Several vacancies have remained unfilled, causing delays in RTI appeals.
Appointment of eight Commissioners + CIC is expected to reduce backlog significantly.
b) Independence of RTI regime
CIC is central to enforcing transparency across government ministries.
Selection must be credible, impartial, and timely to maintain public trust.
c) Wider governance context
Occurs amid national debates on institutional autonomy, including:
Election Commission appointments
Vigilance institutions
Tribunals and regulatory authorities
WHAT IS THE CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISSION (CVC)?
a) Statutory body
Created under the CVC Act, 2003.
b) Mandate
Supervises vigilance administration.
Oversees CBI investigations in corruption cases.
c) Composition
Central Vigilance Commissioner
Up to two Vigilance Commissioners
d) Appointment Committee
PM (Chair)
Home Minister
Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha
Thus, the same selection arrangement as CIC.
Vacancies here also impact functioning of anti-corruption mechanisms.
Deepavali enters intangible heritage list
WHY IS IT IN NEWS?
UNESCO has officially inscribed Deepavali on the Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) of Humanity.
The decision was announced at the 20th session of UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Committee held in New Delhi at the Red Fort.
Delegates from 194 member states, international experts, and Indian officials, including the Union Culture Minister, participated.
The inscription highlights Deepavali’s global cultural significance and its contribution to social cohesion and traditional craftsmanship.
Relevance
GS-I – Indian Culture
Intangible cultural heritage (ICH) under UNESCO 2003 Convention
Festivals as living traditions; craft ecosystems (diyas, rangoli, artisanal work)
Social cohesion, rituals, intergenerational transmission
GS-II – International Relations
Cultural diplomacy & soft power
India’s increasing presence in UNESCO heritage lists
UNESCO committees & global heritage governance
WHAT IS INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE (ICH)?
a) Definition
Under UNESCO’s 2003 Convention, Intangible Cultural Heritage refers to:
Living traditions, expressions, and knowledge passed across generations.
Examples include:
Festivals
Oral traditions
Performing arts
Rituals
Traditional crafts
Social practices and community knowledge
b) Purpose of inscription
Safeguard cultural practices
Promote awareness and respect for cultural diversity
Support communities preserving traditions
Strengthen international cultural cooperation
c) Representative List of the ICH of Humanity
A global list showcasing traditions with significant cultural value.
Deepavali now joins the list, alongside other Indian entries such as:
Yoga
Kumbh Mela
Durga Puja
Ramlila
Kalbelia dance
Vedic chanting
WHAT THE UNESCO INSCRIPTION RECOGNISES ABOUT DEEPAVALI ?
a) A “living heritage”
UNESCO acknowledges Deepavali as a cultural practice kept alive by millions through:
Community celebrations
Intergenerational transmission
Craft-based traditions
b) Key cultural dimensions
Strengthens social bonds
Family gatherings, community rituals, shared customs.
Supports traditional craftsmanship
Potters making traditional ‘diyas’
Artisans engaged in rangoli, décor, textiles, metalwork
Encourages generosity and well-being
Charity, gift-giving, community welfare activities
Contributes to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
SDG 11: Sustainable cities & cultural heritage
SDG 8: Livelihoods for artisans and craftspeople
SDG 16: Stronger social cohesion and community trust
WHY DEEPAVALI QUALIFIES AS INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE ?
A) Wide geographic spread
Celebrated across India and globally (South Asia, Southeast Asia, diaspora communities).
B) Multiple cultural layers
Religious significance
Harvest symbolism
Seasonal rituals
Community bonding traditions
C) Strong craft and livelihood ecosystem
Millions of traditional workers participate in the festival economy, including:
Potters
Decorative artisans
Sweet makers
Farmers producing festival-linked crops
Priests and local craft guilds
D) Deep continuity
Multimillennial tradition with consistent cultural transmission.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE INSCRIPTION FOR INDIA
1. Global recognition
Enhances India’s cultural presence and soft power.
