Jan 14, 2026 Daily Current Affairs

Current Affairs 14 January 2026

Content End of 10-Minute Delivery: Gig Workers’ Safety vs Platform Capitalism Source Code Disclosure Debate: Cybersecurity vs Digital Rights Urbanisation of Small Towns: India’s Silent Urban Transition Passive Euthanasia and the Right to Die with Dignity: Supreme Court Jurisprudence Shaksgam Valley: Sovereignty, Illegality and the China–Pakistan Axis Why Buddhism Went Global and Jainism Did Not: Doctrine, Patronage and Diffusion End of 10-Minute Delivery — Gig Workers’ Safety vs Platform Capitalism Why in News ? Major delivery platforms (Blinkit, Zepto, Zomato, Swiggy) decided to remove 10-minute delivery branding after intervention by the Union Labour Minister. Triggered by: One-day strike by gig/platform workers (Dec 31). Demands citing accidents, health stress, and unsafe working conditions. Marks a policy-relevant moment in India’s evolving gig economy governance. Relevance GS I (Society) Changing nature of work, informalisation, urban labour precarity Platform economy & “invisible urban workers” GS II (Social Justice & Governance) Labour welfare, unorganised sector, State intervention Code on Social Security, 2020; labour as Concurrent List Vulnerable Workforce Category Gig workers fall under informal, unorganised, and non-standard employment. Characteristics: No fixed employer–employee relationship. Absence of minimum wages, social security, paid leave. Algorithmic control without human accountability. 10-minute delivery intensified precarity and risk, deepening social injustice. Changing Nature of Work Shift from traditional employment → platform-mediated work. Speed-based service models: Normalise hyper-productivity culture. Transfer business risk (time pressure, road safety) to workers. Social Impact Accident-prone urban delivery ecosystem. Health issues: Stress, fatigue, unsafe driving. Creates a class of “invisible urban workers” sustaining middle-class convenience. Constitutional Ethos Article 21: Right to life → includes right to safe and dignified working conditions. Article 23: Prohibition of forced labour → economic compulsion + unsafe mandates raise ethical concerns. Directive Principles: Article 39(e): Health and strength of workers must not be abused. Article 42: Just and humane conditions of work. 10-minute delivery model arguably conflicted with constitutional morality. Governance & State Intervention Labour Minister’s intervention shows: Soft regulation through persuasion, not coercion. Recognition that branding and algorithms shape work intensity. Shift from: “Consumer-first convenience” to “worker-first safety framing”. Gig Economy Regulation: Static Linkage Existing Framework Code on Social Security, 2020: Recognises gig & platform workers. Enables social security schemes (insurance, maternity, old age). Gaps: Codes not fully operational. No regulation of algorithmic management, delivery timelines, or work intensity. Ethical Dimension Utilitarian consumer logic: Faster delivery = better service. Rights-based ethics: Worker safety > marginal consumer convenience. Corporate ethics issue: Is speed-driven branding ethical if it externalises risk onto workers? Government action reflects ethics of care and dignity of labour. Economic & Urban Governance Angle Hyper-speed delivery: Encourages unsafe driving → public safety issue. Externalises costs (accidents, healthcare) to society. Sustainable platform economy requires: Balancing efficiency with human costs. Significance of the Decision Symbolic but important: Removes normative pressure of “10 minutes”. Acknowledges worker voices & collective action. Signals: Beginning of labour-sensitive platform governance. Precedent for regulating algorithm-driven work practices. Challenges Removal of branding ≠ end of implicit performance pressure. Warehousing logic may still incentivise speed. Weak collective bargaining power of gig workers. Absence of enforceable workplace safety standards for platforms. Way Forward Regulatory Notify and operationalise Social Security Code provisions for gig workers. Define reasonable delivery timelines as part of labour standards. Mandate accident insurance & health coverage funded by platforms. Institutional Establish Gig Workers Welfare Boards at State level. Enable platform worker unions/associations. Technological Governance Audit algorithms for: Work intensity Penalty systems Incentive structures Transparency in ratings & delivery metrics. Social Justice Lens Recognise gig workers as workers, not mere service providers. Shift discourse from convenience to dignity of labour. Prelims Pointers Gig workers are recognised under Code on Social Security, 2020. They are part of unorganised workforce, not regular employees. Labour is a Concurrent List subject. Source Code Disclosure Debate — Cybersecurity vs Digital Rights Why in News ? Reports (Reuters) suggested the Indian government was considering mandating smartphone manufacturers to: Disclose source code to third-party testing agencies. Notify the government before rolling out major software updates. Government has officially denied any finalised demand, stating discussions are exploratory. Triggered concerns over cybersecurity, privacy, transparency, and regulatory overreach. Relevance GS II (Polity & Governance) Right to Privacy (Art. 21), proportionality doctrine (Puttaswamy) Transparency, stakeholder consultation GS III (Internal Security & S&T) Cybersecurity, critical digital infrastructure Supply-chain risks, state-sponsored cyber threats What is Source Code? The core human-readable instructions that define how software functions. Includes: Algorithms Security architecture System design logic Kept confidential because: Commercial IP protection Cybersecurity (prevents attackers from identifying vulnerabilities). Why Source Code Disclosure Is Risky ? Security-by-obscurity vs Security-by-design: Full disclosure increases attack surface. Risks include: Easier identification of zero-day vulnerabilities. Supply-chain attacks via testing agencies. Potential state or non-state cyber exploitation. Smartphones = critical digital infrastructure: Banking, Aadhaar, health, communications. Paradox: A measure meant to enhance security may weaken systemic cyber resilience. Internal Security Dimension Smartphones are gateways to: Personal data Critical communications Location and biometric-linked services Any compromise affects: Individual security National cyber posture India already faces: Rising cybercrime State-sponsored cyber threats Source code exposure magnifies internal security vulnerabilities. Governance & Regulatory Dimension Existing Regulatory Framework Indian Telegraph (Amendment) Rules, 2017 MTCTE (Mandatory Testing & Certification of Telecom Equipment): Includes Indian Telecom Security Assurance Requirements (ITSAR). Telecommunications Act, 2023: Shifted regulatory approach. Smartphones already undergo: BIS certification for India. Institutional Overlap Earlier: DoT → MTCTE & ITSARs. Now: MeitY assumes lead role. Raises issues of: Regulatory clarity Jurisdictional overlap Polity & Constitutional Dimension Article 21 – Right to Privacy Source code access could: Enable mass surveillance (directly or indirectly). Undermine data security guarantees. Puttaswamy judgment (2017): Any intrusion must satisfy: Legality Necessity Proportionality Procedural safeguards Blanket source code access fails proportionality test. Transparency & Democratic Governance Civil Society Concerns Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) flagged: Closed-door consultations. Lack of public disclosure of draft ITSARs. Governance issue: Stakeholder consultation ≠ Big Tech consultation alone. Democratic regulation requires public scrutiny. Comparative Global Practice China: Heavy state control, but even China does not mandate Apple to share full source code. EU / US: Focus on: Security audits Vulnerability disclosure programmes Standards-based compliance Not source code handover. India’s reported approach would be globally atypical. Technology & Innovation Impact Risks: Discouraging foreign investment. Undermining India’s image as a trusted digital market. Potential chilling effect on: Innovation Startup ecosystem Global supply chains. Ethical Dimension Competing Ethical Claims State ethics: Protect citizens from insecure devices. Rights ethics: Protect users from overreach & surveillance. Corporate ethics: Duty to protect users’ data and systems. Ethical governance demands least intrusive means. Way Forward Regulatory Design Prefer: Black-box security audits Penetration testing Bug bounty programmes Avoid: Blanket source code access. Institutional Clear division of roles: DoT vs MeitY vs CERT-In. Strengthen: CERT-In National cyber testing labs. Governance Publish draft ITSARs. Open public consultation. Parliamentary oversight of digital security norms. Rights Protection Embed privacy-by-design and security-by-design. Align with Digital Personal Data Protection Act principles. Challenges Balancing: National security Cyber resilience Privacy & trust Rapid technological change outpacing regulation. Capacity constraints in indigenous testing infrastructure. Prelims Pointers Source code ≠ executable code. Smartphones already certified by BIS. MTCTE stems from Indian Telegraph Rules, 2017. Privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21. Urbanisation of Small Towns — India’s Silent Urban Transition Why in News ? India’s urban debate remains metro-centric, while the most significant urbanisation is occurring in small towns (population <1 lakh). Of ~9,000 census/statutory towns, only ~500 are large cities. Editorial argues that small-town urbanisation is a structural outcome of capitalist development under stress, not a benign decentralisation. Relevance GS I (Society & Urbanisation) Urbanisation patterns, migration, informal labour Urbanisation without industrialisation GS II (Governance & Local Government) Municipal capacity, decentralisation vs devolution Metro-centric bias in AMRUT Core Argument India is witnessing urbanisation without urban prosperity. Small towns are not “alternatives” to metros; they are new frontiers absorbing surplus labour and capital displaced from over-saturated cities, often under weaker regulation and governance. Nature of India’s Urban Transition From Metropolisation (1970s–1990s): Large cities as centres of industry, state investment, labour absorption. “Spatial fixes” for capitalism. To Small-Town Urbanisation (Present): Driven by: High land costs in metros Infrastructure saturation Rising cost of living Small towns emerge as: Logistics hubs Agro-processing centres Warehousing & construction economies Service & consumption markets Social Composition Migrant workers pushed out of metros. Rural youth with declining agrarian options. Dominance of informal labour: Contract-less construction workers Women in home-based piecework Youth in platform/gig work without security Urbanisation of rural poverty, not inclusive urban growth. Municipal Weakness Small-town municipalities: Understaffed Underfunded Low technical capacity Planning deficits: Outsourced to consultants Minimal local participation Procedural rather than deliberative governance Policy Bias Metro-centric urban missions: AMRUT (even expanded) largely excludes small towns from meaningful investments. Infrastructure design (water, sewerage) tailored to large cities. Consequences: Tanker economies Groundwater over-extraction Ecological stress Decentralisation without devolution. Economic Dimension Small towns as: Low-cost accumulation zones (cheap land, pliable labour). Sites for informal capitalism. New power hierarchies: Real estate brokers Local contractors Micro-financiers Political intermediaries Capital relocates, but labour precarity persists. Infrastructure Stress Fragmented schemes instead of integrated systems. Absence of long-term urban services planning. Environmental Dimension Unregulated groundwater extraction. Absence of sewage and solid waste systems. Ecological degradation without institutional safeguards. Social Justice Angle Who Loses? Informal workers without: Job security Social protection Collective bargaining Women workers concentrated in low-paid, invisible labour. Migrants lacking urban entitlements. Structural Injustice Benefits of urbanisation accrue to: Local elites Land intermediaries Platform corporations Costs borne by: Workers Urban poor Local ecology Unequal urban citizenship in small towns. Ethical & Political Economy Perspective Urban growth without dignity violates: Justice Equity Human-centred development Planning reduced to technocracy, not democracy. Way Forward 1. Political Recognition Acknowledge small towns as India’s primary urban frontier, not peripheral spaces. 2. Reimagined Planning Town-specific plans integrating: Housing Livelihoods Transport Ecology Avoid replication of metro templates. 3. Empowered Local Governments Fiscal devolution to municipalities. Transparent budgeting. Capacity-building of local cadres. 4. Labour & Social Justice Space for: Workers’ collectives Cooperatives Women’s groups Extend urban social protection to migrants and informal workers. 5. Discipline Capital & Platforms Regulate: Platform economies Digital infrastructures Ensure: Labour rights Local value retention Data accountability Prelims Pointers Majority of India’s towns are small towns (<1 lakh population). Urbanisation ≠ industrialisation or formalisation. AMRUT primarily targets larger urban centres. Takeaway India’s future urban crisis will not be written in its megacities, but in its small towns—where capital has moved faster than planning, governance, and social justice. Passive Euthanasia, Right to Life & Supreme Court Jurisprudence Core Issue Family of a man in a persistent vegetative state (PVS) met Supreme Court of India judges seeking permission for euthanasia. The patient has been in a vegetative state for over 13 years. Judges sought views of primary and secondary medical boards on whether continuation of treatment is in the patient’s best interest. Relevance GS II (Polity & Constitution) Article 21, judicial interpretation of dignity Supreme Court role in rights expansion GS IV (Ethics) Autonomy vs sanctity of life Medical ethics: beneficence, non-maleficence What is Euthanasia? Euthanasia: Intentional act/omission to end life to relieve suffering. Types: Active Euthanasia: Direct act to cause death (e.g., lethal injection) → Illegal in India. Passive Euthanasia: Withdrawal/withholding of life-sustaining treatment → Legal under conditions. Assisted Suicide: Providing means to commit suicide → Illegal. Article 21 – Right to Life Interpreted as Right to live with dignity, not mere animal existence. Includes: Right to privacy Bodily autonomy Right to refuse medical treatment Key question: Does dignity extend to the end of life? SC answer: Yes, in limited circumstances. Supreme Court Jurisprudence 1. Aruna Shanbaug Case First legal recognition of passive euthanasia in India. Allowed withdrawal of life support for patients in PVS. Required: Approval of High Court. Medical opinion. Laid foundation but procedure was cumbersome. 2. Common Cause v. Union of India Landmark Constitution Bench judgment. Held: Passive euthanasia is legal. Living Will / Advance Directive recognised. Established: Right to die with dignity as part of Article 21. Replaced HC approval with medical boards. Legal Framework for Passive Euthanasia Who can decide? Competent patient → Through Living Will / Advance Directive. Incompetent patient (PVS/coma) → Family + Doctors + Medical Boards. Safeguards: Opinion of: Primary Medical Board. Secondary Medical Board. Certification that: Treatment is futile. Continuation not in best interest of patient. No criminal liability if procedure followed. Medical Boards – Role Explained Primary Board: Treating doctors, hospital specialists. Secondary Board: Independent experts, acts as safeguard. Purpose: Prevent misuse. Ensure decision is medical, not emotional or economic. Ethical Dimension Competing Ethical Principles Autonomy: Respecting patient’s will/dignity. Beneficence: Acting in patient’s best interest. Non-maleficence: Avoiding prolonged suffering. Sanctity of life vs Quality of life debate. Indian approach: Middle path – no active killing, but dignity-preserving withdrawal. Social & Governance Concerns Fear of misuse against: Elderly Disabled Economically dependent patients Indian society: Strong family involvement. Limited palliative care infrastructure. Hence emphasis on procedural safeguards. Relevance of Current Case Tests implementation of SC guidelines in real-life scenarios. Shows shift from judicial approval to medical ethics-based governance. Reinforces: Family’s role. Medical board centrality. Highlights growing acceptance of end-of-life dignity. International Context Many countries allow: Passive euthanasia (UK, India). Some allow active euthanasia (Netherlands, Belgium). India follows conservative, dignity-based model. Challenges Low awareness of Living Wills. Hospital-level hesitation due to fear of litigation. Uneven capacity of medical boards across States. Emotional burden on families. Way Forward Standardise hospital protocols for end-of-life care. Public awareness on Advance Directives. Strengthen palliative care services. Periodic training of doctors on legal safeguards. Ethical committees at hospital level. India’s Assertion, Pakistan’s Cession — How China Took Shaksgam Valley Core Issue India has reiterated its sovereignty claim over Shaksgam Valley, after China referred to infrastructure activity in the region. The issue revives debates around the 1963 China–Pakistan Boundary Agreement, legality of territorial cession, and implications for India’s territorial integrity. Relevance GS I (Geography) Strategic location: Karakoram, Siachen region GS II (International Relations) Sovereignty, boundary agreements, international law India–China–Pakistan relations Location & Geography Shaksgam Valley (Trans-Karakoram Tract): Lies north of the Shaksgam River, north of the Siachen Glacier. Part of the larger Ladakh region of J&K claimed by India. Area: ~5,000 sq km. Strategically located between Xinjiang (China) and PoK (Pakistan-occupied Kashmir). Historical Background Pre-1963: Region historically linked to Jammu & Kashmir; never legally ceded by India. China began asserting control post-1962 India–China war. 1963 Boundary Agreement: Signed between China and Pakistan. Pakistan illegally ceded ~5,180 sq km of Indian-claimed territory to China. India not a party → Agreement void ab initio under international law (no third-party territorial transfer). India’s Official Position Reiterated by Ministry of External Affairs: Shaksgam Valley is Indian territory. 1963 agreement has no legal validity. China’s presence is based on illegal occupation facilitated by Pakistan. Consistent stance since 1960s, including Parliamentary statements by Jawaharlal Nehru. China’s Position Claims Shaksgam based on 1963 agreement with Pakistan. Built infrastructure linking Xinjiang–Tibet through the area. Treats region as settled boundary, despite India’s objections. Pakistan’s Role Pakistan lacks locus standi to cede territory of J&K (disputed under UNSC resolutions). Pattern of territorial concessions to China for strategic & economic support. Weakens its own Kashmir position internationally. Strategic & Security Dimension Shaksgam Valley forms a critical Sino-Pak strategic link. Enhances China–Pakistan military coordination near Siachen–Ladakh sector. Raises concerns for India’s northern front security. CPEC Angle Region’s proximity to China–Pakistan Economic Corridor: Alternative routes connecting Xinjiang to Gwadar. Part of China’s strategy to reduce dependence on Malacca Strait. India’s objection: CPEC passes through Indian-claimed PoK → violation of sovereignty. International Law Perspective Principle violated: Nemo dat quod non habet (no one can give what they don’t own). Boundary agreements involving disputed territories lack legitimacy without consent of all claimants. Reinforces India’s argument against third-party legitimisation of PoK. Political & Diplomatic Dimension India maintained claims despite pressures during Cold War era, including from John F. Kennedy to compromise on Kashmir talks. Demonstrates continuity in India’s territorial claims irrespective of regime or global alignments. Implications for India Territorial Integrity: Sets precedent against legitimising illegal occupations. India–China Relations: Adds another layer to boundary disputes (LAC, Aksai Chin). India–Pakistan Relations: Highlights Pakistan’s inconsistent Kashmir stance. Strategic Autonomy: Reinforces India’s refusal to accept faits accomplis. Challenges De facto Chinese control since 1960s → difficult on-ground reversal. Growing China–Pakistan strategic convergence. Limited international awareness of Shaksgam issue compared to Aksai Chin. Way Forward Persistent diplomatic articulation of India’s legal position. Integrate Shaksgam issue within broader boundary negotiations with China. Highlight illegality of 1963 agreement in international forums. Strengthen infrastructure & security posture in eastern Ladakh. Strategic communication distinguishing PoK, Aksai Chin, Shaksgam in public discourse. Why Buddhism Went Global and Jainism Did Not ? Context Article explains divergent historical trajectories of Buddhism and Jainism, despite: Common origin in Śramaṇa tradition Similar period of emergence (6th century BCE) Shared opposition to Vedic ritualism Core question: Why did Buddhism become a world religion, while Jainism remained largely India-centric? Relevance GS I (Ancient History & Culture) Śramaṇa tradition, heterodox philosophies Role of doctrine, patronage, trade routes Indian Thought: Two Broad Traditions Brahmanical tradition Authority of Vedas Emphasis on ritual, sacrifice, social order Śramaṇa tradition Rejection of Vedic authority Emphasis on renunciation (tyāga), moksha Included Buddhism, Jainism, Ajivikas Both Buddhism and Jainism belong to the Śramaṇa stream Buddhism (Middle Path) Rejects extremes of: Self-indulgence Severe asceticism Key doctrines: Four Noble Truths Eightfold Path Impermanence (anicca), non-self (anatta) Flexible ethics → adaptable across cultures Jainism (Ascetic Rigour) Core doctrines: Ahimsa (absolute non-violence) Anekantavada (multiplicity of truths) Aparigraha (non-possession) Strict code: Mahavratas for monks Extreme ascetic practices Doctrinal rigidity vs flexibility is central to divergent spread Role of Royal Patronage Buddhism Received imperial backing from: Ashoka Kanishka Effects: State-sponsored missions Monasteries (viharas) along trade routes Diplomatic-cum-religious outreach to: Central Asia Sri Lanka Southeast Asia Jainism Patronage from: Chandragupta Maurya Kharavela Later regional rulers Limitations: Patronage remained regional No organised missionary state support Empire-backed Buddhism vs regionally-supported Jainism Approach Buddhism Actively proselytising Monks: Travelled widely Interacted with local cultures Adapted practices without diluting core tenets Monastic code (Vinaya) allowed: Flexibility in food Cultural accommodation Jainism Non-proselytising Jain monks: Travel on foot only Avoid interaction with other belief systems Strong inward focus → community preservation, not expansion Outreach vs inward preservation Social Accessibility Buddhism Simple ethical code Use of local languages (Pali, Prakrit) Open to: Women (bhikkhunis) Lower social groups Compatible with urbanisation & trade networks Jainism Highly demanding ascetic ideals Monastic life difficult to replicate outside Indian socio-cultural context Better suited to: Mercantile communities Urban elites within India Historical Turning Point (~1200 CE) Buddhism in India Decline due to: Loss of royal patronage Revival of Brahmanism Turkish invasions (monastic destruction) But: Buddhism already global → survived abroad Jainism in India Continued to flourish within India Strong community institutions No equivalent global footprint Geographical diversification ensured Buddhism’s survival Ethical Philosophy & Global Reception Buddhism Universal ethics: Compassion Moderation Mindfulness Easily integrated with foreign belief systems Jainism Anekantavada promotes tolerance But doctrinal position: Truth is multi-faceted No need to convert others Mahavira’s teaching (Sutrakritanga): Respect other ideologies, do not impose Ethical universalism vs ethical exclusivity Summary Dimension Buddhism Jainism Asceticism Moderate Extreme Patronage Imperial Regional Missionary zeal Strong Absent Cultural adaptability High Low Global spread Extensive Limited Survival outside India Yes No

