Posts

Daily Current Affairs

Current Affairs 08 November 2025

Content Experts Bat for Increasing Carbon Sequestration of Soil, Prioritising Endemic Trees Boost Financial Sector Reforms to Secure $30 Trillion Economy Goal SC Pushes for Reform of Colonial-Era Property Laws HAL–GE Aerospace $1 Billion Jet Engine Deal Kazakhstan to Join Abraham Accords Stray Dog Management & ABC Rules Rhesus Macaque Protection Experts Bat for Increasing Carbon Sequestration of Soil, Prioritising Endemic Trees Why in News? At The Hindu Sustainability Summit 2025, experts and policymakers emphasised the urgent need to enhance carbon sequestration in Indian soils (currently ~0.15%) to 2–5%, and to prioritise endemic tree species for long-term ecological balance. The discussion highlighted climate governance, ESG integration, and sustainable industrial practices for achieving India’s climate and net-zero goals. Relevance : GS 3 – Environment & Sustainable Development Climate Change Mitigation & Carbon Sequestration Biodiversity Conservation & Role of Endemic Species Sustainable Agriculture & Soil Health Management Corporate ESG & Green Governance Climate Policy (TN Climate Mission, SDGs, Net Zero 2070) Background Carbon sequestration: The process of capturing and storing atmospheric CO₂ in vegetation, soil, and other carbon sinks. India’s soil organic carbon levels have declined drastically due to intensive agriculture, deforestation, and urbanisation. The summit theme — “Policy and Governance for Climate Action” — focused on cross-sector collaboration between government, industry, and civil society to accelerate sustainability transitions. Key Highlights Soil Carbon and Endemic Trees Sultan Ahmed Ismail, Member, State Planning Commission (TN), urged for increasing soil carbon to at least 2–5%. Emphasised endemic trees over fast-growing exotics, as they better support local biodiversity, soil microbes, and earthworm activity. Highlighted the need for inter-departmental coordination to align agricultural, forestry, and climate policies. Corporate Climate Action: CPCL’s Example Rohit Agrawala, Director (Finance), CPCL, outlined a “Planet–People–Profit” integrated approach. Key sustainability milestones: Zero freshwater withdrawal; first sewerage reclamation plant in Asia + 5.8 MGD desalination unit. Rainwater harvesting: 57 sites; stormwater augmentation: 79,500 KL. Clean energy transition: RLNG, BS-VI fuels, 17.6 MW solar & wind; 400 kV grid for 100 MW renewable integration. CPCL follows Business Responsibility and Sustainability Reporting (BRSR) and integrated ESG reporting, aligned with the UN SDGs. Corporate Governance and ESG Leadership Jayanthi Raju Vadivelu (ERM) emphasised board-level accountability for sustainability strategy. ESG must go beyond compliance — serve as a driver of innovation and green finance. Proper ESG disclosures increase investor trust and attract capital for low-carbon technologies. Public Policy and Local Governance Girish Palwe, Assistant Mission Director, Tamil Nadu Climate Change Mission, shared progress on the Chief Minister’s Green Fellowship Programme, implemented across all districts. Advocated for bottom-up, locally adaptive climate policies rather than uniform one-size-fits-all frameworks. Key Data Points Current soil carbon content in India: ~0.15%. Ideal level for resilient ecosystems: 2–5%. CPCL renewable energy capacity: 17.6 MW; goal to scale to 100 MW import capacity. Significance Environmental: Enhancing soil carbon improves water retention, biodiversity, and climate resilience. Economic: Healthy soils reduce fertilizer dependency and enhance agricultural productivity. Governance: ESG reporting and localised policy execution improve accountability and stakeholder engagement. Climate Impact: Supports India’s net-zero by 2070 and Panchamrit goals. Challenges Lack of cross-sector coordination between agriculture, forest, and environment departments. Overemphasis on exotic species in afforestation drives. Low awareness and technical capacity for soil carbon management. Limited ESG literacy in small and medium enterprises. Way Forward Mainstream soil carbon enhancement into national climate strategies (NDCs, National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture). Incentivise endemic afforestation and regenerative agricultural practices. Institutionalise ESG-based sustainability reporting across public and private sectors. Use AI and remote sensing to track soil carbon and forest health. Boost Financial Sector Reforms to Secure $30 Trillion Economy Goal Why in News? The World Bank, in its latest Financial Sector Assessment (FSA) report, said that India must accelerate financial sector reforms to achieve its goal of becoming a $30-trillion economy by 2047. The report emphasized the need to enhance private capital mobilisation, deepen markets, and strengthen financial stability. Relevance: GS 3 – Economy Financial Sector Reforms & Stability Private Capital Mobilisation & Long-Term Financing Digital Financial Infrastructure & Fintech Regulation Role of IMF–World Bank FSAP Assessments Vision 2047 – $30 Trillion Economy Roadmap Financial Inclusion & Institutional Strengthening (RBI, SEBI, IRDAI, PFRDA) Background Vision 2047: India aims to transition from a ~$4 trillion economy (2025) to $30 trillion by 2047, coinciding with 100 years of Independence. Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP): A joint IMF–World Bank initiative to evaluate financial stability, regulatory soundness, and systemic risks. The previous FSAP (2017) had noted structural weaknesses and a need for stronger non-bank oversight. Key Findings of the 2025 FSA Report India’s financial system has become more resilient, diversified, and inclusive compared to 2017. Banking sector health improved: NPAs reduced from >11% (2017–18) to ~3% (2024). Capital markets deepened: Equity market capitalization at ~110% of GDP; corporate bond market expanding. Fintech revolution: Growth of digital payments (UPI), microfinance, and financial inclusion through PMJDY and Aadhaar-based systems. Despite gains, credit-to-GDP ratio (~56%) remains below emerging market peers (China ~180%). World Bank Recommendations Deepen Capital Markets Promote long-term financing instruments (corporate bonds, REITs, InvITs). Simplify regulatory frameworks to attract foreign and domestic investors. Strengthen Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) Improve supervision, governance, and capital adequacy. Encourage risk-based regulation and reduce over-dependence on bank funding. Enhance Private Capital Mobilisation Develop venture and private equity ecosystems to fund innovation and infrastructure. Strengthen domestic institutional investors (pension, insurance funds). Financial Stability and Inclusion Strengthen coordination between RBI, SEBI, IRDAI, and PFRDA for systemic risk oversight. Enhance financial literacy and consumer protection. Leverage Technology Expand digital infrastructure for financial access. Implement strong data governance and cybersecurity frameworks. Challenges Identified Low penetration of long-term finance and insurance. High dependence on public sector banks. Regulatory fragmentation across sectors. Rising household leverage and informal credit channels. Significance A robust financial sector is key to sustaining 8–9% annual growth needed for a $30-trillion economy. Mobilising domestic private capital will reduce reliance on government borrowing and FDI. Aligns with India’s Amrit Kaal Vision 2047 and GIFT City reforms for global financial competitiveness. SC Pushes for Reform of Colonial-Era Property Laws Why in News? The Supreme Court directed the Law Commission of India to draft a report on reforming India’s outdated property laws — the Transfer of Property Act (1882), Registration Act (1908), and Stamp Act (1899). The Court observed that property transactions in India remain “traumatic” and that property disputes form nearly 66% of civil litigation in the country. Relevance : GS 2 – Polity & Governance Legal Reforms & Law Commission Role Centre–State Relations (Land as State Subject) Good Governance & Ease of Doing Business Technology in Governance (Blockchain, Digitisation of Land Records) Right to Property – Constitutional & Judicial Dimensions Background Colonial-era origin: These Acts were enacted under British rule, designed for a limited land market and a different administrative context. Post-Independence neglect: Despite urbanization, digitization, and rising property value, core provisions of these laws remain unchanged. Land as State subject: Registration rules, stamp duties, and verification procedures vary widely across states, causing complexity and inefficiency. Key Judicial Observations Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Joymalya Bagchi called current property transactions “traumatic” due to: Fake documents and title fraud. Land encroachments and unclear titles. Delays in verification and registration. Red tape and corruption at sub-registrar offices. Outdated procedural requirements (e.g., two witnesses). Property ownership is a constitutional right, and smooth transfer processes reflect institutional maturity of a nation. Court’s Directives Law Commission’s task: Recommend reforms to modernize and harmonize property laws with present socio-economic realities. Centre’s role: Lead digitization and integration of property registration across states. Adoption of blockchain: Suggested to ensure transparency, authenticity, and immutability in land records. Can record ownership history, encumbrances, and transfers securely on a distributed ledger. Issues Identified Fragmented land data (varies by State). Manual documentation leading to corruption. Multiple agencies involved in verification. Poor grievance redress and dispute resolution mechanisms. Reform Measures Suggested National Uniform Property Registration Framework. Full digitization of land titles under Digital India Land Records Modernization Programme (DILRMP). Integration of property databases with Aadhaar and GIS mapping. Blockchain-based title registry to prevent fraud and duplication. HAL–GE Aerospace $1 Billion Jet Engine Deal  Why in News? Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) signed a $1 billion (≈ ₹8,870 crore) agreement with GE Aerospace (USA) to procure 113 F404-GE-IN20 jet engines for India’s Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Mk-1A fleet. The deliveries will start in 2027 and conclude by 2032. The deal was finalized despite recent trade tensions after the U.S. imposed 50% tariffs on Indian goods under Trump’s administration. Relevance : GS 3 – Internal Security / Economy / Science & Tech Defence Indigenisation & Atmanirbhar Bharat India–US Strategic & Defence Industrial Cooperation Indigenous Fighter Aircraft (Tejas, AMCA) Technology Transfer (ToT) & Industrial Ecosystem Development National Security & Air Power Modernisation Background: Tejas LCA Programme Tejas is India’s indigenously developed 4.5-generation multirole light combat aircraft, designed by Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) and produced by HAL. Objective: Replace ageing MiG-21s and enhance India’s self-reliance in combat aviation. Variants: Tejas Mk-1: Operational version currently in IAF service. Tejas Mk-1A: Advanced variant with better avionics, radar, and electronic warfare systems. Tejas Mk-2: Medium-weight fighter (under development). Twin-engine Deck-Based Fighter (TEDBF): For Indian Navy. About the F404-GE-IN20 Engine Manufacturer: GE Aerospace, USA. Type: Afterburning turbofan engine. Thrust: ~84 kN with afterburner. Current Use: Powers Tejas Mk-1 and Mk-1A aircraft. Performance: Provides high thrust-to-weight ratio, low maintenance, and operational reliability. Indigenous Integration: HAL to perform final integration, assembly, and testing in India under U.S. export controls. Details of the 2025 Deal Engines Ordered: 113 units for 97 Tejas Mk-1A fighters (16 spares). Contract Value: ~US $1 billion. Timeline: Delivery 2027–2032. Part of: ₹62,370 crore contract (Sept 2025) for 97 Tejas Mk-1A aircraft signed with the Ministry of Defence (MoD). Support Package: Includes training, spares, and maintenance support from GE. Objective: Sustain IAF’s fighter squadron strength and ensure production continuity till Tejas Mk-2 is operational. Strategic Significance 1. Strengthening Self-Reliance (Atmanirbhar Bharat) Boosts indigenous production under ‘Make in India–Defence’. HAL to manufacture critical components in India under the Transfer of Technology (ToT) clause. 2. Enhancing Air Power Tejas Mk-1A will equip at least six IAF squadrons, replacing MiG-21s. Enhanced AESA radar, Beyond Visual Range (BVR) missiles, and Electronic Warfare suites will improve combat readiness. 