Highlights India’s diversity and heritage diplomacy.
2. Preservation and documentation
UNESCO tag encourages:
Cultural mapping
Safeguarding measures
Financial and institutional support
3. Benefits for traditional livelihoods
Craftspeople and artisans gain visibility, market value, and protection of traditional crafts.
Opportunities for sustainable tourism and cultural industries.
4. Strengthens the RTI of culture
Reinforces India’s role in shaping global cultural narratives.
Enhances people-to-people diplomacy.
NATIONAL CONTEXT OF THE EVENT
The Union Culture Minister described the inscription as a moment of immense pride.
Special emphasis placed on the people-centric nature of Deepavali, acknowledging contributions of artisans and ordinary households.
The Prime Minister described the recognition as reflecting Deepavali’s role in India’s cultural ethos and civilisational identity.
BROADER CONTEXT: UNESCO AND INDIA’S HERITAGE DIPLOMACY
India’s growing heritage presence
Multiple Indian traditions have been added to UNESCO lists in recent years.
India’s cultural diplomacy aims to highlight:
Civilisational depth
Community cultural practices
Sustainable craft ecosystems
Plurality of festivals and traditions
UNESCO ICH helps India in:
Cultural tourism
Global image-building
Protection of traditional knowledge systems
Strengthening artisan-based rural economies
Western Tragopan
WHY IS IT IN NEWS?
The western tragopan, one of India’s rarest pheasants and the State bird of Himachal Pradesh, has shown successful captive breeding at the Sarahan Pheasantry, with 46 individuals currently maintained.
However, experts warn that the species’ long-term survival remains uncertain because:
Only 3,000–9,500 mature individuals survive in the wild.
All belong to one subpopulation, increasing genetic vulnerability.
Habitat fragmentation, climate change, and human disturbance continue to threaten wild populations.
Reintroduction trials (2020–21) showed early signs of viability, but funding gaps and need for more research have stalled further releases since 2023.
Relevance
GS-III – Environment & Ecology
Species conservation (IUCN Vulnerable)
Ex-situ vs in-situ conservation
Habitat loss, fragmentation, climate change effects
Reintroduction protocols; genetic diversity management
Human–wildlife interface in Himalayan ecosystems
WHAT IS THE WESTERN TRAGOPAN?
a) Taxonomy
Scientific name: Tragopan melanocephalus
Family: Phasianidae (pheasants & partridges)
Distribution: Historically Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand; now restricted to fragmented Himalayan pockets.
b) IUCN Status
Vulnerable (but with rapidly declining numbers; conservationists consider it closer to “Endangered”).
c) Habitat
Prefers dense temperate broadleaf and conifer forests, usually between 2,000–3,600 m elevation.
d) Ecological role
Indicator species for high-altitude forest health, sensitive to disturbance & climate variability.
POPULATION STATUS & FRAGMENTATION
a) Wild population
3,000–9,500 mature individuals
All part of a single subpopulation → high extinction risk
Distributed across western Himalayas & parts of northern Pakistan
b) Key threats
Habitat fragmentation
Encroachment & grazing pressure
Climate variability disrupting breeding cycles
Declining insect availability for chicks
Human disturbance in breeding zones
THE MISSING LINK: IN-SITU CONSERVATION
Experts repeatedly emphasise that ex-situ breeding cannot substitute for habitat protection.
Key issues:
Habitat loss continues → forests crucial for wild survival remain threatened.
Breeding failures linked to climate variability:
Warming at lower altitudes
Unsynchronised timing between chick hatch and insect peak
Dependence on community support:
Locals in Pakistan voluntarily protect breeding zones
Similar models could be explored in India
Conservation benefits remain stagnant despite crores spent because:
Birds were produced
But wild habitats were not strengthened simultaneously
COMMUNITY-BASED CONSERVATION: A PROMISING MODEL
Birdwatchers and local guides report stronger sightings in areas where villagers minimise disturbance.