Jan 13, 2026 Daily PIB Summaries

PIB Summaries 13 January 2026

Content BHASHINI Samudaye: Strengthening India’s Language AI Ecosystem India’s Fisheries & Aquaculture Sector: Blue Transformation through Production, Livelihoods and Exports BHASHINI Samudaye: Strengthening India’s Language AI Ecosystem Why in News ? BHASHINI Samudaye workshop organised on 13 January 2026 by Digital India BHASHINI Division, under Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology. Reinforces mandate of National Language Translation Mission (NLTM). Focus: Ecosystem-led governance of Language AI. Community-driven data creation via BhashaDaan. Sovereign, ethical, inclusive AI as part of India’s Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI). Aligns with recent national thrust on: IndiaAI Mission (2024). DPIs for inclusive governance (UPI, DigiLocker, ONDC → now Language AI). Relevance GS I – Indian Society & Culture Linguistic diversity of India (1,300+ mother tongues). Beyond Eighth Schedule languages → inclusion of dialects & tribal languages. Language as a tool of social inclusion and cultural preservation. Digital empowerment of marginalised linguistic communities. GS III – Science & Technology / Internal Security / Economy Science & Technology: AI, NLP, Speech Recognition, OCR in Indian languages. Indigenous datasets → AI sovereignty. Digital Economy: Vernacular enablement of MSMEs, gig workers, startups. Conceptual Basics Language AI: AI systems enabling speech-to-text, text-to-speech, machine translation, OCR across languages. Digital Linguistic Divide: Exclusion of non-English/non-Hindi speakers from digital services. Constitutional & Legal Basis Article 14 – Equal access to public services. Article 19(1)(a) – Freedom of expression in one’s language. Article 21 – Right to life includes access to information. Articles 343–351 – Linguistic diversity & promotion of Indian languages. Eighth Schedule – Recognised languages; BHASHINI goes beyond to dialects. Institutional Architecture BHASHINI Platform: Public digital platform for multilingual AI services. Built as open, interoperable DPI. BhashaDaan: Citizen contribution platform for speech/text datasets. Samudaye Model: Participatory governance involving academia, civil society, states, startups. Static + Current Affairs Integration Static Need: Linguistic diversity (India has 1,300+ mother tongues – Census 2011). Current Response: BHASHINI operationalises constitutional multilingualism using AI. Moves from top-down language policy → community-co-created datasets. Policy Shift: From proprietary AI models → sovereign, open datasets & models. Use-case Expansion: Governance (service delivery). Education (early childhood, vernacular ed-tech). Livelihoods (gig workers, artisans, MSMEs). Challenges Data Quality & Bias Under-representation of tribal/dialectal variations. Coordination Challenge Aligning academia, civil society, startups, states. Capacity Gaps State-level technical & institutional readiness uneven. Ethical Risks Misuse of voice data, deepfake risks. Sustainability Long-term funding & incentives for contributors. Way Forward Institutional Formalise Samudaye councils at national & state levels. Data Governance Adopt DEPA-like consent architecture for language data. Federalisation Dedicated BHASHINI cells in states & UTs. Capacity Building Training bureaucrats, teachers, frontline workers. Tech Roadmap Integrate with IndiaAI compute stack & open LLM initiatives. Ethical AI Mandatory bias audits & community review mechanisms. Prelims Pointers BHASHINI is part of National Language Translation Mission. It is a Digital Public Infrastructure, not a private platform. BhashaDaan = citizen-driven language data contribution. Goes beyond Eighth Schedule languages. Anchored in MeitY, not Ministry of Culture. Takeaway BHASHINI Samudaye exemplifies how Digital Public Infrastructure + Participatory Governance + Ethical AI can operationalise constitutional values in the age of artificial intelligence. India’s Fisheries & Aquaculture Sector: Blue Transformation through Production, Livelihoods and Exports Context Fish production doubled from 95.79 lakh tonnes (2013–14) to 197.75 lakh tonnes (FY 2024–25) → 106% growth. 74.66 lakh employment opportunities generated (direct + indirect) since 2014–15. Reflects outcomes of a decade-long policy push led by Department of Fisheries, under Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Reinforced by: Union Budget 2025–26 announcements (PMDDKY). EEZ Rules 2025 for sustainable deep-sea fishing. Record seafood exports despite global trade shocks (US tariffs). Relevance GS I – Geography & Society Coastal livelihoods & island economies. Regional development (Northeast fisheries, coastal belts). Migration & employment in coastal and rural areas. GS III – Economy, Environment, Security Economic growth: Fisheries as fastest-growing agri-allied sector. 7.43% of Agri GVA. Export resilience despite US tariffs. Blue Economy: Sustainable use of marine & inland water resources. Infrastructure & Value chains: Cold chain, processing, integrated aquaparks. Conceptual Framework Fisheries Sector Components: Capture fisheries (marine + inland). Aquaculture (freshwater, brackish, mariculture). Blue Economy: Sustainable use of ocean resources for growth, livelihoods, and ecosystem health. Constitutional & Legal Basis Article 21 – Livelihood and food security. Article 38 & 39(b) – Equitable distribution of resources. Article 48A – Environmental protection (sustainable fishing). Seventh Schedule: Fisheries largely State subject, oceans & EEZ with Centre → cooperative federalism. Institutional & Policy Architecture Key Schemes: Pradhan Mantri Matsya Sampada Yojana (PMMSY). Fisheries and Aquaculture Infrastructure Development Fund (FIDF). Pradhan Mantri Matsya Kisan Samridhi Sah-Yojana (PMMKSSY). Blue Revolution (earlier phase). Total approved/announced investment since 2015: ₹38,572 crore. Static + Current Affairs Integration Static challenge: Low productivity, informality, post-harvest losses. Current response: Productivity raised to 4.77 tonnes/ha (aquaculture). Formalisation via National Fisheries Digital Platform (NFDP). Shift from subsistence → value-added, export-oriented fisheries. Policy evolution: From input subsidy → cluster-based, market-linked growth model. Integration with Digital India (ONDC onboarding of FFPOs). Administrative Cluster-based development: 34 notified fisheries clusters (species/ecosystem-specific). Institutional innovations: Matsya Seva Kendras. Sagar Mitras as last-mile extension workers. Convergence governance: PMDDKY integrates 36 schemes from 11 ministries in 100 Agri Aspirational Districts. Economic India: 2nd largest fish producer globally. 8% of global fish output. Exports: FY 2024–25: ₹62,408 crore (US$ 7.45 bn). Despite 58.26% US tariffs on shrimp, exports grew: +21% value, +12% quantity post-tariff. Agriculture GVA: Fisheries share: 7.43% (highest among allied sectors). Value addition: Value-added exports ↑ 56% in 5 years. Livelihood Livelihood base: ~3 crore fishers & fish farmers. Social security: 34.71 lakh fishers covered under Group Accident Insurance. Nutritional support during ban/lean period to 4.33 lakh families annually. Financial inclusion: 4.49 lakh KCCs sanctioned (₹3,569.6 crore). Environmental EEZ Rules 2025: Sustainable harvesting. Priority to cooperatives & FFPOs. Promotion of low-impact systems: Biofloc, RAS, cage culture, seaweed farming. Traceability & quality: National Framework on Traceability (2025). SOPs for mariculture, harbours, landing centres. Data & Evidence Fish production growth (2013–14 to 2024–25): +106%. Employment generated since 2014–15: 74.66 lakh. Aquaculture export contribution: 62% of export value. Export destinations: 130 countries, 350+ products. Challenges Ecological stress: Overfishing in coastal waters. Federal capacity gaps: Uneven state implementation. Infrastructure deficit: Cold chain & processing still inadequate in hinterlands. Export vulnerability: High dependence on shrimp & US market. Climate risks: Cyclones, warming oceans, disease outbreaks. Way Forward Diversification: Species (seaweed, mariculture, ornamentals). Markets beyond US. Deep-sea fishing: Accelerate EEZ Rules operationalisation. Value addition: Processing clusters, branding, GI tagging. Sustainability: Science-based quotas, ecosystem approach. Human capital: Skill upgradation via ICAR training calendar. Digital governance: Expand NFDP, traceability & e-commerce integration. Prelims Pointers Fisheries = State subject, EEZ = Union domain. PMMSY launched in 2020. India ranks 1st in shrimp exports, 2nd in fish production. Seaweed culture promoted as carbon-negative aquaculture. ONDC includes fisheries FFPOs. Takeaway India’s fisheries transformation demonstrates how policy continuity, infrastructure investment, market integration, and sustainability frameworks can convert a traditional sector into a globally competitive engine of growth and livelihoods.