3. Indo–U.S. Defence Cooperation Builds on the GE–HAL MoU (June 2023) to co-produce advanced F414 engines for the Tejas Mk-2. Aligns with INDUS-X initiative to deepen defence-industrial collaboration between India and the U.S. 4. Technology Ecosystem GE engines to support domestic supply chain development — casting, machining, and testing capabilities within HAL’s Bangalore and Koraput divisions. Potential knowledge transfer will assist in future indigenous engine programs (GTX-35VS Kaveri revival). Challenges Dependence on U.S. technology: Export restrictions under ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations) may limit full ToT. Cost overruns and delays: Historically affected indigenous fighter projects. Supply chain sensitivity: Any diplomatic strain with the U.S. could affect deliveries or spares. Broader Context India’s Fighter Strength: IAF currently operates ~30–31 squadrons vs sanctioned 42; Tejas Mk-1A and Mk-2 are critical to bridge the gap. Complementary Projects: F414 Engine Deal (2023): For Tejas Mk-2 (98 kN thrust), to be co-manufactured in India with 80% local content. AMCA (Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft): Indigenous 5th-generation stealth fighter under development; potential future GE collaboration. Economic and Strategic Impact Aspect Impact Industrial Output Boost to HAL and ancillary MSMEs in aerospace sector Employment Estimated 5000+ direct and indirect skilled jobs Export Potential Tejas being offered to Argentina, Egypt, Philippines Strategic Leverage Reinforces Indo–U.S. defence-industrial trust post-2023 Critical Technology Sharing pact Recent Related Developments June 2023: GE & HAL signed MoU to co-manufacture F414 engines in India (50% local content target). Sept 2025: MoD approved ₹62,370-crore procurement of 97 Tejas Mk-1A. 2025-26 Budget: Allocation of ₹1.72 lakh crore for indigenous defence procurement — 75% of capital outlay. India’s Defence Exports: Crossed ₹21,000 crore (2024–25), highest ever. Kazakhstan to Join Abraham Accords   Why in News ? U.S. President Donald Trump announced that Kazakhstan is set to join the Abraham Accords — the U.S.-brokered normalization framework between Israel and Arab/Muslim-majority nations. This marks the first addition to the Accords during Trump’s second term, reflecting renewed U.S. diplomatic outreach in West and Central Asia. Relevance : GS 2 – International Relations India’s West Asia & Central Asia Policy U.S. Diplomacy & Middle East Peace Architecture Abraham Accords – Regional Geopolitical Realignment Kazakhstan’s Multi-Vector Foreign Policy Implications for India’s I2U2, Energy, and Connectivity Strategy The Abraham Accords Origin: Signed on 15 September 2020, mediated by the U.S. under Trump administration. Initial Signatories: Israel United Arab Emirates (UAE) Bahrain Later joined by Morocco (Dec 2020) and Sudan (Jan 2021). Objective: Normalization of diplomatic, economic, and technological relations between Israel and Arab/Muslim-majority states. Strategic Goal: Strengthen regional stability through U.S.-backed alignment against Iran. Promote Arab–Israeli cooperation in defence, energy, tech, and trade. Kazakhstan’s Position Diplomatic History: Established formal ties with Israel in 1992, shortly after independence from the Soviet Union. Israel has maintained an embassy in Astana (now Astana again since 2022) since 1996. Current Move: Symbolic expansion of the Abraham Accords rather than a new normalization, since Kazakhstan already has official relations with Israel. Seen as a Central Asian endorsement of the U.S.-Israel peace framework. Motivation: Balance between Moscow–Beijing alignment and Western engagement. Enhance trade, technology, and defence cooperation with Israel. Project Kazakhstan as a bridge between Muslim-majority nations and Israel. Strategic Significance 1. For the U.S.: Signals continuity of U.S. influence in Middle East–Central Asia arc. Counters growing Chinese presence under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). 2. For Israel: Expands normalization outreach beyond Arab heartland to post-Soviet Muslim republics. Potential gateway for deeper ties with Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan. 3. For Kazakhstan: Enhances geopolitical autonomy amid pressure from Russia and China. Boosts high-tech, agriculture, and water-management partnerships with Israel. Aligns with its “multi-vector foreign policy” doctrine — balancing relations with all major powers. Comparison with Other Abraham Accord Members Country Year Joined Key Normalization Driver Economic/Strategic Gains UAE 2020 Trade, technology, Iran deterrence $2.5B trade by 2023 Bahrain 2020 U.S.-led security umbrella Enhanced defence ties Morocco 2020 U.S. recognition of Western Sahara claim Defence + tourism growth Sudan 2021 Removal from U.S. terror list Aid and economic reintegration Kazakhstan (2025) Symbolic Tech, agriculture, geopolitical balancing Bridges Central Asia with West Asia Geopolitical Context Comes amid Israel–Hamas conflict (2025 phase) and regional tensions. Kazakhstan maintains cautious neutrality but supports peaceful dialogue and interfaith diplomacy. U.S. likely to leverage Kazakhstan’s entry to revive momentum for other Muslim nations — Oman, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia — to follow. Recent Related Developments Saudi Arabia–Israel normalization talks paused post-2023 Gaza conflict but may resume under new diplomatic mediation. India’s I2U2 bloc (India-Israel-UAE-USA) aligns indirectly with Abraham Accord framework, promoting tech and connectivity projects. Abraham Fund (U.S.-UAE-Israel) has financed renewable energy projects in West Asia and Africa. Criticisms & Challenges Accords criticized for bypassing Palestinian issue, diluting Arab consensus on two-state solution. Central Asian participation could risk alienating Iran, a regional neighbor and key trade partner. Domestic Islamist sentiment in Kazakhstan remains cautious toward overt alignment with Israel. Stray Dog Management & ABC Rules Why in News ? The Supreme Court of India (Nov 2025) directed removal of stray dogs from public premises such as schools, hospitals, bus stands, railway stations, and sports complexes. Dogs must be sterilised and vaccinated before being shifted to designated shelters in accordance with the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023. The ruling aims to balance public safety and animal welfare amid rising incidents of stray dog attacks and rabies cases. Relevance : GS 2 – Governance & Social Justice Animal Welfare Laws (PCA Act, ABC Rules 2023) Centre–State Implementation & Local Governance Judicial Oversight in Policy Enforcement (SC Directive 2025) Public Health (Rabies Control, Waste Management) Ethical Governance & Humane Animal Management Background: The Stray Dog Issue in India Estimated population: ~6.3 crore stray dogs (Livestock Census, 2019; rising trend). Rabies burden: ~18,000–20,000 human deaths per year (WHO, 2023) — 36% of global deaths occur in India. Urban conflict: Over 1.5 lakh dog-bite cases annually in states like Kerala, Maharashtra, and Uttar Pradesh. Root causes — poor waste management, unregulated breeding, and lack of sterilization infrastructure. Legal Basis Parent Law: Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. Implementing Rule: Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023 (replacing ABC Rules, 2001). Objective: Control population through sterilisation. Vaccinate to prevent rabies. Protect animal rights under Article 51A(g) (fundamental duty to show compassion to living creatures). Key Provisions of ABC Rules, 2023 Terminology Change: Uses term “Community Animals” instead of “Stray Dogs” — recognising their territorial nature. Implementation Responsibility: Local bodies must ensure sterilisation and vaccination. RWAs (Resident Welfare Associations) or Apartment Associations responsible for feeding and care of community animals (Rule 20). Sheltering Mandate: Sterilised and vaccinated dogs can be relocated to designated shelters, not abandoned or killed. Dispute Resolution: Local committees including the Chief Veterinary Officer, Police, RWA representatives, and others to resolve disputes related to animal feeding or nuisance. Monitoring: State Animal Welfare Boards to oversee compliance. Supreme Court’s Directive (Nov 2025) Order Highlights: Remove stray dogs from educational and healthcare premises to prevent safety risks. Allow presence of dogs only after sterilisation and vaccination. Mandated state-wise implementation plans under ABC Rules. The Court emphasised humane handling — no culling or cruelty permitted. Past Legal and Policy Developments ABC (Dogs) Rules, 2001: Introduced sterilisation–vaccination model. 2015 SC Judgment (Animal Welfare Board of India vs. People for Elimination of Stray Troubles): Prohibited killing of stray dogs; allowed only sterilisation and vaccination. Municipal Performance: Despite the law, sterilisation coverage <30% of total stray population (MoEFCC data, 2022). Challenges in Implementation Inadequate funding to local bodies. Shortage of veterinary infrastructure and shelters. Conflict between RWAs and animal feeders. Lack of coordination between Animal Welfare Boards, NGOs, and municipalities. Way Forward Integrated Rabies Elimination Strategy (WHO 2030 target): “Zero human deaths from dog-mediated rabies.” Strengthen municipal-level sterilisation centres and vaccination drives. Introduce waste management reforms to cut food access for stray dogs. Public awareness on coexistence and responsible pet ownership. Related Developments National Rabies Control Programme (NRCP) under MoHFW targets 70% dog vaccination coverage. India–WHO Rabies Roadmap (2023): Collaborative surveillance and mass dog vaccination campaigns. Municipal bylaws being revised in Delhi, Mumbai, and Bengaluru to align with ABC 2023 norms. Rhesus Macaque Protection   Why in News ? The Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife (SC-NBWL), chaired by the Union Environment Minister, has recommended reinstating the Rhesus Macaque under Schedule II of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. This move aims to restore statutory protection to the species after earlier delisting, ensuring enforcement against illegal capture, cruelty, and exploitation. Relevance : GS 3 – Environment & Biodiversity Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 – Legal Framework & Amendments Species Protection & Human–Wildlife Conflict Management Ecological Role of Primates & Conservation Biology Institutional Mechanisms (NBWL, WII, State Forest Departments) Ethical Wildlife Governance & Habitat Restoration Rhesus Macaque (Macaca mulatta) Distribution: Widely found across northern, central, and northeastern India; also in neighboring Nepal, Bangladesh, and China. Habitat: Extremely adaptable – forests, urban, and rural landscapes. IUCN Red List: Least Concern – due to large, stable populations. Population in India: Estimated 5–6 million individuals (MoEFCC data, 2023). Cultural significance: Considered sacred in Hindu mythology (linked to Lord Hanuman). Scientific use: One of the most studied non-human primates; used in biomedical research, particularly for vaccine development. Legal Framework Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972: Schedule I & II: Provide highest protection — illegal to hunt, capture, or trade. Schedule III & IV: Lower level of protection. Earlier Status Change: The Rhesus Macaque was earlier listed in Schedule II, but its protection was diluted due to overpopulation in some urban areas leading to conflict. Several states (e.g., Himachal Pradesh, Delhi) sought culling permissions, citing crop damage and aggressive encounters. Current Development (2025 Update) SC-NBWL Recommendation (Nov 2025): Reinstatement in Schedule II for stronger protection. Directs state governments to: Prepare site-specific conservation and conflict management plans. Identify and categorize areas of high human-monkey conflict. Develop rescue and rehabilitation centres. Backed by Central Zoo Authority and National Tiger Conservation Authority. Baseline Study: To be conducted by Wildlife Institute of India (WII) for mapping population density and conflict zones. States Supporting Reinstatement Six states: Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Uttarakhand, West Bengal, Himachal Pradesh, and Arunachal Pradesh. Others like Assam, Rajasthan, Meghalaya, Punjab, and Jammu & Kashmir expressed conditional support, citing conflict management challenges. Reasons for Upgrading Protection Cruelty and Exploitation: Growing instances of illegal trade, poaching for research, and mistreatment. Loss of Habitat: Urbanization and deforestation pushing macaques into human settlements. Genetic Diversity Conservation: Uncontrolled translocation and conflict killings affecting natural population structures. Ecological Role: Important seed disperser and part of forest food web. Human–Wildlife Conflict Dimension Himachal Pradesh reported over 25,000 conflict cases (2015–2023). Annual crop loss estimated at ₹500 crore (National Agricultural Research data). Past culling drives (2016–2018) proved ineffective, highlighting the need for non-lethal management — sterilization, habitat restoration, and waste management. Related Developments 2022 Amendment to Wildlife (Protection) Act: Added Schedules I–IV simplification, Schedule V (vermin list) revision. Empowered Centre to delist species temporarily to manage conflict. Simian Control Programs: Himachal Pradesh, Delhi, and Uttarakhand have run sterilization drives; over 1.3 lakh macaques sterilized since 2010. Rescue Centre Models: Kerala and Tamil Nadu developing macaque rescue and rewilding centres under NBWL funding. Global Context Rhesus macaques are native to South and Southeast Asia, but were introduced in Florida (USA) in the 1930s for tourism — now an invasive species there. International trade controlled under CITES Appendix II.

