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.