Jan 13, 2026 Daily Editorials Analysis

Editorials/Opinions Analysis For UPSC 13 January 2026

Content Why Article 6 is a powerful tool for India ? Equality isn’t the Enemy of Growth; High Inequality Erodes Social Trust Why Article 6 is a powerful tool for India ? Why in News ? Article 6 carbon markets made fully operational at COP29 → marks shift from rule-making to implementation. 89 cooperation arrangements under Article 6.2 across 58 Parties → rapid expansion of bilateral/plurilateral carbon trade. Adoption of Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM) under Article 6.4 → formal transition from Clean Development Mechanism. August 2025: India signs Joint Crediting Mechanism (JCM) → operationalises Article 6.2 with Japan. Relevance GS Paper I (Geography – Environment) Climate change mitigation mechanisms Energy transition & decarbonisation pathways GS Paper II (Governance & International Relations) Global climate governance (Paris Agreement) India–Japan strategic cooperation International institutions & rule-based order Practice Question “Article 6 of the Paris Agreement represents a shift from climate ambition to climate implementation.” Examine how India can leverage Article 6 to achieve growth-compatible decarbonisation.(250 Words) What is Article 6? Article 6.2: Bilateral / plurilateral transfer of ITMOs (Internationally Transferred Mitigation Outcomes). Requires corresponding adjustments to prevent double counting. Article 6.4: Centralised UN-supervised crediting mechanism (successor to CDM). Emphasis on additionality, environmental integrity, transparency. Article 6.8: Non-market approaches (capacity building, tech cooperation). Constitutional Dimension Article 48A & 51A(g): Environmental protection → constitutional basis for climate action. International law alignment: India exercising CBDR-RC within Paris framework. Domestic legal gap: No dedicated Carbon Markets Act yet; reliance on executive rules under Energy Conservation Act (amended). Governance & Institutional Architecture Designated National Authority (DNA) for Article 6 appointed. Pending clarity on: Rules for Letters of Authorisation (LoA). Application of corresponding adjustments. Interplay with Indian Carbon Market (ICM). Need for Cabinet-level Steering Committee for inter-ministerial coordination (Power, MNRE, Steel, Civil Aviation, MoEFCC). Economic & Developmental Significance for India Climate finance mobilisation: Bridges India’s climate finance gap (India needs ~$170 bn/year till 2030 – various estimates). Technology transfer: Offshore wind, green hydrogen, CCUS, SAF, fuel cells. Industrial competitiveness: Prepares Indian exports for CBAM-like carbon border measures. Growth-compatible decarbonisation: Aligns with India’s developmental state model, not growth sacrifice. Strategic Significance of India’s Article 6 Participation From credit-selling to transformation tool: Focus on industrial & technological leapfrogging, not low-cost offsets alone. Bilateral diplomacy: Deepens strategic partnerships beyond trade and defence. Resilient trade relationships: Carbon-constrained global economy → carbon credentials become trade currency. India’s Identified Priority Activities (13 sectors) High-end, future-facing sectors: Renewable energy + storage Offshore wind, solar thermal Green hydrogen, compressed bio-gas Fuel-cell mobility Advanced energy efficiency Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) CCUS in cement & steel Marine & emerging energy technologies Overview: Shift away from legacy CDM-style projects (small renewables). Direct alignment with Net Zero 2070 and deep decarbonisation pathways. Environmental & Climate Impact Coal-heavy energy mix reality: Article 6 enables energy diversification without abrupt transition shocks. Hard-to-abate sectors addressed: Steel, cement, aviation → otherwise outside scope of conventional mitigation. Carbon removals potential: Biochar, Enhanced Rock Weathering → long-term negative emissions. Data & Evidence 89 Article 6.2 cooperation arrangements across 58 Parties. Voluntary carbon projects in India: AFOLU projects take ~1,600 days to register vs <400 days in rest of Asia (CEEW). Global demand for carbon removals projected to rise sharply post-2030 (IPCC AR6 pathways). Key Challenges Institutional & Regulatory Absence of detailed Article 6 operational rules. Risk of policy uncertainty deterring investors. Administrative Multi-layered project approvals. Land-intensive projects → federal & local coordination bottlenecks. Market Design Risks Poor-quality credits → reputational risk. Weak MRV could undermine environmental integrity. Equity & Ethics Risk of enclave decarbonisation without local co-benefits. Community consent & benefit-sharing concerns. Way Forward Enact a Carbon Markets Framework Law: Legal certainty, dispute resolution, investor confidence. Single-window clearance system for Article 6 projects. Clear LoA & corresponding adjustment rules. Integrate Indian Carbon Market with Article 6 cautiously. Develop carbon removals ecosystem (R&D + standards). Lead South–South cooperation: Shared MRV platforms, pooled finance, technical assistance. Align with SDGs 7, 9, 12, 13 and principles of Just Transition. Prelims Pointers Article 6 ≠ carbon tax. Article 6.2 = bilateral ITMOs; 6.4 = UN-supervised crediting. JCM is Article 6.2, not 6.4. Corresponding adjustment prevents double counting, not double claiming. Equality isn’t the Enemy of Growth; High Inequality Erodes Social Trust Core Argument Growth without distributive justice weakens social trust, democratic legitimacy, and long-term economic sustainability. Conceptual Clarity Equality ≠ absolute sameness Refers to fair access, capability enhancement, and dignity, not uniform outcomes. Inequality problem: When it becomes structural, persistent, and politically entrenched, it harms growth and democracy. Relevance GS Paper I (Indian Society) Inequality, social cohesion, trust deficit GS Paper II (Polity & Governance) Democratic legitimacy Role of the state in welfare Constitutional values Practice Question Why is high inequality considered detrimental to long-term economic growth?Explain with reference to demand, human capital, and innovation.(250 Words) Economic Dimension Inequality is not growth-neutral: Extreme concentration of wealth → lower aggregate demand. Rich save more; poor consume more → inequality depresses demand-led growth. Human capital distortion: Unequal access to education, health, nutrition → suboptimal workforce productivity. Misallocation of talent: High inequality limits intergenerational mobility → innovation suffers. Empirical insight: IMF & World Bank studies: high inequality shortens growth spells and raises volatility. Social Dimension Erosion of social trust: Visible disparities undermine belief in fairness of institutions. Perception of rigged systems: Wealth → political influence → policy capture. Psychological impact: Inequality fuels resentment, alienation, and social fragmentation. Outcome: Rise of populism, identity politics, and social unrest. Governance & Democratic Dimension Democracy depends on legitimacy: Citizens must believe outcomes are not pre-determined by wealth. Inequality weakens democratic consent: Policy debates shift from evidence to resentment. Elite capture: Regulatory frameworks, taxation, subsidies skewed towards affluent interests. Result: Decline in trust in state capacity and democratic institutions. Ethical & Constitutional Dimension Constitutional morality: Articles 14, 15, 38, 39(b)-(c) mandate reduction of inequalities. Ethical economy: Growth that excludes large sections violates principles of justice, dignity, and fraternity. Equality as enabling condition: Not anti-growth, but pro-growth in the long run. Political Economy Insight False binary exposed: Growth vs equality is a misleading dichotomy. Real danger: Inequality reshapes politics by: Turning policy into distributional conflict. Weakening institutional credibility. Historical lesson: Stable high-growth societies invested early in broad-based welfare and opportunity. Indian Context India’s growth paradox: High GDP growth with: Persistent wealth concentration. Unequal access to quality public services. Visible fault lines: Education quality gaps. Health expenditure burden on poor. Informal sector precarity. Risk: Growth loses social legitimacy → reform fatigue and resistance. Challenges Policy focus skewed towards headline growth: Distribution treated as secondary. Weak redistributive capacity: Limited tax progressivity. Implementation gaps: Welfare leakage, uneven state capacity. Narrative problem: Equality framed as populism, not productivity-enhancing. Way Forward Reframe equality as growth enabler: Focus on capability-based equality. Strengthen public goods: Health, education, nutrition as productivity investments. Progressive but efficient taxation: Wealth and inheritance debates grounded in data. Institutional neutrality: Reduce policy capture; ensure rule-based governance. Inclusive growth narrative: Growth + fairness as complementary, not competing goals. Prelims Pointers Equality in Indian Constitution includes substantive equality, not just formal. Inequality affects social trust, not merely income distribution. IMF links inequality with shorter growth durations.

Jan 13, 2026 Daily Current Affairs

Current Affairs 13 January 2026

Content Pax Silica: India’s Likely Entry into a U.S.-Led Tech–Supply Chain Bloc EV Retrofit Push in India: Converting Old Cars to Electric AI Translation of Parliamentary Proceedings into 22 Languages Two Consecutive PSLV Failures PESA Act Implemented in Jharkhand after 25 Years: Will It Change Tribal Lives? Pax Silica: India’s Likely Entry into a U.S.-Led Tech–Supply Chain Bloc Context & Why in News ? India to be invited to join “Pax Silica”, a U.S.-led 8-nation initiative on: Semiconductors Critical minerals Artificial Intelligence Signals reset in India–U.S. strategic-tech cooperation after months of trade frictions. India was excluded in the initial launch (Dec, Washington) despite Quad membership. Relevance GS II – International Relations India–U.S. strategic partnership Minilateralism (Quad, I2U2) Strategic autonomy vs alignment GS III – Economy & S&T Semiconductors, AI, critical minerals Supply chain security Industrial policy (PLI, Semicon India) What is Pax Silica? Strategic techno-economic bloc, not a formal treaty. Aims to: Secure trusted semiconductor supply chains. Reduce dependence on China-centric manufacturing & minerals. Coordinate on AI governance, standards, and innovation. Part of broader U.S. vision of “friend-shoring” and tech alliances. Strategic Context: Why Pax Silica Matters Now ? Semiconductors as geopolitics: Chips = core of defence, AI, telecom, EVs. Critical minerals: Lithium, cobalt, rare earths → energy transition & defence. AI race: Economic productivity + military applications. Pax Silica complements: Quad tech agenda I2U2 economic corridor U.S. CHIPS & Science Act ecosystem. Why India’s Participation is Significant ? Strategic Dimension Indo-Pacific balancing: Strengthens India’s role in shaping rules-based tech order. Trust-based alignment: Without formal alliance → preserves strategic autonomy. Enhances India’s leverage in: Quad G20 Global tech governance forums. Economic & Industrial Dimension Aligns with India’s: Semicon India Programme PLI schemes Access to: Advanced chip design ecosystems. Global value chains (fab, packaging, testing). Helps India move up from: Assembly → design, materials, and equipment. Supply Chain Security Reduces vulnerability to: China-dominated rare earth processing. Diversification of: Mineral sourcing Manufacturing nodes. Why India Was Initially Excluded ? Trade tensions: U.S. imposed 50% tariffs on Indian goods. Friction over: India’s Russian oil imports. Policy divergence: Data localisation Market access issues. Current invitation reflects: Pragmatic reset rather than ideological convergence. Challenges & Risks for India Strategic Risks Over-alignment risks perception of bloc politics. China factor: Possible retaliation in trade or border diplomacy. Economic Risks High entry barriers: Capital-intensive fabs. Technology export controls (U.S. ITAR-like regimes). Policy Risks AI governance: U.S. model vs India’s development-first approach. Critical minerals: India weak in domestic reserves → dependency persists. Linkages with Other Groupings Quad: Security + tech norms. I2U2: Economic innovation corridor. BRICS: India must balance tech alignment with Global South leadership. Way Forward for India Selective participation: Focus on semicon design, OSAT, minerals processing. Insist on technology access, not just market integration. Leverage Pax Silica for Global South: Act as bridge between advanced tech & developing world. Domestic reforms: Ease land, power, water bottlenecks for fabs. Parallel diversification: Continue cooperation with EU, Japan, South Korea. Pax Silica – Members United States (Lead country) Japan Australia South Korea Singapore United Kingdom Netherlands Israel United Arab Emirates EV Retrofit Push in India Context & Why in News ? Delhi government announced incentives under its upcoming EV Policy to promote retrofitting of old ICE vehicles into EVs. Incentives include: ₹50,000 for first 1,000 retrofitted vehicles. Focus on 2-wheelers & 3-wheelers initially. Policy aims to address urban air pollution, vehicle scrappage gaps, and affordability barriers to EV adoption. Relevance GS III – Environment & Economy Electric mobility Urban air pollution Circular economy GS II – Governance Urban transport policy Centre–State regulation (CMVR) What is EV Retrofitting? Retrofitting = converting an Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicle into an Electric Vehicle (EV). Key components replaced: Engine → Electric motor Fuel tank → Battery pack Transmission simplified Requires approval under Central Motor Vehicles Rules (CMVR) and testing by agencies like ARAI / ICAT. Economic Analysis: Why Retrofitting Is Expensive ? Retrofit cost: 2-wheelers: ~₹60,000–₹1 lakh 4-wheelers: ₹3.5–6 lakh High cost drivers: Battery (~40–50% of cost) Low economies of scale Certification & compliance costs Concerns Battery sourcing & disposal: Environmental costs of lithium extraction. Limited lifecycle benefit: If retrofit lifespan < new EV lifespan. Technology & Industry Dimension Market maturity: Retrofit industry still nascent. Supply chain gaps: Limited certified vendors. Warranty issues: Retrofit kits often offer: ~3-year battery warranty ~1 lakh km motor warranty Safety & reliability: Fire risk concerns if standards not enforced. Key Challenges Economic High cost vs declining cost of new EVs. Limited subsidy support compared to new EVs. Institutional Complex approval & certification. Lack of uniform standards across states. Environmental Battery recycling ecosystem still weak. Market Low consumer confidence and limited scale. Way Forward Targeted retrofitting strategy: Focus on: 2W, 3W, taxis, delivery fleets. Battery-as-a-Service (BaaS): Reduce upfront retrofit cost. Stronger incentives: Link with vehicle scrappage policy. Standardisation: National retrofit standards & safety norms. Urban low-emission zones: Mandate retrofitting or EV-only access. Parallel push: Do not dilute incentives for new EVs. AI Translation of Parliamentary Proceedings into 22 Languages Context & Why in News ? From 2026, parliamentary proceedings and official paperwork will be translated using AI into 22 Scheduled Languages. Announcement by the Om Birla, aligned with Lok Sabha Secretariat’s digitisation drive. Aim: Full linguistic accessibility, real-time or near real-time translation. Relevance GS II – Polity & Governance Parliamentary functioning Linguistic inclusion E-governance Constitutional & Legal Dimension Article 120: Allows use of Hindi/English and permits other languages as authorised by Parliament. Eighth Schedule: Recognises 22 Scheduled Languages → normative basis for inclusion. Article 350: Right to representation in one’s language. Spirit of the Constitution: Linguistic diversity + democratic participation. Governance & Democratic Significance Deepening representative democracy: MPs, especially from non-Hindi states, can engage more effectively. Public accessibility: Citizens gain direct access to debates in their mother tongue. Legislative quality: Better comprehension → informed debate and scrutiny. Transparency: Entire proceedings, not just summaries, made accessible. Technology & Administrative Dimension Use of AI/NLP tools: Machine translation + human post-editing. Phased implementation: Currently available in 10 languages → 22 by end-2026. Human–AI hybrid model: Contract translators + younger AI-literate professionals. Digitisation push: Linked with e-Vidhan, e-Parliament initiatives. Ethical & Constitutional Concerns Accuracy & nuance: Legislative language is technical; mistranslation can alter meaning. Accountability: Who is responsible for errors—AI vendor or Secretariat? Bias & data training: Regional dialects under-represented in datasets. Digital divide: Access assumes digital literacy and connectivity. Key Challenges Technical Context loss in: Legal terms Sarcasm, interruptions, procedural phrases. Difficulty in low-resource languages. Institutional Over-reliance on AI without robust human oversight. Version control between original and translated texts. Democratic Risk of misinterpretation influencing public opinion. MPs may rely on AI translations during debates. Way Forward Human-in-the-loop model mandatory for final versions. Authoritative language principle: Original text prevails in case of dispute. Standardised legislative glossaries across languages. Independent audit of AI tools for bias and accuracy. Capacity building: MPs & staff trained to use translated material responsibly. Gradual rollout with feedback loops. Two Consecutive PSLV Failures Context & Why in News ? Indian Space Research Organisation’s Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) has suffered two consecutive failures: PSLV-C61 (May 2025): Pressure drop in PS3. PSLV-C62 (Jan 2026): Disruption in roll rate of PS3, deviation from intended orbit. First time in PSLV’s 32-year history that back-to-back failures have occurred. Raises concerns beyond “bad luck” → systemic and organisational scrutiny. Relevance GS III – Science & Technology Space technology Failure analysis & reliability PSLV at a Glance Four-stage launch vehicle: PS1 & PS3: Solid stages PS2 & PS4: Liquid stages Known for high reliability and cost-effectiveness. Backbone of India’s: Earth observation Navigation (IRNSS) Commercial launches (earlier phase) Failure History Snapshot 5 failures / partial failures in ~64 launches. Earlier failures were isolated & time-separated (1993, 1997, 2017). 2025–26 failures clustered around PS3 → commonality demands scrutiny. Technical Analysis Why PS3 Matters ? PS3 (third stage): Solid motor Provides crucial velocity shaping & attitude stability. Failures observed: Pressure drop (C61) Roll-rate instability (C62) Indicates possible issues in: Motor casing integrity Thrust vector alignment Sensor-actuator feedback loop Possible Technical Causes Manufacturing variability in solid propellant. Ageing supply-chain components. Quality assurance gaps in: Pressure regulators Inertial navigation sensors Configuration management challenges due to PSLV variants (CA, XL, DL). Strategic PSLV supports: Surveillance Weather & disaster management Strategic payloads Reliability dip → national security sensitivity. Science & Technology Ecosystem Perspective Maturity paradox: Highly mature systems risk complacency. ISRO increasingly focused on: Gaganyaan LVM3 Reusable Launch Vehicle Risk of attention dilution for “legacy” systems like PSLV. Comparative Insight NASA / ESA practice: Mandatory public post-failure disclosures. Independent review boards. Transparency improves: Learning curve Public confidence International credibility Way Forward Deep-dive PS3 audit: Design, material science, manufacturing chain. Public release of FAC findings (non-sensitive parts). Digital twin & AI-based anomaly prediction. Independent safety oversight board within ISRO. Gradual phase-out / redesign of PSLV as small-launch ecosystem matures. Strengthen role of private launch vehicles to reduce strategic dependence. PESA Act Implemented in Jharkhand after 25 Years: Will It Change Tribal Lives? Context & Why in News ? Panchayat (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act rules notified in Jharkhand in 2025–26, 25 years after statehood. Applies fully in 13 districts, partially in 3. Reignites debate on Gram Sabha supremacy, customary law, and administrative control in Fifth Schedule Areas. Relevance GS II – Polity & Governance Fifth Schedule Tribal self-governance Panchayati Raj in Scheduled Areas GS I – Indian Society Tribal autonomy & customary law Constitutional / Legal Dimension Fifth Schedule (Article 244): Mandates special governance for Scheduled Areas to protect tribal autonomy. PESA, 1996: Extends Part IX (Panchayats) to Scheduled Areas with modifications. Core spirit: Gram Sabha as basic unit of self-governance. Key Constitutional Anchors: Article 13 (customary law protection via PESA). Articles 38, 39(b): distributive justice, community control over resources. Fault Line: Jharkhand rules alleged to dilute Sections 4(a), 4(d) of PESA → erosion of protection to customary law, cultural identity, community ownership. Governance & Administrative Dimension What the Rules Provide: Gram Sabha declared “supreme” in Scheduled Areas. President chosen as per traditional customs. Powers over: Minor minerals, forest produce, small water bodies. Local dispute resolution; fines up to ₹2,000. Critical Governance Concerns: District Deputy Commissioner: Recognises and notifies Gram Sabhas and boundaries → top-down control. Gram Sabha excluded from: District Mineral Foundation (DMF). Tribal Sub Plan (TSP). Institutional Tension: Panchayati Raj Institutions + bureaucracy vs customary institutions (Manki-Munda, Majhi-Pargana). Economic & Resource Governance Dimension Resource-rich State: ~30% forest cover. ~40% of India’s mineral reserves. Annual mineral output: ~160 million tonnes. Disconnect: High resource extraction vs persistent tribal poverty. Key Issue: Gram Sabha authority limited to minor minerals, not major mining, DMF funds, or consent mechanisms. Social & Human Development Dimension Demographic Reality: STs = 26.3% of population (~32.9 million). 32 tribal communities; 8 PVTGs. Persistent Deprivation: Literacy (STs): 57.2% (2011). Only 6.08% tribal households in salaried jobs. Health Indicators: 28% tribal women with BMI < 18.5 (NFHS-5). High anaemia, malaria burden. Water & Welfare: Jal Jeevan Mission coverage: ~55%, tribal areas lagging. Environment & Forest Rights Dimension Forest Rights Act (FRA) Interface: 110,756 claims filed; only ~56% approved by Aug 2025. Civil Society Concern: Jharkhand Forest Rights Forum alleges: Bureaucratic dominance. Community forest management rights diluted. Structural Issue: PESA + FRA not harmonised in rules → fragmented tribal governance. Criticisms Institutional Gram Sabha authority conditional on administrative recognition. Weak linkage with DMF, TSP, major development planning. Legal Omission of explicit terms like “community ownership”. Customary law subordinated to executive discretion. Implementation Risk of symbolic decentralisation. Panchayat secretaries and officials can override traditional institutions. Ethical Violates principle of self-rule as intrinsic tribal right, not state concession. Way Forward Amend Rules to fully mirror PESA Section 4: Explicit protection to customary law, culture, community ownership. Gram Sabha Primacy: Recognition by community, not district officials. Expand Economic Powers: Mandatory Gram Sabha consent for DMF utilisation, major mining impacts. PESA–FRA Convergence Framework: Single institutional platform for forest and village governance. Capacity Building: Legal literacy, financial powers, independent dispute resolution. Governor’s Fifth Schedule Role: Active use of discretionary powers to safeguard tribal interests. Prelims Pointers PESA applies only to Fifth Schedule Areas, not Sixth Schedule. Jharkhand: last major Fifth Schedule state to notify PESA rules. Gram Sabha under PESA ≠ Gram Sabha under normal Panchayati Raj. Customary law protection is core to PESA, not optional.