Daily PIB Summaries

PIB Summaries 07 November 2025

Content 150 Years of Vande Mataram 150 Years of Vande Mataram Why in News ? 7 November 2025 marks 150 years since Vande Mataram was first published in Bangadarshan (1875). The Government of India launched nationwide commemorations to celebrate its enduring legacy as India’s National Song—a symbol of unity, resistance, and nationalism. Relevance GS-1 (History & Culture): Reflects the evolution of Indian nationalism, Bengal Renaissance, and cultural awakening through literature. Highlights Bankim Chandra Chatterjee’s contribution to shaping patriotic and literary consciousness. Basic Facts Author: Bankim Chandra Chatterjee (1838–1894) First Publication: Bangadarshan magazine, 7 November 1875 Incorporated in: Anandamath (1882) First Sung by: Rabindranath Tagore, 1896 Indian National Congress session, Calcutta National Song Status: Adopted by Constituent Assembly on 24 January 1950 Translation: “Mother, I Bow to Thee” Musical Composition: Set to tune by Rabindranath Tagore Historical Context Composed during British colonial rule, the song personified India as the Mother Goddess, invoking divine reverence and national pride. Initially a literary expression, it evolved into a political and spiritual anthem during the anti-colonial struggle. The “religion of patriotism” central to Anandamath reflected early nationalist consciousness. Anandamath depicted India as three forms of the mother: Glorious Past Subjugated Present Resurgent Future Cultural & Political Evolution 1875: Published independently in Bangadarshan. 1882: Included in Anandamath. 1896: Sung at Congress session by Tagore. 1905 (7 August): Used as political slogan during the Swadeshi & anti-partition movement in Bengal. 1906: Adopted at Varanasi session of INC as all-India patriotic song. 1907: Madam Bhikaji Cama inscribed “Vande Mataram” on the tricolour flag raised in Stuttgart, Germany. 1908: Chanted during Tilak’s arrest; symbol of unity across linguistic and religious lines. Symbol of Resistance 1905–1911 Bengal Partition Era: Became the rallying cry of the Swadeshi Movement. British authorities banned its recitation in schools and colleges. Students in Rangpur fined ₹5 each for chanting it. Bipin Chandra Pal & Aurobindo Ghose edited the newspaper BandeMataram, spreading nationalist ideology. Prabhat Pheris led by Bande Mataram Sampradaya in North Calcutta promoted patriotic awakening. Impact Beyond India 1907: Tricolour with “Vande Mataram” raised in Europe by Madam Cama. 1909: Madan Lal Dhingra’s last words before execution—“Bande Mataram”. 1909: Bande Mataram magazine published from Geneva by Indian patriots. 1912: South Africans welcomed Gokhale with cries of Vande Mataram. Constitutional Recognition 24 January 1950: Dr. Rajendra Prasad declared in Constituent Assembly: Jana Gana Mana — National Anthem. Vande Mataram — National Song, equal status and honor. No formal debate; consensus reflected emotional reverence attached to it. Thematic Significance Literary Dimension: Blends devotion (bhakti) and patriotism—symbol of cultural renaissance. Political Dimension: Served as India’s first nationalist hymn, linking emotional nationalism with political mobilization. Social Dimension: Fostered unity beyond religion, caste, and language. Philosophical Core: Bankim envisioned the nation as divine motherhood. Sri Aurobindo called it “the mother with seventy million arms”—symbol of empowerment and resistance. Data & Legacy Highlights Aspect Key Data / Event Year of Composition 1875 Year of Publication in Anandamath 1882 First Sung 1896 Congress Session Political Usage 7 August 1905 (Swadeshi Movement) Banned by British 1905–1906 in Bengal Constituent Assembly Recognition 24 January 1950 150th Anniversary Celebration November 2025–November 2026 Overview Bankim’s Contribution: Created India’s first literary articulation of Motherland as Goddess, blending spiritual nationalism and political activism. Role in Freedom Struggle: Unified educated elite and masses through shared symbolism; influenced leaders like Aurobindo, Tilak, Cama, and Pal. Cultural Continuity: The song still resonates through public ceremonies, school recitations, and patriotic art—bridging colonial resistance and postcolonial nationhood. Modern Relevance: Reinforces civic nationalism and environmental symbolism (tree plantation theme linking “Mother Earth” with “Mother India”). Conclusion Vande Mataram remains the moral and emotional foundation of India’s national identity. It transformed from poetry to protest, art to action, and song to symbol of independence. The 150-year commemoration is not merely a tribute to Bankim Chandra Chatterjee but a reaffirmation of India’s unity in diversity, cultural pride, and spiritual nationalism.

Daily Editorials Analysis

Editorials/Opinions Analysis For UPSC 07 November 2025

Content Redraw Welfare Architecture: Place a UBI at the Centre Justice in food Redraw Welfare Architecture: Place a UBI at the Centre Why in News? Growing wealth inequality in India and precarious job structures (automation, gig economy, climate stress) have reignited debate on Universal Basic Income (UBI). The article argues for a restructuring of India’s welfare model around UBI as a cushion against future socio-economic shocks. Relevance GS II – Governance, Welfare Schemes, Social Justice Relevance to welfare delivery, leakages, inclusion, and rights-based governance. Examines redesign of India’s welfare architecture to make it universal, efficient, and dignity-based. GS III – Economy (Inclusive Growth & Employment) Role of UBI in stabilising demand, cushioning automation shocks, and addressing inequality. GS IV – Ethics (Justice, Equity, and Human Dignity) Philosophical rationale: dignity, agency, and fairness as pillars of a modern welfare state. Practice Question   “In an age of automation and inequality, Universal Basic Income is not a populist giveaway but a structural necessity.”Critically examine this statement in light of India’s fragmented welfare system.(Answer in 250 words) Background: The Concept of UBI Definition: A periodic, unconditional cash transfer to every citizen irrespective of income, employment, or social status. Core Principles: Universality – available to all citizens. Unconditionality – no strings attached (no eligibility filters). Agency & Dignity – recipients decide how to use the funds. Global Experiments: Finland (2017–19): Improved well-being, reduced stress, and maintained work motivation. Kenya: Enhanced nutrition, mental health, and school enrolment. Iran: Maintained labour participation while reducing poverty. India’s Socio-Economic Context Wealth Inequality: Top 1% own 42% of wealth (World Inequality Database, 2025). Wealth Gini: 75, among the world’s highest. GDP vs Well-being Disconnect: India ranks 118/147 in World Happiness Report 2025 — below Nepal . High GDP (8.4% in 2023–24) not translating into equitable prosperity. Automation Threat: McKinsey Global Institute (2023): Up to 800 million jobs globally could be displaced by 2030. India’s semi-skilled and informal workers are most vulnerable. Labour & Mental Health Stress: Rising gig economy, job insecurity, and unacknowledged unpaid care work (mostly by women). Current Welfare Architecture: Fragmented and Targeted Existing System: Over 1,000+ central and state welfare schemes (DBT, PDS, MGNREGA, PM-KISAN). Challenges: Leakages, duplication, exclusion errors. Complex eligibility filters and bureaucratic hurdles. Political populism — “vote-for-freebie” culture undermines systemic reform. Digital Platforms: Aadhaar + Jan Dhan + DBT infrastructure enable large-scale cash transfers, but digital divides persist (tribal, remote areas). Why UBI Now? Economic Rationale: Boosts consumption demand in low-income groups. Stabilises economy during automation and job shocks. Simplifies subsidies, improving fiscal efficiency. Social Rationale: Provides economic floor and income security for all. Recognises unpaid care work (especially by women). Reduces dependence on ad hoc welfare politics. Moral-Philosophical Rationale: Transforms citizen–state relationship from charity to rights. Shifts democracy from “consumer-voter” to “citizen-holder of rights.” Evidence from India SEWA Pilot (Madhya Pradesh, 2011–13): Conducted with UNICEF support. Results: Better nutrition and child health. Increased school attendance. Growth in small business income. No evidence of reduced work participation. Economic Feasibility Estimated Fiscal Cost: Minimum UBI (₹7,620 per person/year = poverty line): ≈ 5% of GDP. Equivalent to major subsidies (food, fertilizer, fuel combined). Possible Financing Options: Rationalisation of overlapping subsidies. Wealth tax or inheritance tax on top 1%. Carbon tax or digital transaction levy. Diverting inefficient expenditure from multiple welfare heads. Phased Implementation: Begin with women, elderly, persons with disabilities, and informal workers. Expand progressively as fiscal space and tech systems improve. Addressing Criticisms Criticism Counter-argument Fiscal burden too high Start small, integrate with existing subsidies; 5% of GDP manageable with reprioritisation. Encourages laziness Evidence (SEWA, Finland) shows no decline in labour participation. Inflation risk Moderate UBI stimulates demand without supply shock; inflation arises from shortages, not income. Rich also benefit Can be clawed back through progressive taxation; universality reduces administrative cost. Global Context & Lessons Finland (2017–19): Improved mental health; 0.5% GDP cost. Kenya: 37% rise in local business income. Iran: Replaced energy subsidies with UBI-style payments; no inflation surge. Canada (Manitoba, 1970s): Hospitalisation fell 8.5%. UBI vs Targeted Welfare Aspect UBI Targeted Welfare Eligibility Universal (citizenship-based) Means-tested Leakages Minimal (DBT-enabled) High Administrative Cost Low High Stigma None Often high Political Manipulation Low High (vote-linked) Inclusion High Exclusion-prone Way Forward Integrate UBI with DBT infrastructure and Jan Dhan–Aadhaar–Mobile (JAM) trinity. Combine with public goods provisioning (health, education) — not replacement. Conduct pilot projects at national scale for cost-benefit calibration. Pair UBI with skill-upgradation and green employment programmes. Conclusion India’s current welfare model is fragmented, exclusion-prone, and reactive. A Universal Basic Income, if responsibly designed and fiscally balanced, can rebuild the social contract — restoring dignity, reducing inequality, and future-proofing citizens against economic shocks. The question is no longer affordability, but necessity — Can India afford not to guarantee a minimum income floor in an age of automation and inequality? Justice in food Why in News? The new EAT–Lancet Commission (2024) report highlights that global food systems drive 5 of the 6 breached planetary boundaries and contribute to nearly 30% of global GHG emissions. It calls for a “just transition” toward healthy, affordable, and sustainable diets — especially crucial for countries like India, facing high food insecurity and ecological stress. Relevance GS II – Governance, Welfare, Health and Nutrition Food policy as a tool for social justice and equitable access to nutrition. GS III – Environment, Agriculture & Climate Change Food systems’ role in planetary boundary breaches and sustainable farming transitions. Practice Question “Justice in food systems demands not only sustainable production but also equitable consumption.” Discuss in the context of India’s cereal-heavy diet and environmental stress. (Answer in 250 words) The Core Idea Food systems encompass agriculture, processing, transportation, and consumption. They are central to climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution, and inequality. “Justice in food systems” implies ensuring: Healthy diets for all (nutrition security). Affordability and accessibility (economic justice). Sustainability of production (ecological justice). Fair livelihoods for farmers and workers (social justice). Environmental Dimensions Food-related emissions: ~30% of global GHGs. Animal-based foods: Dominant share of emissions (methane, land use). Cereal crops: Major contributors to nitrogen, phosphorus, and water stress. Biogeochemical imbalance: Global nitrogen surplus >2× safe limit. Agricultural nutrient use surpasses planetary boundaries. Water crisis: Agriculture consumes ~70% of freshwater withdrawals globally. The “Five of Six” Planetary Boundaries Affected by Food Boundary Impact by Food Systems Climate Change 30% of global GHG emissions Biodiversity Loss Habitat conversion, pesticide use Land-System Change Expansion of agriculture Biogeochemical Flows Excess nitrogen & phosphorus runoff Freshwater Use Unsustainable irrigation practices The Commission’s Key Insights Even combined action (dietary change + emission cuts + productivity gains) will barely restore food systems’ safety by 2050. Assumes 127% global GDP growth by 2050 — likely overestimation given worsening climate shocks. Warns against efficiency traps: productivity gains often spur higher total output, eroding environmental savings. India-Specific Concerns Dietary Structure: India’s diet remains cereal-heavy (especially rice and wheat). Meeting 2050 health benchmarks needs ↑ fruits, vegetables, nuts, legumes. Challenges: Price inflation for perishable, nutrient-dense foods. Affordability crisis in import-dependent regions. Cultural and caste-linked dietary preferences. Public schemes (PDS, Midday Meals) reinforce cereal-based consumption. Environmental Stressors: Groundwater depletion (Punjab–Haryana belt). Soil degradation and nutrient imbalance. Fossil fuel dependence in cold chains and food processing. Pathways for a Just Transition Demand-Side Interventions Promote diverse diets through nutrition education and school meals. Fiscal incentives (GST cuts, subsidies) for minimally processed, plant-based foods. Redesign public procurement to include local, nutritious staples (millets, pulses, leafy greens). Introduce “healthy food standards” to curb harmful additives and ultra-processing. Supply-Side Reforms Invest in soil restoration, water-efficient crops, and organic/natural farming. Remove implicit incentives for groundwater overuse (e.g., free power). Support climate-resilient agriculture and regional diversification. Develop sustainable cold chains powered by renewable energy. Governance & Equity Break corporate concentration in agri-processing and retail. Enforce labour and environmental safeguards in supply chains. Strengthen collective bargaining rights for farmers and agri-workers. Ensure consumer representation in food regulation and policy. Justice Dimension Type of Justice Policy Focus Environmental Reduce emissions, restore nitrogen balance Economic Make healthy diets affordable Social Fair wages, worker protection Cultural Respect dietary diversity and regional food traditions Intergenerational Sustain ecosystems for future food security Policy Implications for India Shift from “calorie sufficiency” to “nutrition sufficiency.” Integrate EAT–Lancet diet targets with India’s National Nutrition Mission (Poshan 2.0) and FAO’s “One Health” framework. Align MSP and procurement toward millets, pulses, and oilseeds. Strengthen price stabilisation mechanisms for perishable foods. Promote urban food policies (local markets, rooftop gardens) to shorten supply chains. Key Data Points Indicator / Source Value / Finding Food system GHG share ~30% globally Planetary boundaries breached by food 5 of 6 Nitrogen surplus >2× safe limit Global GDP assumption (by 2050) +127% (EAT–Lancet 2024) India’s dominant food share Cereals (~60% calorie intake) Water use in agriculture ~70% of freshwater withdrawals Conclusion Food systems are at the heart of both the climate and inequality crises. Justice in these systems demands environmentally safe, nutritionally adequate, and economically fair diets. For India, this means: Diversifying diets beyond cereals. Reforming subsidies and procurement. Empowering farmers and consumers equally. The next phase of food policy must thus be nutrition- and justice-centric, not merely production-driven.