Community-based tourism provides alternative income → reduces pressure on forests.
Examples: Rakhundi, Shilt regions
Positive local stewardship reshapes conservation outcomes
Top 10% earners in India get 58% of national income, bottom half 15% – World Inequality Report 2026
WHY IS IT IN NEWS?
The World Inequality Report 2026, led by economists Lucas Chancel, Ricardo Gómez-Carrero, Ravaida Mushrif, and Thomas Piketty, reveals that India’s income inequality is among the highest in the world.
The top 10% of earners capture 58% of national income, while the bottom 50% receive only 15%.
Wealth inequality is even sharper: the top 1% owns 40% of total wealth, and the bottom 50% owns just 6%.
The findings mark a continued rise in inequality despite earlier improvements post-liberalisation.
Relevance
GS-III – Economy
Income & wealth inequality trends
Structural drivers: informality, labour markets, capital concentration
Impact on growth quality, consumption demand, productivity
Policy responses: taxation, social security, universal services
GS-II – Welfare & Governance
Public service delivery gaps
Social protection mechanisms for bottom 50%
Fiscal policy design (wealth tax, inheritance tax debates)
WHAT IS THE WORLD INEQUALITY REPORT?
a) What is it?
An annual global study by the World Inequality Lab, analysing distribution of income, wealth, gender inequality, and public vs private assets.
b) Why it matters?
Provides country-wise comparable data.
Influences global debates on taxation, welfare, job creation, and inequality.
Uses multiple data sources: national accounts, tax data, household surveys.
KEY FINDINGS FOR INDIA (INCOME INEQUALITY)
a) Income Shares in 2024
Top 10%: 58% of national income
Middle 40%: 27%
Bottom 50%: 15%
b) Historical trend
Inequality fell after Independence → lowest in 1980s
Rose sharply after 1991 liberalisation
Since 2000s, India among world’s most unequal economies
c) Comparison with 2023
Top 10% share: rose from 57% → 58%
Bottom 50% share: marginal improvement from 13% → 15%
WHY INEQUALITY IS WORSENING
A) Structural economic factors
High informality in labour markets → low wages
Unequal access to education & health
Skill-biased growth favouring tech-intensive sectors
Concentration of corporate power and private capital
Regional disparities (South & West more developed than North-Central regions)
B) Wealth concentration mechanisms
Rising property prices
High returns on capital vs wages
Growth of billionaire wealth → tripled in 10 years
Limited inheritance taxation or wealth taxes
C) Labour market outcomes
Women earn only 64% of what men earn for equal work
Unpaid labour and care burden remain high
Agricultural wages remain stagnant despite growth in service economy
GLOBAL CONTEXT
Inequality reduced in Asia, Europe, North America during 20th century, but:
Since 1980, 40% of global wealth growth captured by the top 1%
India mirrors global trend but with more extreme concentration
Geography of inequality (report highlights)
High inequality regions:
Middle East & North Africa
Latin America
India
Sub-Saharan Africa
Low inequality regions:
Europe
East Asia (Japan, South Korea)
SOCIAL & ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES FOR INDIA
A) Economic growth quality
High inequality → reduces consumption demand
Limits human capital formation
Weakens long-term growth sustainability
B) Social impacts
Reduced social mobility
Intergenerational inequality
Increased risk of social tension
Gender disparity persists
C) Policy impacts
Public investments (health, education, skilling) face pressure
Widening gap between urban digital economy and rural informal economy
POLICY DEBATES RAISED BY THE REPORT
Possible interventions (as per global best practices):
Progressive taxation
Wealth tax or inheritance tax
Stronger taxation on capital gains & high-income groups
Universal basic services
Health, education, childcare reforms
Social security for informal workers
Labour market reforms
Higher minimum wages
Strengthening collective bargaining
Gender-focused interventions
Reducing unpaid labour burden
Ensuring equal pay structures
Regional balancing
Targeted investment in backward districts
Rural infrastructure & skilling