Jan 12, 2026 Daily PIB Summaries

PIB Summaries 12 January 2026

Content Bhadrakali Temple Inscription & Somnath Legacy National Youth Day 2026 Bhadrakali Temple Inscription & Somnath Legacy Why in News? PIB highlighted a 12th-century Bhadrakali Temple inscription at Prabhas Patan. The inscription chronicles Somnath Temple’s reconstruction history, especially Solanki ruler Kumarapala’s role (1169 CE). Reinforces archaeological, epigraphic, and cultural continuity of Somnath amid repeated destruction and revival. Relevance GS I (Art & Culture / History): Temple architecture, epigraphy, Solanki dynasty. GS I (Indian Heritage & Culture): Sacred geography, continuity of religious traditions. GS II (Culture & Governance): Role of state patronage in heritage conservation. Chronology & Dating Inscription date: 1169 CE Valabhi Samvat 850 Vikram Samvat 1255 Period: Solanki (Chaulukya) dynasty, Gujarat’s medieval golden phase. Nature of the Inscription Eulogistic epigraph. Dedicated to: Param Pashupata Acharya Shriman Bhavabrihaspati. Spiritual preceptor of Maharajadhiraj Kumarapala (Anhilwad Patan). Language & tradition: Reflects Shaiva–Pashupata lineage. Combines mythology + historical memory (typical of medieval inscriptions). Somnath Temple Reconstruction Narrative Satya Yuga: Built by Chandra (Soma) in gold. Treta Yuga: Built by Ravana in silver. Dvapara Yuga: Built by Shri Krishna in wood. Kali Yuga: Bhimdev Solanki: Artistic stone temple (4th temple). Kumarapala (1169 CE): 5th reconstruction on same sacred site. Demonstrates how epigraphy blends sacred cosmology with verifiable medieval history. Role of Solanki Rulers Bhimdev Solanki: Constructed major stone phase of Somnath. Siddharaj Jaysinh: Known for justice, administrative consolidation. Kumarapala: Patron of temple revival after destruction. Symbol of state-backed religious reconstruction. Result: Prabhas Patan emerged as a hub of religion, architecture, literature. Archaeological & Architectural Significance Confirms: Continuity of sacred geography despite invasions. Use of Solanki-era architectural idioms. Reinforces Somnath as: A palimpsest site—layers of destruction and reconstruction. Museum preservation: Converts ruins into historical testimony, not mere relics. Cultural & Civilisational Dimensions Represents: Sanatan Dharma’s resilience. Valor, devotion, and cultural self-respect. Inscriptions as: Primary sources validating India’s temple-revival traditions. Symbolism: Somnath as a civilisational constant, not a static monument. Takeaway The Bhadrakali inscription at Prabhas Patan is a crucial epigraphic source linking mythology, Solanki-era statecraft, and the enduring civilisational resilience of the Somnath Temple. National Youth Day 2026 Why in News? National Youth Day observed on 12 January 2026, commemorating Swami Vivekananda’s birth anniversary. PIB outlines India’s youth empowerment architecture aligned with Viksit Bharat @2047. Highlights scale, outcomes, and convergence across youth engagement, skilling, employment, entrepreneurship, health, and civic participation. Relevance GS II (Governance & Social Justice): Youth policy, skilling, employment, health. GS III (Economy): Human capital, labour markets, entrepreneurship. Demographic Context Over 65% of India’s population below 35 years. Youth as: Demographic dividend Key drivers of economic growth, social cohesion, and governance renewal. Policy focus: Youth as partners, not mere beneficiaries. Institutional Framework Nodal Ministry: Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports (MYAS). Whole-of-government approach: MYAS, MSDE, MeitY, MoHFW, DPIIT, MoRD, Defence. Emphasis on digital platforms, decentralised participation, outcome-based skilling. Youth Engagement, Leadership & Civic Participation Mera Yuva Bharat (MY Bharat) Autonomous body under MYAS; launched 31 Oct 2023. Technology-driven national youth platform. Core functions: Volunteering Experiential learning Leadership development Skill discovery Scale (as of 26 Nov 2025): 2.05 crore youth registered 14.5 lakh volunteering opportunities 16,000+ youth clubs 60,000+ institutional partners Governance logic: “Yuva Shakti se Jan Bhagidari” Youth as co-creators of development. MY Bharat Mobile App Mobile-first governance. Features: Multilingual interface AI chatbots, voice navigation Smart CV Builder Digital certificates & badges At launch: 1.81 crore youth 1.20 lakh organisations onboarded. MY Bharat 2.0 MoU (30 June 2025): MYAS + Digital India Corporation. Objectives: Deeper digital engagement Career services, mentorship, Fit India integration. Strategic intent: Empower Amrit Peedhi Align youth governance with Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI). National Service & Social Capital National Service Scheme (NSS) Launched 1969. Coverage: 657 universities 20,669 colleges 11,988 schools Annual engagement: ~39 lakh volunteers Focus: Community service National integration Personality development. Key instruments: National Integration Camps Republic Day Parade Camp National Youth Festivals. Viksit Bharat Young Leaders’ Dialogue (VBYLD) Reimagined National Youth Festival. 2nd edition: 9–12 Jan 2026, Bharat Mandapam. Participation: ~3,000 youth 100 international delegates. Process innovation: Four-stage Challenge Track 50.42 lakh youth participated in digital quiz. Outcome: Youth policy ideas presented to national leadership. Youth & National Security Agnipath Scheme Launched 15 June 2022. Youth aged 17.5–21 recruited as Agniveers for 4 years. Outcomes: 46,000 trained in first batch (2023) ~1.5 lakh enrolled till Feb 2025 Governance logic: Youthful armed forces Skills + discipline + post-service employability. Education-to-Employment Pipeline PM-SETU Investment: ₹60,000 crore. Objective: Modernise 1,000 Government ITIs. Model: 200 hub ITIs + 800 spoke ITIs “Government-owned, industry-managed”. Linked initiatives: 1,200 vocational labs in JNVs & EMRS. Alignment: NEP 2020 Aspirational districts Tribal & remote inclusion. Skill India Ecosystem Skill India Mission (SIM) Launched 15 July 2015. Beneficiaries since 2014: 6+ crore. Restructured programme (2022–26): Outlay: ₹8,800 crore Merged PMKVY 4.0, NAPS, JSS. Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY) Total enrolment (till 31 Oct 2025): 1.76 crore. Trained: 1.64 crore. Evolution: PMKVY 1.0 → PMKVY 4.0. Shift to On-the-Job Training (OJT). Inclusivity: 45% women Strong SC/ST/OBC participation. Future-ready skills: AI, drones, robotics, IoT. Jan Shikshan Sansthan (JSS) Non-formal, doorstep skilling. Beneficiaries (2018–2025): 32.5 lakh. 82% women beneficiaries. Focus: Non-literates School dropouts Marginalised communities. National Apprenticeship Promotion Scheme (NAPS) Since 2016: 49.12 lakh apprentices engaged. NAPS-2 (2025–26): Target: 13 lakh apprentices. Instrument for industry-integrated skilling. Rural Youth & Livelihoods DDU-GKY Rural youth placement-focused scheme. Placement rate: ~65%. Trained: 16.9 lakh Placed: 10.97 lakh. RSETIs Bank-led entrepreneurship model. Trained (till June 2025): 5.67 crore candidates. Emphasis: Credit linkage Self-employment. Entrepreneurship & Employment Pradhan Mantri Viksit Bharat Rozgar Yojana Announced 15 Aug 2025. Outlay: ₹1 lakh crore. Target: 3.5 crore jobs in 2 years. Dual incentive: Youth wage support Employer contribution subsidy. Startup India Launched 16 Jan 2016. Recognised startups (Oct 2025): 1.97 lakh. Key pillars: Ease of doing business Tax incentives Fund of Funds (₹10,000 crore). Structural shift: Rise of Tier-II & Tier-III startups. Startup India Seed Fund Scheme (SISFS) Early-stage risk capital. Approved: 219 incubators ₹945 crore. Pradhan Mantri MUDRA Yojana 10 years completed (2025). Loans sanctioned: 53.85 crore ₹35.13 lakh crore. Focus: Women First-generation entrepreneurs. Health, Fitness & Well-being Fit India Movement Launched 29 Aug 2019. Behavioural change approach. Instruments: Fit India School Certification Sundays on Cycle Fitness Pledge Fit India App. Youth Spiritual Summit & Kashi Declaration Held July 2025, Varanasi. Theme: “Nasha Mukt Yuva for Viksit Bharat”. Kashi Declaration: 5-year roadmap Youth-led, stakeholder-defined roles. Integrates: Spiritual capital + public health governance. Rashtriya Kishor Swasthya Karyakram (RKSK) Launched 2014. Target group: 10–19 years. Six domains: Nutrition Mental health SRH Substance misuse Violence & injuries NCDs. Shift from curative to preventive-adolescent-centric model. Takeaway National Youth Day 2026 underscores India’s shift from welfare-centric youth policy to a participation-driven, skill-linked, and purpose-oriented youth governance model aligned with Viksit Bharat @2047.