Daily Current Affairs

Current Affairs 07 November 2025

Content Bihar’s Makhana Potential: From Local Crop to Global Superfood India–Peru & India–Chile Free Trade Agreements (FTAs): Strengthening India’s Latin America Footprint Not Just PMLA, UAPA – Give Reason for Arrest in All Offences: Supreme Court (Nov 2025) 15 Ophthalmologists per Million Indians (AIIMS, 2025) Why the Nomination Process Needs Reform Trump’s Nuclear Test Threat Risks Upending Global Test Ban Regime Global Warming Intensifies Despite La Niña Effects (WMO, 2025) Bihar’s Makhana Potential: From Local Crop to Global Superfood Why in News ? Bihar — India’s poorest state by per capita income — contributes 90% of India’s makhana (fox nut) output, and India itself produces ~90% of the world’s supply. Despite this dominance, Bihar’s makhana sector remains under-scaled, low in export share, and value distribution is skewed away from producers. The discussion has gained attention after GI tagging of “Mithila Makhana” (2022) and rising global demand for gluten-free superfoods. Relevance GS-1 (Geography & Society): Agrarian livelihoods in eastern India, esp. wetland ecosystems of North Bihar (Mithila). Socio-economic role of Mallah community in traditional occupations. GS-3 (Economy & Agriculture): Agricultural diversification and value-chain development. Role in “One District One Product” and Agri-export strategy. GI tag (2022) – linkage with rural branding and Atmanirbhar Bharat. Integration with PMFME & Agricultural Export Policy under superfood category. Sustainable water-use and climate-resilient cultivation models. Basic Context Botanical name: Euryale ferox (fox nut or gorgon nut). Nature: Aquatic crop cultivated in stagnant ponds and wetlands. Cultural significance: Used in traditional Indian diets and Ayurveda. Main growing regions in Bihar: Darbhanga, Madhubani, Sitamarhi, Katihar, Purnia. Production and Global Standing Bihar’s share in India’s makhana: ~90%. India’s share in global output: ~90%. Global market value (2024): ~$100 million; projected to grow to $250–300 million by 2030 (IMARC estimate). Employment base: Over 5 lakh farmers, primarily from the Mallah community. Core Issues and Challenges Lack of Scale: Despite being the largest producer, Bihar lacks export-scale production and quality infrastructure. Domestic and global demand far exceeds current quality-adjusted supply. Value Distribution Gap (GVC Problem): Like African cocoa producers who get <$10 billion from a $150 billion chocolate industry, Bihar’s farmers capture a small share of makhana’s total value. High-value post-production and export activities occur in other States — Punjab and Assam dominate processing and packaging. Technological and Quality Deficits: Traditional pond-based methods limit yield and uniformity. Field-based cultivation and mechanised popping technologies can improve quality and consistency. Data and Trade Recognition Gaps: Until 2022, makhana lacked a unique HS trade code — it was clubbed with other nuts, obscuring export data. Non-Price Barriers: Limited food safety certification, packaging quality, and traceability restrict export potential. Absence of independent certification and branding for quality assurance. Opportunities and Potential Geographical Indication (GI) Tag (2022): Mithila Makhana GI tag can boost brand identity and price premium, similar to Darjeeling tea or Basmati rice. Real benefit depends on traceable value chain enforcement and export branding. Technological Upgradation: Move from pond- to field-based systems (reduces crop duration by 25–30%). Encourage transplanting method instead of traditional podcasting for higher yields. Introduce improved seed varieties for better popping quality. Value Addition and Diversification: Develop nutraceutical, cosmetic, and medicinal applications beyond snack form. Promote ready-to-eat and flavoured makhana, targeting global health markets. Inclusive Supply Chain Development: Integrate the Mallah community through cooperatives or FPOs for fair income distribution. Encourage public-private partnerships in post-harvest infrastructure. Economic and Policy Implications Export and trade policy: Integrate makhana into India’s Agricultural Export Policy (AEP) under niche superfoods. Infrastructure: Develop processing clusters under the PM Formalisation of Micro Food Processing Enterprises (PMFME) scheme. Research: Strengthen ICAR–RCER (Patna) initiatives on makhana productivity and mechanisation. Sustainability: Promote water-efficient cultivation and climate-resilient varieties to counter pond drying and erratic monsoon. India–Peru & India–Chile Free Trade Agreements (FTAs): Strengthening India’s Latin America Footprint Why in News ? India has made “substantive progress” in FTA negotiations with Peru and Chile (Oct 27–Nov 5, 2025 visit by Indian delegation). Talks aim to boost cooperation in critical minerals, automobiles, pharmaceuticals, textiles, and food processing. These FTAs are part of India’s trade diversification strategy, especially amid US tariff hikes (50%) on Indian exports in Aug 2025. Relevance GS-2 (International Relations): Deepening South–South Cooperation; part of India’s outreach to Global South and Latin America. Strengthens India’s position against China’s growing influence in the region. Expands strategic partnerships in critical minerals (lithium, copper). GS-3 (Economy): Trade diversification amid US tariff escalation (2025). Integration of FTAs with energy transition goals — EVs, Green Hydrogen, and ACC battery PLI. Strengthens India’s export basket (pharma, auto, textiles) and raw material security. Supports “Atmanirbhar Bharat” via assured critical mineral supply chains. Background Latin America’s strategic role: Resource-rich region with high demand for Indian goods and potential for South-South cooperation. India–Chile PTA (Partial Scope Agreement): First signed in 2006, expanded in 2017 (covering ~2,000 products). Ongoing FTA aims to upgrade and broaden coverage to services, investments, and critical minerals. India–Peru FTA: Negotiations launched in 2017; 9th round held in Lima (Oct 2025) — now nearing finalization. Strategic and Economic Significance 1. Access to Critical Minerals Peru and Chile among the world’s largest producers of lithium, copper, zinc, and molybdenum. Chile: 2nd largest lithium producer (after Australia). Peru: 2nd largest copper producer globally. Essential for India’s energy transition — electric vehicles, solar, and battery manufacturing under National Green Hydrogen Mission and PLI for ACC batteries. 2. Trade Diversification Counters heavy dependence on US, EU, and China. Latin America offers emerging market demand and new supply chains for Indian manufacturing and services. 3. Tariff and Market Access The US’s 50% import tariff (Aug 2025) on select Indian goods (steel, aluminum, textiles) makes Latin America a priority export alternative. India seeks zero or reduced tariffs on: Pharmaceuticals (India exports ~$700 million/year to Latin America) Automobiles and auto parts Textiles and processed foods 4. Complementary Economies India: Services and industrial strength. Peru/Chile: Resource and commodity wealth. Creates scope for balanced trade, unlike India’s China or US trade deficits. Current Trade Data (2024–25) India–Latin America trade: ~$52 billion. India–Chile trade: ~$4.5 billion. India–Peru trade: ~$3 billion. Top Indian exports: Automobiles, pharmaceuticals, textiles. Top imports: Copper, minerals, and pulp. Progress in Negotiations (2025 Rounds) Peru: 9th round concluded; next round planned for New Delhi, Jan 2026. Chile: Technical discussions advanced on goods, services, investment, and critical minerals cooperation. Both sides agreed to intersessional meetings to resolve pending chapters. Broader Geoeconomic Implications Strengthens India’s role in Global South cooperation under IBSA and BRICS+ frameworks. Provides leverage against China’s expanding influence in Latin America (China–Chile FTA operational since 2006). Supports India’s Atmanirbhar Bharat and energy security goals by ensuring steady critical mineral supply. Challenges Ahead Logistical barriers: Long shipping routes, high freight costs. Non-tariff barriers: Sanitary, phytosanitary, and technical standards. Investment protection clauses and services liberalization remain contentious. Competition from China: Deeply entrenched trade networks in both Peru and Chile. Way Forward Fast-track negotiations to finalize by mid-2026. Link FTA outcomes with India’s Critical Minerals Mission (2023) for assured supply chains. Promote triangular cooperation — India–Latin America–Africa for technology and manufacturing. Expand pharma, EVs, and renewable energy collaboration. Not Just PMLA, UAPA – Give Reason for Arrest in All Offences: Supreme Court   Why in News? The Supreme Court (Nov 6, 2025) ruled that the constitutional requirement to furnish grounds of arrest applies to all offences — not just under special statutes like PMLA (2002) or UAPA (1967). This judgment reinforces personal liberty under Article 22(1) and Article 21, mandating that every arrested person must be informed of the reasons for arrest at least two hours before being produced in court for remand. Relevance GS-2 (Polity & Governance): Reinforces Article 21 (Right to Life & Liberty) and Article 22 (Protection in Arrest). Expands scope of constitutional due process beyond special laws (UAPA, PMLA). Enhances accountability in law enforcement; aligns with Arnesh Kumar (2014) guidelines. Strengthens procedural fairness — cornerstone of “Rule of Law”. Supports police reforms and human rights jurisprudence. Constitutional and Legal Framework 1. Constitutional Safeguards (Article 21 & 22) Article 21: “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.” Article 22(1): Right to be informed of reasons for arrest and to consult a lawyer. Article 22(2): Mandates production before a magistrate within 24 hours. 2. Statutory Provisions Indian Penal Code (IPC) / Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 – defines offences. CrPC 1973 / Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023 – procedural law governing arrest, remand, and investigation. Section 50 BNSS (analogous to CrPC Sec 50): Obligation to inform grounds of arrest and right to bail. Special Laws: PMLA 2002: Mandates communication of arrest grounds in writing (SC in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, 2023). UAPA 1967: Similar requirement for National Investigation Agency (NIA) arrests. The Current Judgment (2025) Core Ruling Requirement to inform arrest grounds is not limited to special laws but extends to all arrests under general laws (IPC/BNS). Such intimation must be given “at least two hours before the accused is produced for remand”. The duty is constitutional, not merely procedural — derived from Articles 21 and 22, ensuring “meaningful exercise of the right to liberty.” Key Observations “Personal liberty cannot be a hollow formality.” Providing reasons ensures transparency and accountability in police power. Failure to communicate grounds vitiates the legality of arrest and can render subsequent detention unconstitutional. The right applies irrespective of the offence’s gravity or category — ensuring uniform protection under Article 14. Significance 1. Strengthening Rule of Law Extends constitutional protection to every arrest — ending arbitrary distinction between ordinary and special laws. Reaffirms India’s commitment to due process, a cornerstone of Article 21 post-Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978). 2. Accountability in Law Enforcement Police must record and communicate reasons in writing — promoting transparency. Prevents misuse of arrest powers (India averages 60–70 lakh arrests annually, NCRB 2024). In 2024, ~70% of arrests were for offences punishable up to 7 years, often unnecessary per Supreme Court’s Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) guidelines. 3. Protecting Personal Liberty Aligns with India’s rising custodial death and pre-trial detention concerns: Custodial deaths (NCRB 2024): 175. Undertrials constitute 77% of prison population — among world’s highest. This judgment, thus, operationalises the “right to liberty before procedure” principle. Relation to Previous Judgments Case Year Key Principle DK Basu v. State of West Bengal 1997 Laid down arrest/detention guidelines. Joginder Kumar v. State of UP 1994 Arrest should not be routine; must have justification. Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar 2014 Police must record reasons for arrest in minor offences. Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India 2023 Written grounds of arrest mandatory under PMLA. Current Case (SC, 2025) 2025 Grounds of arrest mandatory in all offences, not just special laws. Overview Progressive move: Establishes uniform procedural rights and reduces arbitrary arrests. Challenges: Implementation gap — especially at police station level. Requires digital records, legal awareness, and training. Way Forward: Integrate “grounds of arrest disclosure” into BNSS digital e-FIR and e-remand modules. Strengthen police accountability commissions under State laws. 15 Ophthalmologists per Million Indians (AIIMS, 2025) Why in News? A national survey by AIIMS Delhi (2025) on “Human Resources and Infrastructure for Ophthalmic Services in India” found India has only 15 ophthalmologists per million population — far below WHO’s recommended benchmarks. The survey covered 7,901 eye care institutes, highlighting regional disparity, workforce shortages, and infrastructure gaps in eye care services. Relevance GS-2 (Social Justice – Health): Public health infrastructure gaps; NPCBVI under Vision 2020. Human resource deficit in healthcare — shortage and regional imbalance. Policy need: Integrating eye care with primary healthcare (Ayushman Bharat–HWCs). Importance of telemedicine and digital health networks. GS-3 (S&T and Economy): Strengthening healthcare R&D, medical education, and allied health services. Role of AI, tele-ophthalmology, and innovation in public health delivery. Basic Context 1. What is Ophthalmology? Branch of medicine dealing with diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of eye diseases. Core to achieving Universal Eye Health and eliminating avoidable blindness. 2. Global Target – Vision 2020: The Right to Sight Joint initiative by WHO and International Agency for the Prevention of Blindness (IAPB). Aimed to eliminate avoidable blindness by 2020 and ensure equitable access to eye care. India adopted the Vision 2020: India program under the National Programme for Control of Blindness and Visual Impairment (NPCBVI). Key Findings of AIIMS Study (2025) Indicator Data Institutes surveyed 7,901 Eye care beds per million population 74 Ophthalmologists (secondary + tertiary levels) 20,944 Optometrists 17,849 Average per capita availability 15 ophthalmologists / million population Target (WHO/AIIMS Vision 2020) 20–25 ophthalmologists / million States below benchmark Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Assam, West Bengal States meeting/exceeding Delhi, Puducherry, Goa, Maharashtra Highest variation From 127 per million (Ladakh) to just 2 per million (Bihar) Overview 1. Magnitude of Deficit India’s 20,944 ophthalmologists for ~1.4 billion people = severe shortage. WHO recommends at least 20 per million → India falls short by ~25–30% nationally, and >70% in BIMARU states. 2. Regional Inequality Urban concentration: 70% of ophthalmologists in metro or Tier-1 cities. Rural areas: Home to 65% of population but only 20% of eye care facilities. States like Bihar and UP show “eye-care deserts”. 3. Infrastructure Deficits Only 15.6% public and 18.3% NGO-run institutes, the rest private — leading to affordability and access issues. Beds: 74 per million — far below desired 100 per million benchmark. Poor integration of primary eye care into general PHC system. 4. Burden of Eye Diseases India accounts for ~20% of global blindness burden. Major causes: Cataract (~66%), uncorrected refractive errors (~25%), glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy. National Blindness Survey 2019: Blindness prevalence = 0.36%, visual impairment = 2.55% — updated AIIMS projections (2025) show little improvement. Programs & Initiatives Program Key Features NPCBVI (1976, revamped 2017) Free cataract surgeries, vision screening, eye banks. Ayushman Bharat Health & Wellness Centres Integration of primary eye care. Digital Health Mission e-OPD, teleophthalmology in remote areas. District Blindness Control Societies Local implementation of eye-care schemes. Pradhan Mantri Ayushman Bharat Health Infrastructure Mission (PM-ABHIM) Strengthens tertiary care, including eye hospitals. Challenges Shortage of trained ophthalmologists & optometrists in rural belts. Skewed distribution — north-central states lagging. Infrastructure underutilization due to lack of human resources. Limited R&D and training institutes in community ophthalmology. Dependence on NGOs like Aravind Eye Care, LV Prasad Eye Institute for outreach work. Policy Implications India needs at least 35,000 ophthalmologists to meet the WHO norm. Expand fellowship and residency capacity under NPCBVI. Integrate optometrists into public health cadre under National Allied Health Policy (2023). Incentivize posting in underserved districts through performance-linked grants. Adopt “Hub and Spoke” eye-care networks using telemedicine (AIIMS model). Electoral Nomination Process and Democratic Safeguards  Why in News? A recent case from Dadra and Nagar Haveli municipal council elections (2025) highlighted arbitrary rejection of a candidate’s nomination without a hearing or verification, exposing flaws in India’s nomination scrutiny system under the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951. Relevance GS-2 (Polity & Governance): Issues in electoral process under Representation of the People Act, 1951. Arbitrary powers of Returning Officers — violation of Article 14 and 326. Highlights procedural opacity and need for digital reforms (ENCORE Portal). Supports recommendations of Law Commission and ECI for transparent scrutiny. Comparative perspective: Canada, UK models of error correction and reasoned scrutiny. The Nomination Process Legal Basis: Governed by Sections 33–36 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961. Section 33: Filing of nomination papers. Section 34: Security deposit. Section 35: Notice of nominations. Section 36: Scrutiny of nominations — Returning Officer (RO) empowered to accept or reject. Key Clause — Section 36(2): Authorises RO to reject a nomination for “defects of a substantial character.” However, the Act does not define what constitutes “substantial.” Judicial Bar: Under Article 329(b), courts cannot intervene during elections, so rejections can only be challenged after results, rendering remedies ineffective. Core Issue Excessive discretionary power of Returning Officers (ROs). No uniform guidelines on what constitutes a “substantial defect.” Opaque, unreviewable process — enables political exclusion before voting even begins. Recent Examples of Nomination Rejection Year Case Reason for Rejection Impact 2025 Dadra & Nagar Haveli No hearing given to candidate Violation of natural justice 2024 Surat LS election Opposition candidates’ proposers denied signatures Seat won unopposed 2019 Varanasi Tej Bahadur Yadav (ex-BSF) lacked EC certificate Prevented independent challenge to PM 2023 Birbhum Debasish Dhar delayed no-dues certificate Eliminated from ballot 2025 Bihar (RJD) Blank fields in form Technical rejection Legal & Constitutional Angle Constitutional Safeguard: Article 326: Right to vote. Article 19(1)(a) & 19(1)(c): Freedom of expression and association (linked to political participation). Article 14: Equality before law. Arbitrary nomination rejection undermines both the candidate’s right to contest and voters’ right to choose. Key Case Laws: Resurgence India v. Election Commission (2013): False declarations invite prosecution but do not invalidate nomination; incomplete forms do. ⇒ Honest errors punished more than deliberate lies. K. Venkatachalam v. A. Swamickan (1999): Courts can step in post-election if process violates constitutional principles. PUCL v. Union of India (2003): Established voters’ right to know candidates’ background — basis of affidavit filing. Structural Weaknesses (“Procedural Traps”) Oath Trap: Oath must be taken before a specified officer after nomination but before scrutiny; early/late timing = invalid. Notarisation Trap: Affidavit (Form 26) not notarised by specified authority = automatic rejection. Certificate Trap: “No-dues” or clearance certificates missing/delayed = rejection, often due to bureaucratic delay. Checklist Illusion: ROs provide checklists but are not legally binding. Even defect-free forms can later be rejected. Global Best Practices Country Safeguard Measure UK RO assists candidates to correct errors before deadlines. Canada 48-hour correction window for technical defects. Germany Written notice + appeal layers for errors. Australia Early submission encouraged to enable corrections. ⇒ India treats RO as gatekeeper, while others treat them as facilitators. Reforms Suggested Digital-by-Default Nomination System: Online filing, validation via electoral roll, auto-verification of voter ID, age, constituency. Real-time public dashboard showing nomination status, timestamps, and reasons for acceptance/rejection. Categorisation of Defects: (1) Technical/paperwork: should not lead to rejection. (2) Authenticity disputes: require verification. (3) Constitutional/Statutory disqualifications: valid grounds for rejection. Guaranteed 48-hour Correction Window: Similar to Canada’s model, for candidates to fix errors. Mandatory Reasoned Orders: Each rejection must specify: violated clause, evidence, and why defect is “substantial.” Broader Democratic Implications Democratic Legitimacy: Without fair nomination scrutiny, the right to vote is hollow. Political Competition: Arbitrary rejections can skew contests — e.g., unopposed seats like Surat (2024). Citizen Trust: Opacity erodes confidence in ECI’s neutrality. Data & Facts India had 8,000+ candidates rejected in 2019 Lok Sabha elections (ECI data; ~12% of total nominations). Average 4 candidates per constituency rejected for technical grounds. Lok Sabha 2024: Over 200 nominations rejected in first scrutiny day in Gujarat and Bihar. ECI Digital Reforms: ENCORE Portal currently digitises election management but not nomination scrutiny. U.S. Nuclear Testing Debate and the Future of Global Non-Proliferation Why in News? On October 29, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump, ahead of a meeting with China’s President Xi Jinping in Busan (South Korea), announced that the U.S. would resume nuclear weapons testing, claiming parity with other powers like Russia, China, and North Korea. His statement follows Russia’s 2025 tests of a nuclear-powered cruise missile (Burevestnik) and an underwater torpedo (Poseidon), reigniting global fears of a new nuclear arms race. Relevance GS-2 (International Relations): Undermines global non-proliferation architecture (CTBT, PTBT). Implications for India’s nuclear posture (No First Use, Credible Minimum Deterrence). Strategic stability challenges in Indo-Pacific and South Asia. Role of multilateral diplomacy — CTBTO, NAM, G-20, and UN disarmament forums. GS-3 (Security): Nuclear deterrence, arms race dynamics, and India’s strategic autonomy. Implications for global peace and security architecture. Nuclear Testing and Treaties First Nuclear Test: “Trinity” by the U.S. in 1945. Total Global Tests (as of 2025): ~2,056 nuclear detonations. Last Tests: U.S. – 1992 Russia (then USSR) – 1990 China – 1996 India – 1998 (Pokhran-II) North Korea – 2017 (last confirmed test) Key Treaties and Legal Framework Partial Test Ban Treaty (PTBT, 1963): Banned nuclear tests in the atmosphere, underwater, and outer space. Allowed underground testing. Signed by U.S., USSR, U.K.; India not a signatory. Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT, 1996): Bans all nuclear explosions (civilian or military). Not in force: 8 key countries (U.S., China, India, Pakistan, Iran, Israel, North Korea, Egypt) haven’t ratified. U.S. & China: signed but not ratified. Russia: ratified in 2000, de-ratified in 2023 amid tensions with the U.S. Subcritical Tests: Use conventional explosives on fissile material (e.g., plutonium-239) without causing a chain reaction. Allowed under CTBT — used to maintain arsenal safety without actual detonations. Global Nuclear Arsenals (2025, Source: Federation of American Scientists) Country Estimated Warheads Status Russia 4,309 De-ratified CTBT; new delivery systems tested U.S. 3,708 Subcritical tests continue China ~1,000 Rapid buildup; new silos at Xinjiang France 290 No recent tests UK 225 Committed to moratorium India ~164 No-testing pledge (1998) North Korea ~40–50 Tested 6 times (2006–2017) Environmental & Human Implications Underground tests still cause severe radioactive contamination of soil, water, and air. Nevada Test Site (U.S.) — caused long-term radiation-linked health crises. Semipalatinsk (Kazakhstan) — over 1.5 million affected by Soviet-era tests. Pokhran (India) — minor radiation but ecological risk to Thar desert. Strategic Implications Erosion of Non-Proliferation Regime: CTBT moratorium collapse may trigger arms race 2.0 among major powers. Nuclear Modernisation Race: U.S. pursuing B61-13 tactical bomb; Russia developing Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle; China expanding silo fields. Impact on South Asia: If China resumes testing, India may face pressure to do so for deterrence parity, forcing Pakistan to follow. Could undermine India’s 1998 self-imposed test moratorium and “credible minimum deterrence” policy. Global Security Risks: Testing resurgence could undermine New START (U.S.–Russia arms reduction treaty), already under strain. U.S. Domestic Debate Pro-testing lobby: Argues resumption ensures arsenal reliability & technological edge. Cites “aging warheads” and emerging threats (China’s buildup). Anti-testing experts: Argue that computer simulations and subcritical tests suffice for maintenance. Fear political fallout and moral loss of leadership in global arms control. India’s Stand India’s nuclear policy (since 1998): “No First Use” and “Credible Minimum Deterrence.” Supports universal and verifiable disarmament but refuses to sign CTBT citing discriminatory nature. Implication: If U.S.–Russia–China resume testing, India may face strategic compulsion to test for reliability and deterrence assurance. Geopolitical Consequences Asia-Pacific Flashpoints: Heightened tension in Taiwan Strait, South China Sea, Korean Peninsula. Europe: U.S.–NATO missile defense tensions with Russia’s Kaliningrad deployment. Middle East: May embolden Iran to pursue enrichment unchecked. Way Forward Revive CTBT Negotiations: Pressure U.S. and China to ratify; re-engage Russia. Establish Global Verification Regime: Strengthen CTBTO International Monitoring System (IMS). Promote Regional Test Bans: Similar to Treaty of Tlatelolco (Latin America). Enhance Transparency: Public declarations of test moratoriums, open inspection regimes. India’s Role: Champion “Responsible Restraint Framework” through NAM and G-20 platforms. Global Warming Intensifies Despite La Niña Effects  Why in News ?? The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) released its State of the Global Climate Update 2025, warning that 2023–2025 is likely to be the warmest three-year period on record, despite cooling La Niña conditions. The period marks a historic acceleration of global warming, with 2025 expected to be among the top 2 hottest years ever recorded. Relevance GS-1 (Geography): Climatic trends, oceanic processes (La Niña, El Niño) and global heat balance. Regional impacts on South Asian monsoon and heat stress patterns. GS-3 (Environment): Global warming data trends — WMO 2025 findings and 1.5°C threshold. Carbon budget and emission trajectory relevance for COP30 (Belém Summit). Sea-level rise, ocean heat content, and cryosphere loss. Reinforces need for India’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and renewable transition. Key Data and Findings (WMO Report 2025) Global mean temperature (2023–2025): ~1.4°C above pre-industrial levels (1850–1900). Decade 2015–2025: Warmest 10-year span in instrumental record. 2024: Recorded highest ocean heat content in history. 90%+ of excess heat from greenhouse gases absorbed by oceans. Sea level reached a new record high. La Niña Impact: Temporarily cooled global temperature slightly, but warming trend persisted. Preliminary 2025 data show a minor decline, but the long-term trajectory remains sharply upward. Oceanic and Atmospheric Indicators Ocean Heat Content: Increased steadily since 2023, driving stronger cyclones and coral bleaching. Weakens ocean carbon sink capacity → less CO₂ absorption. Sea Level Rise: Accelerating due to melting of Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets. 2024 hydrological year (2023/24): 3rd consecutive record for global mass loss from glaciers (WMO Global Cryosphere Watch). Greenhouse Gas Concentrations (2024): CO₂ ~423 ppm, CH₄ ~1925 ppb, N₂O ~336 ppb — all record highs. Regional & Temporal Trends Northern Hemisphere: Record heatwaves in 2024–25 (Europe, North America, China). South Asia: Warming aggravating monsoon variability and heat stress. 2024/25: WMO warns of El Niño–La Niña alternation, amplifying climate unpredictability. Scientific & Policy Implications 1.5°C Threshold: UN Secretary-General António Guterres warns world is on track to breach 1.5°C within this decade if emissions continue. COP30 (Belém Summit, 2025) stresses need for accelerated decarbonization. Carbon Budget: Only ~250 Gt CO₂ left (≈6 years of emissions at current rates) before breaching 1.5°C. Urgent Warnings: Celeste Saulo (WMO Sec-Gen): Rising greenhouse gases make it “extremely difficult” to limit warming below 1.5°C without drastic emission cuts before 2030. Long-Term Climate Trends Since 1850, global mean temperature rose by ~1.3–1.4°C. Over 90% of total excess energy trapped by greenhouse gases stored in oceans. Anthropogenic warming now overwhelms short-term natural cooling cycles like La Niña.