Jan 12, 2026 Daily Editorials Analysis

Editorials/Opinions Analysis For UPSC 12 January 2026

Content Delimitation, Finance Commission & Southern States Quad in 2025: A Year of Interregnum Delimitation, Finance Commission & Southern States Why in News? Renewed debate on post-2026 delimitation of Lok Sabha seats ahead of the 2029 General Elections. Finance Commission allocations to southern States declining as population carries ~50% weight in tax devolution. Concern that States which successfully reduced fertility will face loss of political and fiscal power. Delimitation Commission (DC) likely to be constituted after Census 2026 (expected results by Oct 2028). Relevance GS II – Polity & Governance Delimitation Commission: constitutional mandate, democratic representation. Federalism: Centre–State balance, political equity. Constitutional amendments: 42nd, 84th, 87th CAA. Role of constitutional bodies: Finance Commission vs Delimitation Commission. GS III – Economy Fiscal federalism and horizontal imbalances. Demographic transition and economic performance. Incentive structures in public policy. Practice Question “Post-2026 delimitation risks undermining the principle of cooperative federalism.” Examine in the context of demographic transition across Indian States.(250 Words) Core Issue Policy paradox: States investing in health, education, and family planning face: Reduced Union tax share. Potential relative loss of Lok Sabha seats. Population growth since 1991 concentrated in: Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh. Southern States (TN, Kerala, Karnataka, AP, Telangana): Near-replacement or below-replacement TFR. Slower population growth → representation penalty. Constitutional & Legal Background 84th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2001: Froze Lok Sabha seat allocation till Census after 2026. Explicit intent: incentivise population stabilisation. Census delay: 2021 Census postponed. Results now expected 2028, enabling DC before 2029. Implication: Seat proportions may change, widening absolute seat gap between North & South. Fiscal Federalism Link Finance Commission criteria (15th FC indicative): Income distance: ~50%. Population (2011): significant weight. Demographic performance. Tax effort. Southern States’ grievance: High contribution to GDP & taxes, declining relative transfers. Key contradiction: FC rewards population control. DC likely to penalise population control. Political Impact of Delimitation Even if seat proportion freezes, absolute numbers matter: Northern States gain more MPs. Southern States’ agenda-setting power weakens. Risk of permanent political dominance by high-population States. Proposed Solutions Increase Lok Sabha Seats (Status Quo Ratios) Basis: 2011 Census. Lok Sabha size: ~866 seats. Pros: No State loses seats. Least disruptive. Cons: Still rewards high population growth. Equal Representation in Rajya Sabha Fixed seats per State (e.g., 10 each). RS strength: ~290. Federal logic (US Senate model). Politically unlikely due to Lok Sabha dominance focus. Expand Vidhan Sabhas Equalise MLAs per 1,000 population. Improves State-level representation. Does not address Lok Sabha power imbalance. Digressive Proportionality (Most Viable) Lok Sabha seats: 60% population-based 40% demographic performance-based Rewards States with: Lower fertility. Better human development. Mirrors: EU Parliament’s digressive proportionality. Aligns with Finance Commission logic. Comparative & Conceptual Anchor Digressive Proportionality: Larger States: more seats, fewer per capita. Smaller States: fewer seats, higher vote weight. Balances: One person, one vote vs federal equality. Strategic Imperative for Southern States Build early political consensus before DC constitution. Demand: Explicit inclusion of demographic performance in delimitation. Frame issue as: Rewarding responsible governance, not regional favouritism. Takeaway Post-2026 delimitation risks penalising States that achieved demographic transition; adopting digressive proportionality offers a constitutionally consistent and federal solution to balance representation with responsibility. Delimitation – Static Notes What is Delimitation? Delimitation: Redrawing boundaries of Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assembly constituencies to reflect population changes. Objective: Equal representation → “one person, one vote, one value”. Constitutional Provisions Article 82: Parliament enacts a Delimitation Act after every Census. Article 170: Delimitation of State Legislative Assembly constituencies. Article 327: Parliament’s power over elections. Article 329: Bars judicial interference in delimitation orders. Delimitation Commission (DC) Nature: Independent, high-powered statutory body. Constitution: Chairperson: Retired Supreme Court judge. Members: Chief Election Commissioner / Election Commissioner. State Election Commissioners. Key Feature: DC orders have the force of law. Not challengeable in court. Historical Timeline Delimitation Commissions constituted in: 1952 1963 1973 2002 Last major delimitation: Based on 2001 Census (implemented in 2008). Freezing of Seats 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976 Froze Lok Sabha and Assembly seats based on 1971 Census. Period: 1976–2000. Rationale: Encourage population control. 84th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2001 Extended freeze till Census after 2026. Allowed: Readjustment of constituency boundaries, not seat numbers. Explicit intent: Reward States with successful family planning. 87th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003 Permitted delimitation using 2001 Census data. Did not alter total number of seats. Quad in 2025: A Year of Interregnum Why in News? 2025 marked the first year since 2021 without a Quad leader-level summit, despite escalating Indo-Pacific tensions. Return of Donald Trump as U.S. President triggered uncertainty over U.S. multilateral commitments. India was scheduled to host the 2025 summit, but it did not materialise, raising questions about the Quad’s momentum. Despite this, Quad initiatives continued, signalling resilience rather than decline. Relevance GS II – International Relations Indo-Pacific strategy. Minilateralism vs multilateralism. India–US–Japan–Australia strategic convergence. Rules-based international order. GS III – Security Maritime security. Naval interoperability. Maritime domain awareness. Practice Question The absence of a Quad leaders’ summit in 2025 does not imply strategic irrelevance. Critically analyse. (15 marks) Strategic Context Indo-Pacific remains the most contested geopolitical theatre. Intensifying U.S.–China strategic competition. Quad positioned as a key instrument to: Uphold a rules-based order. Promote a Free, Open, and Inclusive Indo-Pacific (FOIP). Core members: India, U.S., Japan, Australia — all maritime democracies. Quad’s Evolution Formed: 2004 (Indian Ocean tsunami coordination). Dormancy: Post-2008 due to strategic hesitations. Revived: 2017, amid China’s growing regional assertiveness. Leader-level summits: 6 summits held (2021–2024). Latest: 2024, Wilmington (U.S.) — President Biden’s farewell summit. Trump Factor in 2025 Trump was a key architect of the 2017 revival of the Quad. Initial concerns: “America First” doctrine. Skepticism toward multilateral groupings. Reassurance signals: U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio hosted Quad Foreign Ministers: January 2025 July 2025 Quad featured as first major diplomatic engagement of Rubio. Why 2025 Is Called an “Interregnum” ? No leader-level summit for over a year. Political transitions: U.S.: Biden → Trump. Japan: New PM Sanae Takaichi (Oct 2025), yet to attend Quad summit. Quad lacks: Treaty status. Secretariat. Hence, leader-level summits are critical for strategic coherence. Continuity Through Operational Initiatives Quad-at-Sea: Ship Observer Mission Operationalised: June 2025 Enhances: Coast Guard cooperation. Maritime domain awareness. Ports of the Future Partnership First meet: October 2025, Mumbai Focus: Sustainable and resilient port infrastructure. Indo-Pacific connectivity. Malabar Naval Exercise Held in Guam (2025). Though not formally a Quad initiative: Involves all four Quad navies. Enhances interoperability and maritime signalling. Assessment of Quad’s Resilience No summit ≠ strategic drift. Continued programme delivery shows: Institutional learning. Operational depth beyond symbolism. Quad functioned as a “minilateral without paralysis”. Why Leader-Level Summit Matters ? Historically, major initiatives announced at: Vaccine partnership. Critical technologies. Maritime security. Diplomatic push underway: U.S. Ambassador to India Sergio Gor (Oct 2025): Confirmed efforts for early 2026 summit. Strategic Implications Quad remains: Central to U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy. Crucial balancing mechanism against unilateralism. 2025 tested Quad’s institutional elasticity. Outcome: Pause, not decay. Takeaway Despite leadership transitions and the absence of a summit, 2025 demonstrated the Quad’s operational resilience, underscoring its enduring relevance in sustaining a rules-based Indo-Pacific order. Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) – Notes What is QUAD? Informal strategic forum of four democracies: India, United States, Japan, Australia Objective: Promote a Free, Open, Inclusive, and Rules-Based Indo-Pacific. Nature: Minilateral, non-treaty, non-institutional grouping. No secretariat, charter, or mutual defence obligation. Origin & Evolution 2004: Emerged from coordination during the Indian Ocean Tsunami relief. 2007: First Quad meeting (Abe Shinzo’s “Confluence of the Two Seas” vision). 2008–2016: Dormancy due to strategic hesitations (esp. Australia). 2017 Revival: Restarted amid China’s assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific. Core Strategic Objectives Uphold international law, especially UNCLOS. Counter: Coercive actions. Unilateral status-quo changes. Ensure: Maritime security. Freedom of navigation. Provide public goods in the Indo-Pacific.

Jan 12, 2026 Daily Current Affairs

Current Affairs 12 January 2026

Content Centre Seeking Smartphone Source Code Should the Age of Consent Be Lowered? Bhairav Battalions PSLV-C62 / EOS-N1 Mission HPV Vaccine and Herd Protection Zehanpora Stupas, Kashmir Centre Seeking Smartphone Source Code Why in News? Government is considering legally mandating security requirements for smartphones sold in India. Draft framework: Indian Telecom Security Assurance Requirements (ITSAR), 2023. Most contentious proposal: Access to smartphone source code for vulnerability analysis. Strong behind-the-scenes resistance from global manufacturers like Apple and Samsung. Ongoing consultations between IT Ministry and tech companies. Relevance GS II – Governance & Polity State regulation vs individual privacy. Role of executive rule-making. Digital sovereignty. GS III – Internal Security & Science & Tech Cybersecurity. Supply-chain security. Technology regulation. Basics: What is Source Code? Source code: Human-readable programming instructions that define how software functions. Considered: Core intellectual property (IP). Central to: Security architecture. Commercial competitiveness. Access risks: IP leakage. Reverse engineering. Loss of proprietary advantage. What Are the Proposed Security Measures? Under ITSAR (Drafted 2023): 1. Source Code Access Smartphone makers must: Share source code (or parts) with designated Indian testing labs. Purpose: Vulnerability analysis Detection of hidden backdoors or security flaws. 2. Mandatory Malware Scanning Automatic and periodic malware scans on devices. Applies even after sale to consumers. 3. Data & Activity Logs Smartphones must: Store device activity records for at least one year. Raises concerns on: User privacy. Surveillance architecture. Government’s Rationale Smartphones now: Handle critical personal, financial, and strategic data. Rising concerns: Cyber espionage. Supply-chain vulnerabilities. Embedded malware or backdoors. India’s position: Large digital population. Increasing reliance on foreign hardware/software. Seen as: National security and cyber sovereignty measure. Industry Concerns IP Protection: Source code disclosure risks trade secrets. Global Precedent: Fear India becoming a high-compliance market. Trust Deficit: Storage and handling of code by government labs. Privacy Risks: Mandatory logging could violate: Data minimisation principles. User consent norms. Legal & Policy Dimensions Cybersecurity Aligns with: National Cyber Security Strategy (proposed). Moves India towards: Pre-market security certification for devices. Data Protection Potential conflict with: Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023: Purpose limitation. Storage limitation. Malware scanning and logging raise: State vs individual privacy tension. Trade & WTO Issues Possible violation of: TRIPS Agreement (IP protection). Non-tariff trade barriers. Risk of: Retaliatory measures. Global Comparison China: Extensive source-code audits for foreign tech. EU / US: Prefer: Security certification. Independent third-party audits. Do not routinely demand source code access. India’s approach: More state-centric and interventionist. Strategic Implications Positives: Enhanced device-level cybersecurity. Reduced dependence on opaque foreign systems. Risks: Reduced investor confidence. Higher device costs. Slower tech diffusion. Key question: Can security be ensured without intrusive code access? Takeaway India’s proposal to seek smartphone source code reflects a shift towards assertive digital sovereignty, raising complex trade-offs between cybersecurity, privacy, and intellectual property rights. Should the Age of Consent Be Lowered? Why in News? Supreme Court (Jan 10, 2026) in State of Uttar Pradesh vs Anurudh & Anr.: Acknowledged misuse of POCSO, 2012 in consensual adolescent relationships. Urged the Union government to consider corrective measures. Rising number of POCSO cases involving 16–18-year-olds where the relationship is claimed to be consensual. Renewed debate on the conflict between adolescent autonomy and child protection. Relevance GS II – Polity & Governance Child rights vs individual liberty. Judicial interpretation of social legislation. Role of Parliament vs judiciary. GS I – Society Adolescence, sexuality, social norms. Gender and family dynamics. Basics: What Is the Age of Consent? Age of consent: Legally defined age at which a person can consent to sexual activity. In India: 18 years (gender-neutral). Anyone below 18 is a “child” → consent is legally irrelevant. Sexual activity with a minor = statutory rape, irrespective of consent. Legal Framework in India POCSO Act, 2012 Defines all persons under 18 years as children. Section 19: Mandatory reporting of suspected offences. No distinction between: Consensual adolescent relationships. Exploitative sexual abuse. IPC / Criminal Law Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013: Raised age of consent from 16 → 18. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023: Section 63: Sexual acts with a woman under 18 constitute rape, with or without consent. Distinction to Note Age of consent ≠ Age of marriage: Marriage: 18 (female), 21 (male). Consent law deals with sexual autonomy, not marital validity. Historical Evolution of Age of Consent 1860 IPC: 10 years 1891: 12 years Later raised to 14, then 16 2012 (POCSO): Raised to 18 Trend reflects: Increasing emphasis on child protection, not autonomy. Arguments in Favour of Lowering the Age (to 16) 1. Criminalisation of Consensual Adolescence Large share of POCSO cases involve romantic relationships. Enfold study (2016–2020): 7,064 POCSO judgments analysed. 24.3% involved romantic relationships. 82% victims refused to testify against the accused. 2. Ground Reality of Adolescent Sexuality NFHS-4 (2015–16): 11% girls had first sexual experience before 15. 39% before 18. Law ignores biological and social realities. 3. Judicial Concerns Bombay HC (2023): Sexual autonomy includes both: Right to engage. Right to protection. Justice B.V. Nagarathna (SC, 2025): Romantic relationships near majority age should be treated differently. POCSO often used by parents to criminalise elopement. 4. Comparative Practice Many democracies (UK, Canada, EU): Age of consent: 16. Use “close-in-age” (Romeo–Juliet) exemptions. Arguments Against Lowering the Age 1. Risk of Weakening Child Protection Majority of abuse cases involve: Known persons (family, neighbours, caregivers). MWCD Study (2007): Over 50% of abusers known to the child. Consent in such power-imbalanced relationships is often illusory. 2. Deterrence Against Exploitation Bright-line rule (under 18 = no consent): Avoids subjective interpretation. Simplifies enforcement. Dilution may: Enable trafficking. Mask coercion as “consent”. 3. Parliamentary & Expert Consensus Justice Verma Committee: Recommended 16, but Parliament chose 18. Standing Committees (2011, 2012): Rejected recognising minor consent. Law Commission (283rd Report, 2023): Lowering age would make POCSO a “paper law”. Judicial Tightrope Courts acknowledge: Harsh impact of blanket criminalisation. Yet repeatedly affirm: Consent is legally immaterial under POCSO. Example: SC (Aug 2024): Overturned Calcutta HC acquittal in a POCSO case involving a 14-year-old. Conviction upheld; sentence waived under Article 142 (not precedent). The Core Policy Dilemma Adolescent autonomy vs Child protection. Binary choice (18 vs 16) is inadequate. Real issue: Distinguishing consensual peer relationships from exploitative abuse. Middle-Path Solutions No blanket reduction of age of consent. Introduce: Close-in-age exemption for 16–18-year-olds (e.g., ≤3–4 years gap). Mandatory judicial scrutiny for coercion or abuse. Complement legal reform with: Comprehensive sex education. Adolescent-friendly reproductive health services. Gender-sensitive policing and counselling. Takeaway The age-of-consent debate is not about lowering protection, but about recalibrating the law to distinguish adolescent autonomy from exploitation without diluting the core safeguards of child protection. Bhairav Battalions Why in News? Bhairav Battalions will debut in the Army Day Parade (15 January, Jaipur). Two units participating: 2 Bhairav Battalion (Southern Command) – “Desert Falcons”. 4 Bhairav Battalion (South Western Command). Marks India Army’s visible shift towards modern, technology-driven warfare. Relevance GS III – Internal Security Modernisation of armed forces. Emerging warfare domains (drones, hybrid warfare). Basics: What are Bhairav Battalions? Newly raised, high-speed offensive units of the Indian Army. Designed to: Execute Special Forces–like tasks. Operate from tactical to operational depth. Intended to bridge the gap between: Para Special Forces (elite, limited numbers). Regular infantry (large but less specialised). Why Were Bhairav Battalions Raised? Changing Nature of Warfare Modern conflicts are: Hybrid (conventional + irregular + cyber + drones). Technology-intensive. Lessons drawn from: Global conflicts (Ukraine, West Asia). India’s operational experience, including Operation Sindoor. Operational Gaps Identified Need for: Faster, more lethal units than regular infantry. Wider availability of special-operations capability without overstretching Para SF. Key Features of Bhairav Battalions High-speed offensive orientation. Capable of: Precision strikes. Deep penetration missions. Disruption of enemy bases and formations. Flexible employment: Tactical raids. Operational-level missions. Technology & Drone Warfare Focus Integral to Army’s unmanned warfare push. Indian Army creating: Pool of over 1 lakh drone operatives. Bhairav units trained to: Operate UAVs. Conduct drone-based reconnaissance, targeting, and strikes. Reflects shift from: Man-centric → man–machine teaming. Force Restructuring Context Bhairav Battalions 15 battalions raised so far. Target: ~25 battalions in near future. Deployed across border formations. Rudra Brigades (Parallel Reform) Integrated all-arms formations. Combine: Infantry. Mechanised units. Tanks. Artillery. Special Forces. Unmanned systems. Dedicated logistics and combat support. Aim: Faster mobilisation. Higher lethality. Integrated battlefield response. Place in India’s Military Doctrine Aligns with: Theatre-level readiness. Integrated Battle Groups (IBGs) concept. Enhances: Offensive deterrence. Rapid response along borders. Reduces dependence on: Limited Para SF units for routine special operations. Strategic Significance Signals: Transition to next-generation land warfare. Improves India’s: Offensive capability without escalation dominance. Ability to respond swiftly in grey-zone conflicts. Supports: Credible deterrence against both western and northern adversaries. Challenges & Cautions High training and technology costs. Command and control integration with: Infantry. Special Forces. Air and drone assets. Avoiding dilution of Para SF’s elite role. Takeaway Bhairav Battalions represent the Indian Army’s shift towards agile, technology-enabled offensive forces, bridging the gap between conventional infantry and Special Forces in an era of hybrid warfare. PSLV-C62 / EOS-N1 Mission Why in News? ISRO commenced the 22.5-hour countdown for PSLV-C62 / EOS-N1 mission. Launch scheduled at 10:17 a.m. from Sriharikota. Mission highlights: Strategic Earth Observation satellite (EOS-N1). 15 co-passenger satellites from Indian start-ups, academia, and foreign partners. Commercial launch by NewSpace India Limited (NSIL). PSLV-DL variant with PS4 stage restart and controlled re-entry. Relevance GS III – Science & Technology Space technology. Launch vehicles. Earth observation satellites. GS III – Security Strategic surveillance. Dual-use space assets. Basics: What is PSLV? Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV): ISRO’s workhorse launch vehicle. Optimised for Sun-Synchronous Orbits (SSO) and LEO. Known for: High reliability. Multi-satellite launch capability. PSLV Variants PSLV-CA: Core Alone. PSLV-DL: Dual strap-on motors. PSLV-QL: Four strap-ons. PSLV-XL: Six strap-ons (heavy-lift PSLV). Mission Profile: PSLV-C62 64th PSLV flight. 5th PSLV-DL mission. 105th launch from Sriharikota. Launch pad: First Launch Pad. Orbit: Sun-Synchronous Orbit (SSO). Primary Payload: EOS-N1 Earth Observation Satellite. Purpose: Strategic surveillance and imaging. Users: National security. Strategic planning. Reinforces: India’s space-based intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capability. Co-Passenger Satellites: Key Features 15 small satellites. Developed by: Indian start-ups (Dhruva Space, TakeMe2Space, OrbitAid). Academic institutions. Foreign partners (Thailand-UK, Brazil, Nepal, Spain-France). Examples: Theos-2 (Thailand-UK EO satellite). CGUSAT, DSUSAT, MOI-1, LACHIT (Indian start-ups). Munal (Nepal–India collaboration). KID Capsule (Spain–France re-entry experiment). What is Special About This Mission? 1. Commercialisation via NSIL Mission operated by NewSpace India Limited. Reflects: Shift from ISRO as operator → ISRO as enabler. Supports: India’s space economy expansion. 2. Start-up & Academic Participation Strong representation of: Indian private space ecosystem. Encourages: Innovation. Indigenous space manufacturing. 3. PS4 Stage Restart & Re-entry PS4 stage restarted post satellite deployment. Purpose: Controlled de-orbiting. Space debris mitigation. Both PS4 stage and KID Capsule: Re-enter Earth’s atmosphere. Impact zone: South Pacific Ocean. What is Sun-Synchronous Orbit (SSO)? Near-polar orbit. Satellite passes over same location at same local solar time. Ideal for: Earth observation. Remote sensing. Environmental monitoring. Strategic & Policy Significance Enhances: National security surveillance. Space situational responsibility (debris mitigation). Aligns with: Indian Space Policy 2023. IN-SPACe–driven private participation. Strengthens India’s: Position as reliable global launch service provider. Takeaway PSLV-C62 reflects India’s mature space capabilities, combining strategic surveillance, commercial launches, start-up participation, and responsible space operations in a single mission. HPV Vaccine & Herd Protection Why in News? A large Swedish population-based study shows school-based HPV vaccination provides herd protection, reducing cervical cancer even among unvaccinated women. Evidence strengthens the case for including HPV vaccine in India’s Universal Immunisation Programme (UIP). Relevant as India is planning school-based HPV vaccination (ages 9–14). Relevance GS II – Governance & Social Justice Public health policy. Universal Immunisation Programme. Women’s health. GS III – Science & Technology / Health Preventive healthcare. Vaccine science. Disease elimination strategies. Basics: What is HPV? Human Papillomavirus (HPV): Sexually transmitted virus. >200 types identified. High-risk strains (notably HPV-16, HPV-18) cause: ~95% of cervical cancer. Also linked to: Anal, oropharyngeal, penile cancers. Genital warts (low-risk strains). Cervical Cancer: India Burden 2nd most common cancer among Indian women. Annual impact: ~1.25 lakh new cases ~75,000 deaths Disproportionately affects: Low-income, low-screening populations. What is Herd Protection? When high vaccination coverage reduces overall virus circulation. Protects: Unvaccinated individuals. Especially relevant for sexually transmitted infections when transmission chains are disrupted. Key Findings of the Swedish Study Cohort: Women born 1989–2000. Vaccination coverage: Rose from 25% → 80% via school-based programmes. Results: Significant reduction in precancerous cervical lesions. Even unvaccinated women benefited if community coverage was high. Critical thresholds: ≥70% coverage → visible herd effects. ~90% coverage → optimal protection. Why School-Based Vaccination Works ? Early age (9–14): Vaccination before sexual debut → maximum efficacy. School-based delivery: Higher coverage. Lower dropout. Equity across socio-economic groups. Cost-effective at population scale. HPV Vaccine: Scientific & Medical Aspects Type: Preventive, not therapeutic. Effectiveness: Nearly 100% protection against HPV-16/18-related precancerous lesions. Limitation: Does not eliminate need for screening (Pap smear / HPV DNA test). No proven herd immunity evidence yet in India, but established in: Sweden UK Australia. India’s Current Position Indigenous vaccine: CERVAVAC developed by Serum Institute of India. Policy direction: Govt considering routine immunisation inclusion. Proposed age group: 9–14 years. Challenges: Awareness gaps. Vaccine hesitancy. Need for adolescent health infrastructure. Public Health Significance Shifts cervical cancer control from: Late-stage treatment → Primary prevention. Reduces: Screening burden. Long-term oncology costs. Aligns with: WHO Cervical Cancer Elimination Strategy: 90% vaccination 70% screening 90% treatment. Ethical & Social Dimensions Gender equity: Protects women disproportionately affected. Intergenerational benefit: Herd protection amplifies social returns. Justice argument: Preventable cancer → moral obligation of the State. Takeaway High-coverage, school-based HPV vaccination can generate herd protection, making cervical cancer a largely preventable disease and strengthening the case for its inclusion in India’s universal immunisation strategy. Zehanpora Stupas, Kashmir Why in News? Archaeological discovery of ancient Buddhist stupas at Zehanpora, Baramulla (J&K). Site mentioned by Prime Minister in Mann Ki Baat. Excavations suggest structures dating back to the Kushan period (≈2,000+ years old). Reinforces Kashmir’s overlooked Buddhist heritage. Relevance GS I – Art & Culture / History Buddhism in India. Kushan period. Stupa architecture. GS I – Indian Society Cultural pluralism. Historical continuity in Kashmir. Basics: What are Stupas? Stupa: Buddhist commemorative structure. Houses relics of the Buddha or monks. Core elements: Anda (hemispherical mound) Harmika Chhatra Functions: Religious worship. Symbol of Buddha’s enlightenment and Mahaparinirvana. Location & Site Details Zehanpora village, near Baramulla town, north Kashmir. Spread across 10+ acres. Landscape: Plateau-like mound. Reduced over centuries due to: Floods. Canal digging (1970s). Long mistaken as natural earth mounds. Archaeological Findings Multiple earthen mounds forming a stupa complex. Evidence suggests: Wooden superstructure over stone base. Site used as winter halt for monks. Methods used: Modern archaeological tools. Drones and remote sensing. Dating & Historical Context Estimated age: ~2,000 years. Period: Kushan Empire (1st–3rd century CE). Kushans known for: Patronage of Buddhism. Trade along Silk Route. Gandhara art tradition. Buddhism in Kashmir: Historical Background Introduced during: Mauryan period (Ashoka) — traditional belief. Major expansion under: Kanishka (Kushan ruler). Kashmir’s role: Scholarly centre of Buddhism. Transmission point to Central Asia and China. Buddhist councils: 4th Buddhist Council traditionally associated with Kashmir (per some sources). Why Zehanpora is Significant ? Adds to known Buddhist sites: Harwan Kanispora Ushkur Hutmur Semthan Confirms: Dense Buddhist settlement in north Kashmir. Shows: Kashmir as a monastic and trade hub, not peripheral region. Global Link: France Connection Photograph of Zehanpora site found in French museum archives. Indicates: Colonial-era documentation. Early European scholarly interest. Reflects: Global dispersal of Indian archaeological records. Cultural & Civilisational Significance Challenges narrative of Kashmir as only: Shaivite or Islamic heritage region. Highlights: Pluralistic religious history. Cultural continuity across centuries. Strengthens: Buddhist civilisational map of India. Governance & Heritage Implications Need for: Site protection. Scientific excavation. Heritage tourism integration. Aligns with: Cultural revival initiatives. Soft power diplomacy via Buddhism. Takeaway The Zehanpora stupa complex reaffirms Kashmir’s role as a major Buddhist centre during the Kushan period, highlighting the region’s deep civilisational pluralism and strategic position in ancient trans-Asian networks.