Daily PIB Summaries

PIB Summaries 06 November 2025

Content National Cooperative Development Corporation (NCDC) Agricultural Education & Training in India National Cooperative Development Corporation (NCDC) Why in News ? Rs. 49,799.06 crore disbursed by NCDC as of October 2025 (FY 2025–26). Rs. 95,182.88 crore disbursed in FY 2024–25 — a 16.5× rise from Rs. 5,735.51 crore in FY 2014–15. New Central Sector “Grant-in-Aid to NCDC Scheme” (2025–29) approved —₹2,000 crore outlay, leveraging ₹20,000 crore market funding. Launch of National Cooperation Policy 2025, aligning with Viksit Bharat 2047 and Sahkar se Samriddhi vision. Relevance : GS-3 (Economy): Strengthens cooperative-based rural credit, enterprise formation, and value chains; aligns with Atmanirbhar Bharat & Viksit Bharat 2047. GS-2 (Governance): Implements National Cooperation Policy 2025 for transparency, professionalism & digital cooperatives. GS-3 (Inclusive Growth): Focus on SC/ST/Women cooperatives, job creation, and decentralized development through “Sahkar se Samriddhi.” GS-3 (Agriculture): Expands financing for dairy, fisheries, sugar, and allied sectors via modernized cooperative structures. NCDC – The Backbone of India’s Cooperative Economy Statutory body, established in 1963 under the National Cooperative Development Corporation Act, 1962. Administrative Ministry: Ministry of Cooperation. Mandate: Promote, strengthen & develop cooperatives in agriculture, allied, and non-farm sectors via financial & technical support. Key Objectives Financing cooperatives in production, processing, storage, marketing, cold chains, and input supply. Supporting non-farm cooperative activities – dairy, poultry, fishery, handloom, SC/ST & women cooperatives. Strengthening value chains & post-harvest infrastructure for rural development. India’s Cooperative Landscape Total cooperatives: 8.44 lakh Membership: >30 crore individuals Farmer linkage: 94% of Indian farmers associated with cooperatives (credit, dairy, sugar, etc.) Economic sectors: Credit, sugar, dairy, fertilizers, textiles, marketing, housing, fishery, handicrafts. NCDC’s Financial Growth Year Financial Assistance (₹ crore) Growth 2014–15 5,735.51 Base Year 2024–25 95,182.88 +1,560% rise 2025–26 (till Oct 2025) 49,799.06 52% of previous FY achieved mid-year Sectoral Focus Sugar sector: ₹33,311.79 crore cumulative (as of Mar 2025) Women cooperatives: ₹4,823.68 crore (FY 2021–25) SC/ST cooperatives: ₹57.78 crore (FY 2021–25) Flagship Schemes of NCDC Yuva Sahakar (2019–20) Promotes start-up cooperatives and innovation-driven youth entrepreneurship. Focus: Aspirational districts, NER, women, SC/ST/PwD cooperatives. Support: Cooperative Start-up & Innovation Fund. Performance: 32 cooperatives supported ₹49.35 crore sanctioned; ₹3.71 crore released Ayushman Sahakar (2020–21) Cooperative model for holistic healthcare and AYUSH promotion. Supports hospital infrastructure, digital health, and health education. Performance (till FY 2024–25): 9 cooperatives ₹161.90 crore sanctioned; ₹43.19 crore released Dairy Sahakar (2021–22) Strengthens dairy cooperatives; covers procurement, processing, value addition, export. Also supports ICT, renewable energy, R&D, veterinary services. Performance: 16 cooperatives ₹162.28 crore sanctioned; ₹177.72 crore released Digital Sahakar (2021–22) Aligns with DigitalIndia. Promotes digitally enabled cooperatives, improved credit access, transparency, and integration with e-governance schemes. Eligible entities: Cooperatives, FPOs, FFPOs, SHG federations. Deerghavadhi Krishak Punji Sahakar Yojana (2022–23) Long-term capital support for agricultural credit cooperatives. Targets PACS, DCCBs, StCBs, PCARDBs, SCARDBs. Performance: 5 cooperatives ₹5,400.76 crore sanctioned; ₹2,137 crore released Women-centric Schemes Swayam Shakti Sahakar Yojana (2022–23) Extends loans via cooperative banks to Women SHGs & federations for rural enterprise creation. Nandini Sahakar (2020–21) Empowers women-led cooperatives via business planning, credit, and training. Performance (FY 2021–25): 34 cooperatives assisted ₹6,283.71 crore sanctioned; ₹4,823.68 crore released ₹2.37 crore for infrastructure (2022–25) Cooperative Sugar Mills Assistance Grant-in-Aid Scheme: ₹1,000 crore (2022–23 to 2024–25) Enables loans up to ₹10,000 crore for ethanol/cogeneration plants & working capital. Funding pattern revised: 90:10 (society: NCDC). Interest: 8.5% term loan rate. Outcome: ₹10,005 crore to 56 sugar mills. Recent Developments Grant-in-Aid Scheme (2025–26 to 2028–29) Outlay: ₹2,000 crore (₹500 crore annually). Leverage potential: ₹20,000 crore from open market. Coverage: ~13,288 cooperatives; 2.9 crore members. Target sectors: Dairy, fisheries, textiles, sugar, storage, women cooperatives, etc. National Cooperation Policy (NCP) 2025 Vision: “Sahkar se Samriddhi” – cooperatives as drivers of Viksit Bharat 2047. Focus areas: Legal reforms for transparency and professionalism Technology-driven and market-linked cooperatives Collaboration with IFFCO, NAFED, KRIBHCO, AMUL, NDDB, NCEL & NABARD Promoting “Cooperation among Cooperatives” model Significance & Impact Economic Impact Enhances rural credit and enterprise formation. Boosts value-added agriculture and farm-to-market linkages. Generates employment and local entrepreneurship. Social Impact Empowers marginalized groups (SC/ST/Women) through inclusive finance. Strengthens social capital via participatory governance. Strategic Impact Reduces dependence on state subsidies by fostering self-sustaining cooperatives. Aligns with Atmanirbhar Bharat and Vocal for Local missions. Critical Analysis Parameter Achievement Challenge Credit Growth 16× growth in disbursement (2014–25) Uneven access across states Inclusivity Dedicated schemes for women, SC/ST Limited scale of disbursement to marginalized groups Digitalization Launch of Digital Sahakar Digital literacy & infra gaps in PACS Health Sector Expansion Ayushman Sahakar model Low adoption rate Policy Support National Cooperation Policy 2025 State-level cooperative law fragmentation Way Forward Uniform Cooperative Legal Framework across states for ease of operation. Stronger credit monitoring to reduce NPAs in cooperative banks. Skill & capacity building through cooperative training institutes. Technology infusion: Blockchain, AI-driven traceability, digital payments. Women & youth-focused financial instruments for social inclusion. Conclusion The National Cooperative Development Corporation has emerged as a key financial and institutional pillar of India’s cooperative resurgence. With record disbursements, targeted social schemes, and integration under National Cooperation Policy 2025, NCDC is central to realizing a “Self-reliant and Inclusive Cooperative India” by 2047. Its sustained focus on credit expansion, inclusivity, and modernization positions cooperatives as engines of rural prosperity and equitable growth. Agricultural Education & Training in India Why in News ? PIB release highlights India’s integrated approach toward agricultural education, research, and farmer training under the vision “One Nation – One Agriculture – One Team.” Focus: Strengthening agricultural human capital, digital technologies (AI, IoT), and farmer skilling to achieve “Viksit Krishi aur Samruddh Kisan” — a pillar of Viksit Bharat 2047. Relevance : GS-2 (Education & Governance): Strengthens institutional capacity through ICAR, CAUs, KVKs; aligns with NEP 2020 and DARE-led reforms. GS-3 (Agriculture): Integrates AI, IoT, and digital skilling for climate-smart, precision-based agriculture. GS-3 (Science & Tech): Promotes AgriTech innovation via Technology Innovation Hubs and startup incubation under RKVY. GS-3 (Rural Development): Enhances farmer training, mechanization, and human capital for “Viksit Krishi aur Samruddh Kisan.” Importance of Agricultural Education Economic significance: Agriculture supports ~50% of India’s work force and contributes ~18% of GDP. Objective: Build a scientifically trained, tech-enabled workforce for 5% annual agri growth. Three Pillars: Education, Research, and Extension — interlinked to raise productivity, reduce costs, and enhance sustainability. Institutional Framework — ICAR System Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) Established: 1929; under Department of Agricultural Research & Education (DARE), MoA&FW. Mandate: Apex body for agricultural education, research, and extension. Network: 113 National Research Institutes 74 Agricultural Universities (State, Central, Deemed, and ICAR-affiliated) 731 Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs) — frontline extension units. Major Achievements: Led the Green Revolution; now drives climate-resilient crop and livestock innovations. ICAR Model Act (Revised 2023): Standardized academic & governance norms. Accreditation: Through National Agricultural Education Accreditation Board (NAEAB). University Ecosystem in Agriculture Category No. of Institutions Key Highlights State Agricultural Universities (SAUs) 63 Mainstream under state governments Central Agricultural Universities (CAUs) 3 Pusa (Bihar), Imphal (Manipur), Jhansi (UP) Deemed Universities (ICAR) 4 IARI (Delhi), NDRI (Karnal), IVRI (Izatnagar), CIFE (Mumbai) Central Universities with Agri Faculties 4 Offer agriculture and allied science programs Private ICAR-accredited Colleges 22 (up from 5 in 2020–21) Reflects growing private participation Central Agricultural Universities — Regional Impact (a) Dr. Rajendra Prasad CAU, Pusa (Bihar) Converted from State Univ. (2016); 8 constituent colleges, 18 KVKs. Offers UG, PG, PhD + short-term industry-linked diplomas. Focus: Eastern India agrarian upliftment. (b) CAU, Imphal (Manipur) Established 1993; serves 7 NE hill states. 13 constituent colleges, 10 UG + 48 PG + 34 PhD programs. Enrolment 2024–25: 2,982 students. (c) Rani Lakshmi Bai CAU, Jhansi (UP) Established 2014; national importance. Focus: Dryland farming, veterinary, horticulture, agri-engineering. Colleges across UP & MP. Digital & Technological Transformation AI & IoT in Agriculture Applications: Precision farming (smart irrigation, pest prediction, drone spraying, livestock monitoring). Innovation Hubs: 25 Technology Innovation Hubs (TIHs) under DST’s NM-ICPS (2022). IIT Ropar (IoT for saffron), IIT Bombay (IoE Hub), IIT Kharagpur (AI4ICPS). Digital Centres: IoT Centres of Excellence — Bengaluru, Gurugram, Gandhinagar, Visakhapatnam (AgriTech hub). e-Governance Plan for Agriculture: States funded to deploy AI/ML, IoT, blockchain solutions. Start-up Promotion (RKVY-Agripreneurship): Launched 2018–19. Supports startups in agro-processing, AI, IoT, blockchain, food tech. Farmer Skilling & Vocational Training (a) Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs) Frontline ICAR training units. Farmers trained: 2021–22 to 2023–24 → 58.02 lakh Apr–Oct 2024–25 → 18.56 lakh Focus: Agronomy, livestock, soil health, post-harvest tech. (b) ATMA (Agricultural Technology Management Agency) Decentralised extension scheme. Farmers trained: 2021–22: 32.38 lakh 2022–23: 40.11 lakh 2023–24: 36.60 lakh Jan 2025 cumulative: 1.27 crore Focus: Integrated local training + agri-business linkages. (c) Skill Training of Rural Youth (STRY) Short-term (7-day) vocational training in horticulture, dairy, fisheries. Trained: 2021–22: 10,456 2022–23: 11,634 2023–24: 20,940 Total till Dec 2024 → ~51,000 rural youth. (d) Sub-Mission on Agricultural Mechanization (SMAM) Promotes mechanization via training/demonstrations. Farmers trained (2021–25): 57,139 Focus: Efficient machinery use, custom hiring. (e) Soil Health Card Scheme Promotes balanced nutrient management. By July 2025: 25.17 crore cards issued, 93,000+ trainings, 6.8 lakh demonstrations. (f) Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs) >10,000 FPOs registered. Trained in business management, digital marketing, and collective procurement. Emerging Trends Shift from degree-centric to skill-centric and tech-based learning. NEP 2020 integration: Multi-disciplinary courses, short-term diplomas, employability focus. PPP in agri-education: Rise of private colleges and industry-academia linkages. Digital inclusion: Smart classrooms, agri-data platforms, AI-based curricula. Challenges Regional disparities in institutional capacity (esp. Eastern & NE India). Low employability among graduates due to theoretical-heavy curricula. Need for AI-ready, climate-smart pedagogy. Limited private investment in agricultural R&D. Policy Implications Strengthen synergy of ICAR–SAUs–KVKs–ATMA–FPOs. Institutionalize agri-tech incubation and digital learning ecosystems. Expand international collaborations for advanced agri-research. Align education reforms with Viksit Bharat 2047 agricultural goals. Conclusion India’s agricultural education ecosystem — 113 ICAR institutes, 74 universities, 731 KVKs, 1.27 crore farmers trained (2021–25) — reflects a robust national capacity-building effort. Integration of AI, IoT, start-ups, and skilling is bridging research-to-field gaps. As agriculture evolves from subsistence to knowledge-driven enterprise, the synergy between education, research, and farmer training will determine India’s agri-future and rural prosperity.

Daily Editorials Analysis

Editorials/Opinions Analysis For UPSC 06 November 2025

Content Death on the Move: India’s Road Safety Crisis COP30 & The Belém Summit: The “COP of Truth Death on the Move: India’s Road Safety Crisis Why in News ? On November 3, 2025, a major accident near Chevella (Hyderabad) killed 19 people when a truck swerved to avoid a pothole and hit a bus on NH-163. The stretch lacked dividers, signages, and streetlights — reflecting India’s chronic road infrastructure and enforcement deficits. Relevance   GS 2 (Governance): Administrative and institutional reforms, citizen-centric governance (RTO reforms). GS 3 (Infrastructure & Internal Security): Road infrastructure, technological safety, disaster management, and resilience. GS 4 (Ethics): Ethical duty of state and engineers in ensuring public safety. Practice Question Despite several policy initiatives, India continues to record one of the world’s highest numbers of road fatalities. Examine the structural causes and suggest a comprehensive multi-level reform strategy.(250 Words) The Scale of India’s Road Safety Crisis India tops the world in road fatalities. Source: MoRTH, Road Accidents in India Report 2023 1.68 lakh deaths in 2022 (highest ever). 53 road crashes and 19 deaths every hour. Global comparison: India accounts for ~11% of global road deaths, with just 1% of the world’s vehicles. Source: WHO Global Status Report on Road Safety 2023 Economic cost: Road accidents cost India 3.14% of GDP annually (World Bank, 2020). Among victims, 70% are aged 18–45, the productive demographic. Structural Causes Infrastructure Deficits Poor road design and maintenance: 40% of accidents linked to defective road conditions (NCRB 2023). Absence of crash barriers, signage, lighting, and drainage systems. Non-adherence to Indian Roads Congress (IRC) standards: Many NHs/SHs lack mandated median dividers and shoulders. Urban-rural divide: 53% of road deaths occur on rural roads with inadequate visibility and enforcement. Human Error & Licensing Failure Government attributes ~80% accidents to driver fault, but: Licensing tests focus on vehicle control, not defensive driving or risk awareness. No standardized training module for new drivers. RTO corruption and fake licences: SaveLIFE Foundation (2022): ~30% licences in some states issued without a test. World Bank (2020): 40% of Indian drivers learn driving informally. Vehicular Safety Low adoption of safety technologies: Until 2022, airbags were optional for many vehicle models. Lack of collision-risk warning systems in commercial vehicles. Crashworthiness: Global NCAP scores for several Indian cars failed minimum safety benchmarks. Enforcement Deficit Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019 aimed to tighten penalties, but: Many States diluted or delayed implementation (e.g., Tamil Nadu, Gujarat). Weak enforcement of speed, helmet, seatbelt norms. Post-Crash Care Golden Hour loss: Only 8–10% victims receive care within the critical hour. WHO: Delays in trauma care increase fatality risk by 30–40%. Regional disparity: States like Bihar, Jharkhand, Odisha have fatality rates 2× national average due to poor trauma infrastructure. Only ~600 trauma centres operational under the National Highway Accident Relief Service Scheme (NHARSS). Dimensions of Impact Dimension Impact Economic Annual loss of ₹7.5 lakh crore (MoRTH); reduces GDP growth by 1–1.5%. Social Majority of victims are low-income pedestrians, riders, and informal workers. Public Health India’s 8th leading cause of death (IHME 2022); burden on overstretched health systems. Governance Fragmented accountability between Centre, States, and local bodies. Urban Planning Poor integration of road design with pedestrian mobility and public transport. Government Initiatives & Reforms Legislative Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019 ↑ Penalties for traffic violations. Mandatory road safety audits for NH projects. Provision for Good Samaritan protection. Institutional National Road Safety Board (NRSB) (under MV Act 2019) – yet to be fully functional. National Road Safety Policy (2010) – outdated; revision pending. Infrastructure & Technology Black Spot Identification Programme: 7,000+ accident-prone zones identified (MoRTH 2023). Integrated Road Accident Database (iRAD): Digitises crash data for targeted interventions. Bharatmala & PM Gati Shakti: Incorporating road safety audits into design stage. e-DAR (Detailed Accident Report) — online platform for quicker insurance and compensation. Awareness & Capacity Building SaveLIFE Foundation initiatives: Proposal for License Seva Kendras — modelled on Passport Seva Kendras for transparent, standardised licensing. iSAFE Challenge by MoRTH: promoting youth engagement in safety awareness. International Best Practices Country Model Learning for India Sweden Vision Zero (no road deaths target) Integrate safety in design, not just enforcement. Japan Driver Re-certification every 5 years Continuous driver education and skill audits. UK Graduated Licensing System Stage-wise driving rights based on experience. Australia Black Spot Funding Programme Dedicated funding for accident-prone zones. Way Forward: Multi-Dimensional Reform Blueprint Policy & Institutional Reform Update National Road Safety Policy (2010) to align with SDG 3.6 (halve road deaths by 2030). Operationalise National Road Safety Board as an independent statutory body. Set annual state-wise targets for reduction in fatalities. Licensing & Driver Education Adopt SaveLIFE Foundation’s License Seva Kendra model. Introduce mandatory driver education modules (simulation-based tests). Digitise all RTO functions to eliminate corruption. Infrastructure Overhaul Ensure strict compliance with IRC standards on all NH/SH projects. Mandate road safety audits pre- and post-construction. Prioritise pedestrian and cyclist safety infrastructure (footpaths, crossings). Vehicle & Technology Integration Make ADAS, collision warning, and lane departure systems mandatory in commercial vehicles. Incentivise scrapping of unsafe vehicles and NCAP-rated models. Emergency & Health Systems Expand Golden Hour Trauma Network via PPP. Integrate 108 ambulance services with highway patrols. Strengthen AIIMS-level trauma centres across NH corridors. COP30 & The Belém Summit: The “COP of Truth” Why in News  ? Belém Summit (Nov 2025) opened in the Brazilian Amazon, ahead of COP30 (to be hosted in Belém, Brazil, in 2025). Leaders from across the globe gathered to renew political momentum for climate justice, energy transition, and protection of tropical forests. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva called it the “COP of Truth” — urging real action over rhetoric and proposing new global climate governance. Relevance GS 2 (International Relations): Multilateralism, international institutions, and global governance reform. India’s role in climate diplomacy (BASIC, G-77). GS 3 (Environment ): Climate change, sustainable development, and energy transition. Forest conservation mechanisms and carbon finance. GS 4 (Ethics): Climate ethics: Responsibility of developed nations, intergenerational justice. Practice Question The Belém Summit and Brazil’s “COP of Truth” call mark a shift from climate diplomacy to climate accountability. Discuss the significance of this shift for global climate governance and the Global South.(250 Words) The Road to COP30 Key Milestones Year Significance Earth Summit (Rio de Janeiro) 1992 Birth of UNFCCC, CBD, and UNCCD; foundation of global environmental governance. Paris Agreement (COP21) 2015 Legally binding framework to limit global temperature rise below 2°C. COP28 (Dubai) 2023 First Global Stocktake revealed world is off-track for 1.5°C target. Belém Summit (Brazil) 2025 Precursor to COP30; focus on climate finance, forests, and just transition. Brazil’s Climate Role and the Amazon Context Amazon = 60% of Brazil’s territory; world’s largest rainforest, absorbing ~2 billion tonnes CO₂ annually (UNEP 2024). Deforestation: Peaked at 13,000 sq km in 2021 under Bolsonaro. Under Lula: ↓ 50% by 2024 (INPE data). Significance: Amazon generates 20% of world’s freshwater and regulates global carbon and rainfall cycles. Loss may trigger “tipping point” → irreversible savannisation (Science Advances, 2023). The Belém Vision: Key Announcements Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF) New global fund model — not a donation mechanism but an investment fund. Reward-based approach: Incentivises countries for keeping forests standing. Attracts investors via carbon credit-based returns. Brazil’s initial pledge: $1 billion. Aims to correct “climate finance inequity” by valuing ecosystem services. Ambitious Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) Brazil: 59–67% emission reduction target by 2030 (covering all GHGs and sectors). Second country globally (after UAE) to submit updated NDC under the Paris framework. Energy transition goal: 88% electricity from renewables (hydro, solar, wind, biofuels). Green hydrogen investments: $10 bn pipeline projects (IBRD, 2024). Declaration on Hunger, Poverty & Climate Links climate justice with social justice: 673 million hungry; 2 billion lack clean cooking fuel (FAO & IEA 2024). Advocates Just Transition — balancing emission cuts with livelihood protection. Proposal for a UN Climate Change Council Linked to UN General Assembly, not UNSC. Aim: Overcome current multilateral paralysis and ensure binding accountability for climate pledges. Addresses global governance deficit highlighted in IPCC AR6 Synthesis Report (2023). Underlying Issues Lula Targets Climate Injustice Global North emits 10× more per capita than Global South (WRI 2024). Yet, 90% of climate-related deaths occur in developing countries (UNDP 2023). $100 billion/year finance goal (Copenhagen 2009) — still unmet. Broken Climate Finance Architecture OECD 2023: Only $89.6 billion delivered in 2022; adaptation share <30%. Lula demands justice, not charity — fulfilling “common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR-RC)” under UNFCCC Article 3. Multilateral Fatigue Frequent pledge–delivery gap at COPs has eroded trust. Lula’s “COP of Truth” = call for measurable, accountable, transparent climate governance. Brazil’s Model of Climate Leadership Sector Action Data/Outcome Deforestation Control Amazon Fund revived (with Norway & Germany support) 50% fall in Amazon deforestation (INPE 2024). Renewable Energy 88% electricity from renewables; 47% total energy mix (IEA 2024). Among cleanest energy systems globally. Agriculture & Land Use ABC+ Programme (Low-Carbon Agriculture) 53 million ha under sustainable practices. Urban Climate Action Net-zero urban plan for 2035 (São Paulo) Green hydrogen buses, electrified transit. Global Significance of the Belém Summit For Climate Governance Potential turning point in post-Paris momentum. Push for binding accountability via Climate Council. For Global South Strengthens South–South solidarity for climate justice and finance equity. Promotes a “development + decarbonisation” narrative rather than a Western mitigation-only agenda. For Forest Economies TFFF could become a new financial model beyond REDD+, ensuring continuous incentives for conservation. For COP30 (Brazil 2025) Sets stage for: Operationalising Loss & Damage Fund (COP28 outcome). Doubling adaptation finance and scaling forest-positive investments. Stocktaking of NDCs and 1.5°C progress. Challenges & Critiques Financing Doubt: Unclear global buy-in for TFFF; risk of greenwashing via voluntary offsets. Governance Feasibility: Creating a UN Climate Council may face opposition from major powers. Implementation Gap: Ambitious NDCs but insufficient domestic enforcement in forest peripheries. Oil Transition Contradiction: Brazil still expanding offshore drilling via Petrobras. Way Forward: Translating Belém Vision into Action Global Level Operationalise Loss & Damage Fund with clear contribution metrics. Enforce accountability metrics for NDC delivery (through proposed UN Climate Council). Link SDGs–Paris–Biodiversity frameworks under a unified implementation platform. National/Regional Level Integrate Just Transition Plans within NDCs. Scale up climate adaptation funding (currently only 20–25% of total). Prioritise forest-based carbon markets with strict MRV systems. India’s Relevance Similar goals in LiFE Mission (Lifestyle for Environment). Shared advocacy with Brazil, South Africa (BASIC) for climate equity and CBDR. Opportunity for India–Brazil collaboration in bioenergy, green hydrogen, and South–South climate finance.