Jan 10, 2026 Daily PIB Summaries

PIB Summaries 10 January 2026

Content Year End Review 2025 – Ministry of Women & Child Development (MWCD) Digitalising India’s Dairy Sector Year End Review 2025 – Ministry of Women & Child Development (MWCD) Why in News? PIB release dated 09 January 2026 published the Year End Review 2025 of MWCD. Highlights scale-up of nutrition, women safety, maternity benefits, child protection, and digital governance. Emphasises technology-led welfare delivery, DBT expansion, and convergence with NEP 2020 & tribal welfare missions. Relevance GS II – Governance & Social Justice Welfare delivery: Poshan 2.0, PMMVY, Mission Shakti, Mission Vatsalya E-governance: Poshan Tracker, FRS, Helpline 1515 Cooperative federalism: Suposhit GP Abhiyan, DAJGUA, ERSS-112 Institutions: OSCs, SHe-Box, Child Helpline, CARINGS GS I – Indian Society Women empowerment: Mission Shakti, PMMVY, shelters Children & vulnerable groups: ECCE, Mission Vatsalya, BVMB Gender issues: GBV (Nayi Chetna, 16 Days of Action) Tribal inclusion: PM-JANMAN AWCs, DAJGUA convergence Macro Overview Focus: Inclusive development, safety, nutrition, early childhood education, women-led growth. Flagship umbrellas: Mission Saksham Anganwadi & Poshan 2.0 Mission Shakti Mission Vatsalya Strong push towards real-time monitoring, biometric verification, grievance redressal. Mission Saksham Anganwadi & Poshan 2.0 (Nutrition + ECCE + Adolescent Girls) Coverage: 8.69 crore beneficiaries (PWLMs, children 0–6 yrs, adolescent girls) (as on 30 Nov 2025) Anganwadi Infrastructure 2 lakh AWCs approved for upgradation. 94,077 AWCs upgraded with improved infrastructure incl. LED screens. PVTG Focus (PM-JANMAN): 2,500 AWCs sanctioned, 2,326 operational. MWCD awarded Best Performing Ministry for PM-JANMAN implementation. Tribal Convergence (DAJGUA – MoTA): 875 AWCs sanctioned, 455 operational. 27,785 tribal beneficiaries covered. Digital Governance – Poshan Tracker Launched: March 2021 Nature: End-to-end, real-time governance tool for ICDS. Key Data (2025) 9+ crore beneficiaries registered ~8 crore children monitored monthly (height & weight) 14 lakh Anganwadi Centres connected 24 Indian languages supported PM’s Award for Excellence in Public Administration 2024 (Innovation – Centre) Functional Scope Attendance & AWC opening HCM & THR distribution ECCE instructional content ABHA & APAAR ID creation Citizen module for self-registration at nearest AWC Suposhit Gram Panchayat Abhiyan Launched: 26 Dec 2024 Objective: Identify 1,000 high-performing Panchayats. Criteria: Nutrition outcomes Infrastructure Malnutrition reduction Methodology: Poshan Tracker-based benchmarking Cross-State peer review Goal: Malnutrition-free Bharat Nutrition Outreach & Behaviour Change 8th Rashtriya Poshan Maah (2025) Launched: 17 Sept 2025, Dhar (MP) Theme: Swasth Nari, Sashakt Parivar Abhiyaan 14.33 crore activities conducted nationwide. Convergence with 20+ Ministries. PMMVY DBT Push ₹450 crore transferred in one day Beneficiaries: 15 lakh+ women Strengthening ECCE – Poshan Bhi Padhai Bhi Alignment: NEP 2020 Capacity Building 8,55,728 Anganwadi Workers trained 41,645 State/Local Master Trainers trained Curricula: Aadharshila (0–3 yrs) Navchetana (3–6 yrs) Translated into 12 regional languages Digital Learning 2.56 crore preschool activities/month logged on Poshan Tracker. Co-location with Schools Guidelines issued: 3 Sept 2025 2.9 lakh AWCs already within school premises. Helpline Rationalisation – 1515 Unified helpline for: PM CARES Poshan 2.0 PMMVY Short code changed: 14408 → 1515 Grievances (till Dec 2025): Received: 1,40,862 Resolved: 1,04,662 FRS-Based Verification (Governance Reform) Anganwadi – THR Delivery Aadhaar-based Face Recognition System (FRS) via Poshan Tracker. No separate app. Status (31 Dec 2025): Eligible: 4.73 crore eKYC completed: 4.51 crore (91.38%) THR via FRS (Dec): 2.79 crore (52.68%) PMMVY Mandatory FRS for new enrolments since 21 May 2025. 17.82 lakh beneficiaries enrolled via FRS (till 17 Nov 2025). Outcome: Reduced leakages, enhanced transparency. Mission Shakti – Women Safety & Empowerment One Stop Centres (OSCs): Approved: 1025 Operational: 865 Women assisted: 12.67 lakh Women Helpline 181: Integrated with ERSS-112 in 35 States/UTs 93.48 lakh women supported Shelter Infrastructure: 411 Shakti Sadan 531 Sakhi Niwas PMMVY Overall Impact: 4.26 crore beneficiaries ₹20,060 crore DBT Beti Bachao Beti Padhao – 10 Years Observed: 22 Jan – 8 Mar 2025 Significance: Decade of girl child protection, education & empowerment Aligned with Viksit Bharat 2047 Shift towards Women-Led Development SHe-Box Portal Launched: 29 Aug 2024 Purpose: Single-window SH Act (2013) grievance redressal Coverage: Organised & unorganised sectors Public & private Data (as on 05 Jan 2026): 1.3 lakh workplaces onboarded 50,000+ Internal Committees LCs of all 777 districts Languages: 22 + English Significance: Workplace safety, labour force participation 16 Days of Action & Nayi Chetna 4.0 Period: 25 Nov – 10 Dec 2025 Focus: Gender-based violence Nayi Chetna 4.0: 25 Nov – 22 Dec 2025 Led by Women SHGs MoRD–MWCD convergence Mission Vatsalya – Child Protection Unified Mission Vatsalya Portal operational. CARINGS adoption platform integrated. Child Helpline: Functional in all 36 States/UTs Installed in 728 districts Capacity Building: 303 Master Trainers trained Locations: Delhi, Bengaluru, Guwahati, Bhopal, Lucknow Karmayogi–iGOT Course (with LBSNAA): Enrolled: 37,242 Completed: 19,728 Key Campaigns PM Rashtriya Bal Puraskar 2025 Ceremony: 26 Dec 2025, Vigyan Bhawan 20 children from 18 States/UTs Fields: Bravery, Art & Culture, Environment, Social Service, S&T, Sports Veer Bal Diwas 2025 Observed: 26 Dec 2025 Nationwide celebrations PM interaction with PMRBP awardees Bal Vivah Mukt Bharat (BVMB) 1 year completed: 27 Nov 2025 100-day intensive campaign launched: 4 Dec 2025 Portal: 58,262 CMPOs listed 92,819 awareness activities 1.79 crore participants 8 lakh pledges recorded Takeaway Shift from welfare delivery to welfare governance. Strong use of biometrics, real-time dashboards, convergence models. Nutrition & ECCE positioned as human capital foundations. Aligns with: SDG 2, 3, 5 NEP 2020 Tribal inclusion & Women-led development. Digitalizing India’s Dairy Sector Why in News? PIB release dated 09 January 2026 published the Year End Review 2025 on digital transformation of India’s dairy sector. Highlights NDDB-led technology-driven reforms covering livestock identification, milk procurement, breeding, ERP systems, logistics, and cooperative governance. Reinforces India’s push towards traceability, farmer-centric DBT, productivity enhancement, and cost efficiency in the world’s largest dairy ecosystem. Relevance GS III – Agriculture & Economy Allied sector: Dairy & agri-GDP Farmer income: AMCS, DBT, cooperatives Agri-tech: NDLM, Pashu Aadhaar, INAPH, SSMS Logistics: GIS route optimisation, ERP DPI: Bharat Pashudhan, i-DIS, NDERP India’s Dairy Sector: Strategic Context India accounts for ~25% of global milk production (largest producer globally). Dominated by small & marginal farmers → high need for: Transparency Payment assurance Disease control Productivity enhancement NDDB positioned as the technology backbone of cooperative dairying. National Digital Livestock Mission (NDLM) – “Bharat Pashudhan” Implementing agencies: NDDB + Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying (DAHD) Core Objective Create a unified national digital livestock ecosystem with individual animal traceability. Pashu Aadhaar 12-digit unique ear tag (barcode-based) aligned with global best practices. Acts as primary key for all animal-related transactions. Coverage (till Nov 2025): 35.68 crore animals tagged Enables tracking of: Vaccination Breeding & AI Treatment & health services Bharat Pashudhan Database 84+ crore field transactions recorded. Users: Farmers Veterinarians Extension workers Benefit: Single-window animal health & productivity history. Farmer Support Tools 1962 App & Toll-Free Helpline (1962): Best practices Scheme information Doorstep veterinary services via Mobile Veterinary Units Analytical Value → NDLM strengthens disease surveillance, productivity analytics, insurance readiness, and export compliance. Automatic Milk Collection System (AMCS) Purpose: Transparent, error-free, and farmer-friendly milk procurement. Functional Design Digitally records: Quantity Fat/SNF quality Price Instant DBT to farmers’ bank accounts Real-time SMS alerts to farmers. Coverage (as on 22 Oct 2025) 17.3 lakh milk producers 26,000+ Dairy Cooperative Societies 54 milk unions Operational in 12 States/UTs System Architecture DCS Application: Windows / Linux / Android Central Portals: Union, Federation, National Mobile Apps: Farmer Society Secretary Dairy Supervisor AMCS Mobile App Adoption 2.43 lakh farmers 13,644 society secretaries 1,374 supervisors Governance Impact Eliminates manual manipulation Enhances price transparency & trust Strengthens cooperative accountability NDDB Dairy ERP (NDERP) Nature: End-to-end digital backbone for dairy & edible oil sectors. Key Features Web-based ERP (built on Frappe ERPNext – open source) No license or installation cost. Modules: Finance & Accounts Purchase & Inventory Sales & Marketing Manufacturing HR & Payroll Maker–checker workflows for internal controls. Distributor Interface iNDERP portal + mNDERP app (Android/iOS): Orders Invoices Delivery challans Payment tracking System Integration Fully integrated with AMCS → cow to consumer digital chain. Uses mass-balance technique to minimise processing losses. Analytical Value → Supports cost optimisation, supply chain transparency, and financial discipline in cooperatives. Semen Station Management System (SSMS) Objective: Quality assurance & traceability in artificial insemination. Operational Scope Bull lifecycle management Frozen Semen Dose (FSD) production Quality control & biosecurity Farm & fodder management Sales & distribution tracking Integration Linked with INSPRM (national portal). Connected to INAPH for field-level traceability. Uses RFID bull tags & lab equipment integration. Coverage 38 graded semen stations nationwide. Developed under National Dairy Plan-I (World Bank funded). Significance Improves genetic quality Enhances milk yield Reduces regional productivity gaps INAPH (Information Network for Animal Productivity & Health) Captures real-time data on: Breeding Nutrition Health services Enables project monitoring & outcome assessment. Supports evidence-based livestock interventions. Internet-based Dairy Information System (i-DIS) Purpose: National cooperative dairy MIS & benchmarking platform. Coverage 198 milk unions 29 marketing dairies 54 cattle-feed plants 15 federations Functional Utility Tracks: Milk procurement & sales Manufacturing & distribution Input supply Enables inter-union benchmarking. Institutional Role Creates National Cooperative Dairy Industry Database. NDDB conducts regular MIS capacity-building workshops. Milk Route Optimisation (GIS-Based) Objective: Reduce logistics cost & time. Technology GIS-based digitised route planning. Replaces manual route mapping. Impact Examples Vidarbha–Marathwada Dairy Development Project (Aug 2022): 4 milk chilling centres redesigned. Significant transport cost savings. Successful pilots in: Varanasi Milk Union West Assam Milk Union Jharkhand Milk Federation Indore Milk Union Scaling Tool Web-based dynamic route optimisation software Free for dairy cooperatives. Enables: Fleet optimisation Real-time planning Fuel & emission reduction Overall Impact Assessment Farmer-centric outcomes: Assured payments Service delivery at doorstep Digital inclusion Systemic gains: End-to-end traceability Reduced leakages Data-driven policymaking Strategic alignment: Doubling farmers’ income Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) Climate-efficient logistics Conclusion India’s dairy digitalisation, led by NDDB, represents a rare case of technology successfully penetrating a smallholder-dominated sector, creating a transparent, traceable, and productivity-oriented ecosystem aligned with inclusive growth and cooperative federalism.

Jan 10, 2026 Daily Editorials Analysis

Editorials/Opinions Analysis For UPSC 10 January 2026

Content Letting the rupee slide isn’t the answer High-quality education needs trust between State and institutions Letting the rupee slide isn’t the answer Why in News? Recent editorial in The Indian Express argues against RBI’s policy of allowing rupee depreciation as a tool to manage external shocks. Context: Persistent rupee volatility amid global monetary tightening. Debate on RBI’s exchange rate management strategy, FX reserves usage, and inflation-growth trade-offs. Relevance amplified by: Rising imported inflation risks. Declining global capital flows to emerging markets. RBI’s balancing act between exchange rate flexibility and stability. Relevance GS III – Indian Economy Exchange rate management Inflation control External sector stability Capital flows & FX reserves GS II – Governance Role of RBI as an independent regulator Credibility of monetary policy institutions Practice Question Letting the rupee depreciate is often presented as a natural adjustment mechanism for external shocks. Critically examine why excessive reliance on currency depreciation can undermine macroeconomic stability in India.(250 Words) Core Argument of the Editorial Letting the rupee depreciate is not a sustainable macroeconomic solution. Excessive reliance on depreciation creates long-term structural and credibility risks. Key Issues Highlighted Limits of Rupee Depreciation as a Policy Tool Depreciation may: Temporarily support exports. Reduce pressure on FX reserves. But: India’s exports are import-intensive → weak competitiveness gains. Trade balance response is limited and delayed (J-curve effect). Imported Inflation Risk Rupee depreciation: Raises cost of oil, fertilisers, electronics, defence imports. Directly fuels cost-push inflation. Inflation transmission: Undermines monetary policy credibility. Forces tighter domestic financial conditions. Corporate Balance Sheet Stress Many Indian firms have: Unhedged foreign currency exposure. Sharp rupee fall: Inflates external debt servicing. Weakens balance sheets → investment slowdown. FX Reserves Are Not Just a Stockpile Reserves serve: Confidence anchor for investors. Buffer against sudden stops. Excess volatility: Increases precautionary reserve demand. Ironically raises pressure on FX reserves instead of reducing it. The “Equilibrium Exchange Rate” Fallacy RBI’s implicit assumption: Market will find a “fair value” if intervention is limited. Editorial’s critique: Equilibrium exchange rate is unobservable and unstable. Global savings-investment dynamics are shifting unpredictably. Risk: Overshooting and self-fulfilling depreciation cycles. Volatility vs Flexibility Trade-off Limited two-way volatility: Encourages hedging. Disciplines speculative positions. Excess volatility: Discourages trade and investment. Raises transaction costs. Hurts small and medium enterprises disproportionately. Capital Flow Dynamics In EMs like India: Capital flows are pro-cyclical. Currency overshooting: Triggers outflows instead of correcting imbalances. Creates feedback loops between currency and capital markets. What Should RBI Do Instead? 1. Managed Flexibility Allow gradual adjustments, not sharp slides. Prevent disorderly movements via calibrated intervention. 2. FX Reserve Utilisation Use reserves to: Smooth volatility. Anchor expectations. Not to defend a fixed level, but to avoid destabilising overshoot. 3. Encourage Hedging, Not Speculation Stable currency environment: Promotes long-term hedging. Discourages short-term carry trades. 4. Policy Credibility over Tactical Gains Prioritise: Inflation control. Financial stability. Predictability in macro framework. High-quality education needs trust between State and institutions Why in News? Recent editorial in The Indian Express discusses structural reforms in Indian higher education in the context of: NEP 2020 implementation Proposed Bharat Shiksha Adhisthan Bill, 2025 Expansion of Viksit Bharat @2047 vision Highlights tensions between: State regulation vs institutional autonomy Scale vs quality in higher education. Relevance GS II – Governance Role of the State in education Regulatory reforms Cooperative institutional governance GS III – Human Capital & Growth Education–productivity linkage Innovation ecosystem Skill and knowledge economy Practice Question Critically examine why trust between the State and higher education institutions is essential for achieving quality and global competitiveness in Indian education.(250 Words) Central Thesis High-quality higher education cannot be achieved through control-heavy regulation alone. It requires: Trust-based governance Academic autonomy Outcome-oriented accountability, not micromanagement. Key Arguments Explained NEP 2020 as a Structural Shift NEP marks a transition from: Rigid degree structures → flexible, multidisciplinary pathways Rote evaluation → holistic, competency-based assessment Introduction of: Multiple entry–exit options Academic Bank of Credits Success depends on institutional freedom, not uniform templates. Role of the State: Enabler, Not Controller International evidence (esp. US, Europe): Strong state funding + low academic interference → global excellence. Indian challenge: Tendency towards procedural compliance, approvals, inspections. Editorial argues: State should set outcomes and benchmarks, not dictate processes. Regulatory Overlap and Fragmentation Existing system: Multiple regulators (UGC, AICTE, councils) Overlapping mandates → delays, uncertainty. Bharat Shiksha Adhisthan Bill, 2025: Proposes unified regulation covering: Institutions Standards Accreditation Welcomed as reform, but: Risk of centralised overreach if trust deficit persists. Differentiated Institutional Roles Not all HEIs should be treated alike. Editorial stresses: Research universities Teaching-focused institutions Liberal arts colleges Vocational & skill institutions Uniform regulation: Suppresses diversity Penalises innovation. Innovation Requires Academic Freedom World-class research thrives on: Freedom to design curricula Interdisciplinary experimentation Risk-taking Excess approvals and reporting: Reduce faculty creativity Discourage global collaboration. Global Competitiveness Gap India’s strengths: Large youth population Rising GER Gaps: Few Indian universities in top global rankings Weak international faculty & student mobility Root cause: Limited autonomy + procedural regulation. Science Education: Excellence with Gaps While elite science institutions excel: Undergraduate exposure Laboratory access Experiential learning remain uneven. Emphasis needed on: Hands-on learning Research-based pedagogy Institutional capacity building. Trust as the Missing Institutional Capital Trust deficit manifests as: Excess audits Over-regulation Suspicion-driven oversight High-performing systems operate on: Trust + accountability Outcome audits, not input control. Way Forward Suggested Outcome-Based Regulation Shift from: Permission-based → performance-based oversight Focus on: Graduate outcomes Research output Global engagement. Graded Autonomy Expand autonomy to: Proven institutions With transparent disclosures. State as Capacity Builder Invest in: Faculty development Research infrastructure Digital & blended learning ecosystems. Trust + Transparency Framework Replace micromanagement with: Public disclosure Independent accreditation Social accountability.

Jan 10, 2026 Daily Current Affairs

Current Affairs 10 January 2026

Content National Improvised Explosive Device Data Management System (NIDMS) DPDP Act, 2023 vs RTI Act, 2005 — Attorney-General’s Opinion Assam’s Pride: Golden Langur Losing Its Only Home The Mountain Monarch: Nilgiri Tahr in the Western Ghats Pesticides Management Bill, 2025: Revised Draft, Old Gaps Persist Only 67 Cities Covered under the National Clean Air Programme Drugs Problem Is Narco-Terrorism, Not a Mere Issue of Crime National Improvised Explosive Device Data Management System (NIDMS). Why in News? Union Home Minister Amit Shah inaugurated the National Improvised Explosive Device Data Management System (NIDMS). It is a first-of-its-kind national database documenting all bomb blast / IED incidents in India since 1999. Aimed at strengthening counter-terrorism investigations, trend analysis, and predictive policing. Relevance GS III – Internal Security Terrorism and insurgency Use of technology in security management Intelligence sharing and coordination GS II – Governance Role of Union Home Ministry Cooperative federalism in policing Institutional capacity building What is NIDMS? NIDMS (National IED Data Management System): A secure national digital platform. Houses comprehensive data on bomb blasts and IED incidents across India. Designed for systematic collection, standardisation, integration, and sharing of blast-related data. Institutional Framework Nodal Agency: National Security Guard (NSG) Operational Hub: National Bomb Data Centre (NBDC), NSG Headquarters: Manesar, Haryana Primary Role of NSG: Lead force for post-blast analysis in India. Coverage & Scale Temporal coverage: All IED / bomb blast incidents since 1999. User agencies: State Police forces Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) Central investigating and anti-terror agencies Nature of access: Single-click access to previously scattered case-file data. Key Features of NIDMS End of Data Silos Earlier: Explosion-related data existed across multiple agencies and case files. Now: Integrated into one centralised national repository. Signature Linking of Incidents System can establish linkages between multiple blasts based on: Location Type of explosion Explosive material Circuit and timer design Example cited: Same delayed circuit timer used in: Rameswaram café blast (March 2024) Mangaluru blast (2022) AI-Enabled Analysis Home Ministry aims to: Connect multiple internal data sources. Use advanced AI-based software for: Pattern detection Modus operandi analysis Predictive assessment of future threats. Predictive & Preventive Capability Enables: Identification of repeat signatures. Mapping of terror networks and bomb-makers. Anticipation of emerging trends in IED design and deployment. Strategic Significance Counter-Terrorism Helps: Investigate terrorist incidents across States. Establish inter-State and inter-incident linkages. Strengthens India’s intelligence-led counter-terror framework. Federal Coordination Common platform for: Centre–State cooperation. Information symmetry across police forces. Reduces duplication and investigation delays. Evidence-Based Security Policy Supports: Trend analysis of explosives used. Shifts in terrorist tactics. Enables data-driven formulation of counter-terror strategies. Governance & Technology Angle Reflects shift towards: Digital governance in internal security AI-supported law enforcement Aligns with: National security modernisation Smart policing initiatives. DPDP Act, 2023 vs RTI Act, 2005 — Attorney-General’s Opinion Why in News? Attorney-General of India, R. Venkataramani, in a written opinion, stated that the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023 does not dilute the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. Comes amid criticism from civil society and transparency advocates after the Centre notified amendments to RTI in November 2025 via the DPDP Act. Core dispute: Whether amendment to Section 8(1)(j) of RTI weakens transparency by expanding the “personal information” exemption. Relevance GS II – Polity & Governance Transparency vs privacy Role of Attorney-General Accountability mechanisms GS IV – Ethics Public interest vs individual privacy Discretion and ethical decision-making by public authorities Legal & Policy Background RTI Act, 2005 Enacted to operationalise Article 19(1)(a) (Right to know). Section 8(1) lists exemptions from disclosure. Section 8(2) provides an override clause allowing disclosure if public interest outweighs harm. DPDP Act, 2023 Enacted to protect informational privacy under Article 21, following Puttaswamy (2017). Amended RTI Act’s Section 8(1)(j) relating to personal information. What Changed in Section 8(1)(j)? Earlier Position (Pre-DPDP) Personal information could be disclosed if: It had a relationship to public activity/interest, or Larger public interest justified disclosure. Included a key proviso: Information not denied to Parliament could not be denied to citizens. Post-DPDP Amendment Language simplified to exempt “personal information” without explicitly mentioning: Public activity linkage Parliamentary disclosure proviso Triggered concerns of a blanket exemption. Attorney-General’s Opinion 1. No Dilution of RTI AG argues: Section 8(2) of RTI Act remains untouched. This section mandates disclosure of even exempt information if public interest outweighs harm. Hence, transparency safeguards still exist. 2. Balance Between Privacy and Transparency DPDP Act provides a legal framework to balance: Right to Privacy (Article 21) Right to Information (Article 19(1)(a)) Explicitly aligned with Supreme Court’s Puttaswamy judgment (2017). 3. Harmonious Construction RTI exemptions must be read with Section 8(2), not in isolation. CPIOs and appellate authorities retain discretion to disclose in public interest. Government’s Stand RTI amendment notified November 2025, even as: Other DPDP provisions were given 12–18 months for implementation. Centre maintains: No reduction in accountability. Only clarification to avoid misuse of personal data. Concerns Raised by Critics Transparency Advocates’ Arguments Removal of explicit public interest language in Section 8(1)(j): May lead to over-cautious denial by officials. Parliamentary proviso omission: Weakens a key democratic safeguard. Practical risk: Information on assets, appointments, disciplinary actions may be denied citing privacy. Constitutional Dimension Article 19(1)(a): Right to Information (derived). Article 21: Right to Privacy (Puttaswamy, 2017). AG’s view: DPDP Act restores constitutional balance, not hierarchy. Implications for Governance Positive Stronger personal data protection regime. Reduced arbitrary disclosure of private data. Compliance with global data protection standards. Risks Chilling effect on RTI usage. Increased discretion at CPIO level. Potential dilution unless Section 8(2) is robustly applied. Key Data & Facts for Mains Enrichment RTI Act enacted: 2005 DPDP Act enacted: 2023 RTI amendment notified: November 2025 Landmark case: K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) Assam’s Pride: Golden Langur Losing Its Only Home Why in News? Recent article highlights rapid habitat fragmentation threatening the Golden Langur, a globally rare primate endemic only to Assam (India) and Bhutan. Raises concerns over: Infrastructure-led habitat loss Genetic isolation Long-term survival of an endemic species Fits into broader debates on: Biodiversity conservation Human–wildlife conflict Community-led conservation models Relevance GS III – Environment & Biodiversity Endemic species conservation Habitat fragmentation Human–wildlife conflict What is the Golden Langur? Taxonomy & Identity Common name: Gee’s Golden Langur Scientific name: Trachypithecus geei Group: Old World monkeys Identified as a distinct species by Zoological Survey of India, based on documentation by Edward Pritchard Gee (1964). The IUCN Red List lists the golden langur as Endangered Geographic Distribution Endemic range: Western Assam Foothills of Bhutan’s Black Mountains Natural boundaries: Manas River (east) Sankosh River (west) Altitudinal range: 100–1,500 metres (subtropical Himalayan foothills) Population Status Estimated population in Assam: ~7,400 individuals Source: Global Ecology and Conservation (2024) One of the rarest and most threatened primates globally. Habitat & Ecology Habitat Type Subtropical broadleaf forests: Moist evergreen Semi-evergreen Riverine forests Strictly arboreal: Depends on continuous tall forest canopy. Behaviour & Social Structure Group size: Average 8 individuals Social system: One male, multiple females, juveniles Behaviour: Shy Avoids human contact Physical Characteristics Long, silky coat with golden to silvery-white sheen. Seasonal colour variation: Males darker golden Females and juveniles lighter Distinct features: Black face Pale beard Crown hair whorl Tail length often >1 metre Cultural Significance Known and revered by: Bodo community (considered descendant of a mythical monkey king) Rabha community Bodoland Territorial Council: Golden langur is the official mascot Cultural reverence has enabled community protection. Key Threats 1. Habitat Fragmentation Causes: Roads Power transmission lines Forest clearance Results in: Isolated forest patches Disrupted canopy continuity 2. Direct Mortality Factors Electrocution from overhead power lines Roadkill (especially near highways) Dog attacks near villages and plantations 3. Genetic Risks Fragmentation restricts gene flow. Leads to: Inbreeding Reduced genetic diversity Long-term population decline Conservation Efforts Protected Areas Chakrashila Wildlife Sanctuary Raimona National Park Kakoijana Reserved Forest Parts of Manas National Park Fragmented patches in Kokrajhar & Dhubri districts Community-Based Conservation Local groups: Patrol forests Prevent timber smuggling Plant native tree species Example areas: Chakrashila Kakoijana Infrastructure Mitigation Canopy bridges: 4 bridges constructed over NH-117 (Bongaigaon) Enable safe arboreal movement Reduce roadkill and electrocution What Needs to Be Done Restore forest corridors: Reconnect fragmented habitats across Assam and Bhutan Wildlife-sensitive infrastructure planning: Underground cabling in key habitats Mandatory canopy crossings Transboundary conservation: India–Bhutan coordination Strengthen community stewardship: Incentives for conservation Recognition of indigenous knowledge The Mountain Monarch: Nilgiri Tahr in the Western Ghats Why in News? New 2025 joint survey by Kerala & Tamil Nadu Forest Departments estimates Nilgiri tahr population at 2,668 individuals, indicating cautious recovery. Revival linked to: Project Tahr (Tamil Nadu, 2023) Grassland restoration and habitat connectivity efforts. At the same time, article warns recovery is fragile due to climate change, invasive species and habitat fragmentation. Relevance GS Paper III – Environment & Biodiversity Endemic species conservation Shola–grassland ecosystems Invasive species management Climate change impacts on fauna GS Paper I – Culture & Geography Sangam literature Tribal ecological knowledge Western Ghats biodiversity hotspot What is the Nilgiri Tahr? Identity & Taxonomy Common name: Nilgiri tahr Scientific name: Nilgiritragus hylocrius Category: Mountain ungulate (goat-antelope) Endemic to the Western Ghats (India only) The Nilgiri Tahr (Nilgiritragus hylocrius) is listed as Endangered on the IUCN Red List Geographic Distribution Habitat: Shola–grassland ecosystems of the Western Ghats. Elevation: Typically above 1,200 metres, prefers cliffs and alpine grasslands. Major landscapes: Eravikulam Anamalai Mukurthi Silent Valley Glenmorgan Present only in: Kerala and Tamil Nadu Cultural & Historical Significance Mentioned in: Tamil Sangam literature (Kurinji landscape) as varayãdu. Epics like Silappathikaram. Tribal knowledge: Toda, Badaga, Kota, Muthuvan tribes. Tahr tracks used to: Navigate fog Locate springs Identify safe mountain passes. Symbol: Endurance, survival, mountain wisdom. Physical & Ecological Adaptations Stocky, sure-footed body adapted to steep cliffs. Curved horns; males have silvery “saddleback” patch. Diet: Generalist feeder Consumes 120+ plant species: Grasses Herbs Shrubs Legumes Some trees. Ecological role: Maintains grassland structure Nutrient recycling Supports predator populations. Population Status – Key Data Total population: 2,668 Kerala: ~1,365 individuals Eravikulam National Park: 841 (largest, most secure population) Tamil Nadu: ~1,303 individuals Indicates recovery after decades of decline. Why Did the Tahr Decline Earlier? 1. Habitat Loss & Fragmentation Conversion of grasslands for: Agriculture Tourism infrastructure Reduced continuous shola–grassland mosaics. 2. Invasive Species Spread of: Wattle Eucalyptus Suppressed native grasses essential for tahr grazing. 3. Climate Change Rising temperatures pushing tahrs: To higher elevations Into smaller habitat zones. 4. Ecological Risks Fragmented populations led to: Genetic isolation Disease vulnerability Reduced resilience. Conservation Turnaround: What Changed? 1. Project Tahr (Tamil Nadu, 2023) Declared Nilgiri tahr as Tamil Nadu’s State Animal. Budget: ₹25.14 crore. Focus areas: Grassland restoration Invasive species removal Long-term population monitoring. 2. Grassland Restoration Revival of native grasses: Chrysopogon zeylanicus Tripogon wightii Enhances forage quality and soil fertility. 3. Community Integration Collaboration with Muthuvan tribe: Mapping migration routes Identifying feeding grounds Use of indigenous ecological knowledge. 4. Kerala’s Parallel Efforts Active conservation in: Eravikulam National Park Silent Valley National Park Protection of core breeding populations. Advanced Conservation Strategies (Current) 1. Translocation (Planned) Kerala considering relocation to: Suitable but under-occupied habitats. Includes: Habitat assessment Forage improvement Soft-release protocols. 2. Habitat Connectivity Mapping wildlife corridors across: Mukurthi Anamalai Glenmorgan Eravikulam Aim: Restore genetic exchange Reduce isolation. Key Concerns Going Forward Translocation risks if: Habitats are not ecologically stable. Climate change may: Shrink high-altitude grasslands further. Conservation success depends on: Landscape-level restoration, not isolated protection. Pesticides Management Bill, 2025: Revised Draft, Old Gaps Persist Why in News? Union Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare released a revised draft of the Pesticides Management Bill, 2025 on January 7, 2026. Bill seeks to replace the Insecticides Act, 1968 and its Rules framed over 50 years ago. Despite revisions, experts and civil society argue core regulatory and accountability gaps remain unaddressed. Public comments invited till February 2, 2026. Relevance GS Paper III – Environment & Agriculture Pesticide regulation Environmental health Sustainable agriculture GS Paper II – Governance Regulatory institutions Centre–State relations Accountability mechanisms Background & Evolution 1968: Insecticides Act enacted. 2008: First attempt to replace the Act. 2018: New Bill introduced. 2020: Revised Bill introduced in Rajya Sabha → referred to Parliamentary Standing Committee. 2025: Fresh draft released with limited changes. What the Bill Seeks to Do ? Regulate: Manufacture Import Sale Distribution Use of pesticides Aim (as per draft language): To “strive to minimise risk to humans, animals, non-target organisms, and the environment”. Promote: Transparency Traceability Farmer-centric regulation Biological and traditional-knowledge-based pesticides. Key Structural Changes in 2025 Draft Clauses reduced: From 65 (2020 draft) → 55 (2025 draft). Government claims: Simplification Ease of compliance. Critics argue: Weaker language, not stronger safeguards. Major Concerns & Gaps 1. Weak Role of State Governments States cannot permanently ban pesticides. Powers limited to: Temporary prohibition (max 1 year). Final decision rests with: Registration Committee (Union-controlled). Implication: States remain administrative implementers, not regulators. 2. Centralised Regulatory Architecture Registration Committee Constituted by Union Government. Members include: Drugs Controller General of India ICAR MoEFCC Dept. of Chemicals & Petrochemicals Plant Protection Advisor Reviews state prohibitions and decides continuation. Issue: Over-centralisation. Weak cooperative federalism in agriculture (State subject). 3. Central Pesticides Board – Advisory, Not Binding Functions: Recommend pesticides for inclusion. Frame: Good Manufacturing Practices Recall procedures Disposal norms SOPs for poisoning cases. Problem: Functions not embedded as enforceable legal provisions. Similar to 2020 draft → no strengthening. 4. Absence of Criminal Liability No explicit provision for: Criminal liability of manufacturers, distributors, marketers. Critical gaps in cases of: Pesticide misuse for suicides. Deliberate poisoning of lakes and water bodies. Weakens deterrence against corporate misconduct. 5. Diluted Environmental & Health Safeguards Language shift: From “minimise risk” → “strive to minimise risk”. Seen as: Lowering regulatory obligation. Creating ambiguity in enforcement. Flagged by organisations like Pesticide Action Network (PAN) India. 6. No Price Regulation Mechanism Bill silent on: Price control of pesticides. Concern: Farmers vulnerable to exploitation. Contradiction with “farmer-centric” claim. 7. Accountability & Redressal Deficit No robust: Compensation mechanism Liability framework Farmer grievance redressal authority. Weak enforcement against: Spurious pesticides Fake seeds (raised by Agriculture Minister in 2025). Government’s Justification Describes Bill as: “Farmer-centric legislation”. Focus on: Ease of living Transparency Traceability. Context: Month-long farmer complaints campaign (2025) highlighted spurious pesticides. Federalism & Governance Angle Agriculture is a State subject (Entry 14, State List). Bill reinforces: Central dominance in regulation and prohibition. Raises questions on: Cooperative federalism State capacity to respond to local agro-ecological risks. Environmental & Public Health Implications India is among the largest pesticide consumers globally. Pesticide misuse linked to: Farmer suicides Water contamination Biodiversity loss Weak regulation undermines: SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) SDG 3 (Health) SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption). Only 67 cities covered under clean air plan Why in News? A CSE–CREA report (Jan 2026) highlights that only 67 cities are covered under the National Clean Air Programme (NCAP). This is despite India having 1,878 cities with population above 4 lakh. Raises concerns over: Limited coverage of air-pollution control Chronic PM pollution across urban India Misalignment of funding priorities. Relevance GS Paper III – Environment Air pollution Environmental health Policy evaluation (NCAP) GS Paper II – Governance Public policy design Centre–State coordination Evidence-based policymaking Basics: What is NCAP? National Clean Air Programme (NCAP) launched in 2019. Nodal ministry: MoEFCC. Objective: 20–30% reduction in PM10 and PM2.5 levels (baseline 2017; later extended to 2026). Approach: City-specific action plans Non-attainment city focus Multi-sectoral coordination. Key Findings of the Report 1. Limited Coverage Cities with population >4 lakh: 1,878 Cities under NCAP: 67 Coverage ratio: ~3.6% Implication: Vast majority of polluted cities remain outside structured clean-air interventions. 2. India’s Most Polluted Cities (2025 PM2.5) Assam: Byrnihat – 90 µg/m³ Delhi NCR: Delhi – 35 µg/m³ Ghaziabad – 35 µg/m³ All far above: WHO guideline: 5 µg/m³ Indian NAAQS: 40 µg/m³ (annual PM2.5). 3. Widespread Chronic Pollution 44% of Indian cities face chronic air pollution. Driven by: Persistent emissions (transport, industry, construction) Not just episodic events (stubble burning, dust storms). 4. PM10 Dominance in NCAP NCAP primarily targets PM10, not PM2.5. Issue: PM2.5 is more harmful (penetrates lungs & bloodstreaaam). Under-addressed despite being dominant pollutant in most cities. Funding & Implementation Gaps 1. Misaligned Spending 68% of NCAP funds spent on: Roads Traffic management Limited spending on: Industrial emission control Clean energy transition Airshed-based interventions. 2. Sectoral Blind Spots Weak focus on: Industrial fuel switching Power plant emissions Construction dust beyond urban roads. Structural Problems in NCAP Design 1. City-Centric, Not Airshed-Based Pollution spreads across regions. Current model ignores: Inter-city transport of pollutants. Need for regional / airshed approach. 2. Exclusion of Industrial Towns Many polluted industrial clusters are: Outside NCAP Outside city-based governance frameworks. 3. Weak Regulatory Integration NCAP relies on: Action plans Advisory mechanisms Lacks: Binding emission reduction mandates Strong enforcement teeth. Implications Public Health Air pollution is among top risk factors for premature deaths in India. PM2.5 linked to: Respiratory diseases Cardiovascular disorders Reduced life expectancy. Environmental Governance NCAP’s limited reach questions: Equity in environmental protection Urban bias vs regional pollution realities. SDG Linkages SDG 3: Good Health SDG 11: Sustainable Cities SDG 13: Climate Action Way Forward Expand NCAP coverage to more cities & industrial clusters. Shift from: City-based → airshed-based planning. Rebalance funding towards: Industrial emissions Power plants Clean fuel transitions. Strengthen: PM2.5 monitoring Emission inventories Accountability frameworks. Drugs problem is narco-terrorism, not mere crime Why in News? Union Home Minister Amit Shah declared India’s drug problem as narco-terrorism, not just a law-and-order issue. Announcement coincides with: Launch of a 3-year national anti-drug campaign (2025–2028). Inauguration of National IED Data Management System (NIDMS) by NSG. Reflects a shift from policing approach to national security framework. Relevance GS Paper III – Internal Security Terror financing Organised crime Border security Use of technology in security GS Paper II – Governance Federal coordination Role of MHA Institutional strengthening What is Narco-Terrorism? Narco-terrorism: Use of drug trafficking networks to finance terrorism, insurgency and organised violence. Drugs → money → weapons → terror infrastructure. Recognised globally by: UNODC US DEA (since 1980s, Latin America). India’s Context: Why Drugs = National Security Threat 1. Terror Financing Link Drug profits fund: Terror outfits Cross-border insurgency Urban terror modules. Particularly relevant for: Punjab Jammu & Kashmir North-East. 2. Geographic Vulnerability (Facts) India lies between: Golden Crescent (Afghanistan–Pakistan–Iran) Golden Triangle (Myanmar–Laos–Thailand). Major trafficking routes: Western border (Pakistan-linked heroin) Eastern border (synthetic drugs, methamphetamine). Data & Enforcement Outcomes (As cited) 2014–2024 (last decade): ₹1 lakh crore worth drugs seized. Sharp rise from pre-2014 levels. 2024 alone: Major seizures of heroin, cocaine, synthetic drugs. Shows: Scale of narco-economy Growing sophistication of networks. Government’s Strategic Shift From Crime Control to Security Doctrine Earlier view: Drugs as law-and-order / social problem. Current view: Strategic conspiracy to destroy youth & economy. Narco-terrorism placed alongside: Terrorism Insurgency Organised crime. 3-Year “Drug-Free India” Campaign (2025–28) Pillars: Supply reduction: crackdown on traffickers. Demand reduction: awareness, de-addiction. Financial disruption: freezing narco-funds. Target: Youth protection Social health Economic security. Operational & Institutional Measures 1. Financial Intelligence Focus Emphasis on: Tracking narco-money flows Digital payment trail analysis Narco-terror networks depend on: Hawala Shell firms Cross-border laundering. 2. Integrated Forensics & Technology Use of: Forensic intelligence AI & machine learning for pattern analysis. Aim: Identify linkages between drugs, terror & explosives. 3. National IED Data Management System (NIDMS) Maintains data on: All IED incidents since 1999. Enables: Signature matching Pattern recognition Terror network mapping. Narco-terrorism link: Drugs → terror → explosives. 4. Database Integration (Key Facts) Existing platforms: CCTNS (crime & criminals) ICJS (justice delivery) NATGRID NIDMS complements them by: Adding explosives-terror data layer. Example data scale: ICJS: ~17.4 crore cases Prison database: ~2.2 crore prisoners Forensics database: ~31 lakh samples. Role of States & Police Shah directed: State DGPs to adopt mission-mode permanent teams. Better coordination between: Police NCB CAPFs Intelligence agencies. Emphasis on: End-to-end disruption (supply → finance → terror). Why This Approach Matters? Internal Security Narco-terrorism: Fuels terrorism without visible weapons. Weakens society internally. Treating it as crime alone is insufficient. Youth & Social Impact Drugs: Destroy demographic dividend. Create social instability. Hence framed as: Threat to future generations. International Cooperation Narco-terrorism is transnational. Requires: Intelligence sharing Financial tracking Border cooperation.

Verify it's really you

Posts