Daily Current Affairs

Current Affairs 06 November 2025

Content Household Income Survey, 2026 Contempt of Court and Judicial Authority The Forgotten Internationalists India among countries with highest yield loss due to human-induced land degradation 3rd Home for Cheetahs in India – Nauradehi Wildlife Sanctuary, Madhya Pradesh India’s 2024 Road Accident Report Household Income Survey, 2026  Why in News? The Government of India is set to conduct the first-ever Household Income Survey (HIS) in 2026 to directly capture income data from Indian households — unlike previous surveys which relied on proxies like consumption or employment data. It aims to provide granular, policy-relevant details into income levels, distribution, class dynamics, and livelihood patterns across India. Relevance: • GS-3 (Economy): Enhances precision in income-based poverty estimation, inequality mapping, and welfare targeting through direct household income data. • GS-2 (Governance): Strengthens evidence-based policy formulation and social sector planning under MoSPI and NSO. • GS-3 (Inclusive Growth): Facilitates better DBT targeting, financial inclusion, and income-linked welfare metrics. • GS-3 (Statistics & Data Governance): Modernises India’s statistical architecture by integrating HIS with HCES and NDAP for data transparency. Context & Need Data gap: India lacks a comprehensive, nationally representative dataset on household income. Existing surveys’ limitations: Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) – focuses on wages & employment, not household-level income. Household Consumption Expenditure Survey (HCES) – infers income via expenditure; less accurate for inequality or savings estimation. RBI Consumer Confidence Survey – measures sentiment on income trends, not actual data. Policy vacuum: Reliable income data are vital for designing targeted welfare schemes, poverty estimates, and inequality mapping. Objectives of the 2026 Survey To directly measure household income — from all sources (salaries, self-employment, agriculture, pensions, transfers, etc.). To map the relationship between income and household characteristics — occupation, caste, gender, region, and assets. To understand income volatility, indebtedness, and loan repayment burden in an EMI-driven economy. To test claims like “Doubling Farmers’ Income” and evaluate outcomes of state and central welfare schemes. Survey Design & Methodology Conducted by: National Statistical Office (NSO) under the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI). Scope: Urban & rural households across all states/UTs. Data modules: Income – Salaries, allowances (bonus, overtime, stock options, leave encashment), self-employment earnings, crop sales, etc. Expenses – Seeds, raw materials, rents, repairs, and maintenance (mirroring HCES structure). Transfers & Support – Pensions, remittances, alimony, and welfare receipts (e.g., Kalaignar Magalir Urimai Thittam in Tamil Nadu). Assets & Liabilities – Property ownership, landholding, dwelling size/type, loans, interest payments. Pilot Survey Insights (August 2025) Pilot coverage: Randomly selected households nationwide. Key findings: ~95% respondents found questions on income “sensitive.” Refusal rate highest for income-tax related questions. Affluent households more reluctant; rural households needed fewer clarifications. Respondents often overstated expenditure or underestimated savings/interest income. Government response: Awareness drives, media outreach, and local-language enumerators. Considering self-compilation forms for gated and affluent communities. Expected Outputs  Granular income mapping by: Sector – agriculture, manufacturing, services. Region – urban vs rural, state-level disparities. Social group – caste, religion, occupation. Economic indicators generated: Gini coefficient for income inequality. Income-to-loan repayment ratio. Income–consumption correlation and profit margins for self-employed. Gender gap in income by employment category. Enables micro-level poverty mapping beyond consumption-based estimates. Policy Significance For Government: Empirical foundation for Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) targeting, tax reform, and social security design. Enables district-level income data, improving NITI Aayog’s SDG localization and state welfare prioritization. For Researchers: Fills critical data gap for income inequality studies (replacing proxy datasets like CMIE-CPHS). Allows integration with HCES for comprehensive welfare analysis. Challenges & Limitations Privacy concerns: Reluctance to share income/tax details. Recall bias: Respondents unable to remember exact income sources or asset returns. Data accuracy: Misreporting, underestimation of informal sector income. Enumerator training: Ensuring sensitivity, accuracy, and uniformity across diverse contexts. Affluent households’ participation: Requires alternative digital/self-reporting mechanisms. Way Forward Strengthen trust via local enumerators, digital anonymity, and awareness on data use. Triangulate data with tax, EPFO, PM-KISAN, and GSTN databases. Synchronize HIS with HCES (2025–26) to cross-verify consumption–income dynamics. Institutionalize periodic surveys (every 3–5 years) for trend monitoring. Integrate with National Data & Analytics Platform (NDAP) for open-access insights. Key Takeaway The Household Income Survey, 2026 marks a paradigm shift from proxy-based welfare estimation to direct income measurement, aiming to equip India with the most precise picture of household economics since Independence — vital for inclusive, data-led governance. Contempt of Court and Judicial Authority  Why in News? A recent controversy arose over alleged derogatory remarks made against the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and the Supreme Court, sparking debate on whether such statements amount to criminal contempt of court. The remarks, widely circulated on media and social media, are being viewed as potentially obstructing the administration of justice and eroding the judiciary’s institutional authority. Relevance: • GS-2 (Polity): Pertains to constitutional provisions under Articles 129, 215 and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971; upholds judicial independence. • GS-2 (Governance): Balances freedom of speech (Article 19(1)(a)) with institutional accountability and rule of law. • GS-2 (Judiciary): Demonstrates the evolving judicial stance on fair criticism, media conduct, and protection of judicial dignity. Constitutional & Legal Basis Article 19(2): Allows “reasonable restrictions” on the freedom of speech for, among other grounds, contempt of court. Article 129: Declares the Supreme Court a Court of Record with inherent power to punish for its contempt. Article 215: Grants the same power to High Courts. Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: Provides statutory clarity and procedure for contempt proceedings. Types of Contempt (as per the 1971 Act) Civil Contempt (Section 2(b)) Definition: Wilful disobedience of any judgment, order, direction, writ, or undertaking given to a court. Example: Non-compliance with a court order to pay maintenance or reinstate employment. Criminal Contempt (Section 2(c)) Definition: Publication or act that — i) Scandalises or lowers the authority of any court, ii) Prejudices or interferes with judicial proceedings, or iii) Interferes with administration of justice. Scope: Goes beyond disobedience — covers speech, writing, signs, or conduct that damages judicial credibility. Key Judicial Interpretations Fair criticism ≠ Contempt: Ashwini Kumar Ghosh v. Arabinda Bose (1952) – Fair and reasoned criticism of a judgment is permissible; personal attacks are not. Exercise with restraint: Anil Ratan Sarkar v. Hirak Ghosh (2002) – Contempt power must be used sparingly and only in clear cases of violation. Public speech as criminal contempt: M.V. Jayarajan v. High Court of Kerala (2015) – Use of abusive language against the judiciary in public constitutes criminal contempt. Recent reaffirmation: Shanmugam @ Lakshminarayanan v. High Court of Madras (2025) – Purpose of contempt law is to uphold the administration of justice, not to suppress legitimate dissent. Procedure for Initiating Contempt Suo motu action: Courts (SC or HC) can initiate proceedings themselves. Third-party initiation: Requires consent of: Attorney General (AGI) – for Supreme Court. Advocate General (AG) – for respective High Court. Punishments (under Section 12 of the Act): Simple imprisonment up to 6 months, or Fine up to ₹2,000, or both (with possibility of discharge on apology). Rationale & Relevance Protects judicial independence: Maintains public confidence in the justice system. Ensures effective administration of justice: Prevents disruptions or undue influence during proceedings. Preserves constitutional morality: Judiciary’s authority is central to checks and balances in a democracy. Contempt vs. Freedom of Speech Balance of rights: While free expression is a fundamental right, it is not absolute. The judiciary, as the guardian of the Constitution, must remain insulated from malicious or false attacks that weaken institutional trust. Law Commission (274th Report, 2018): Retaining criminal contempt provisions is essential to preserve respect for judicial authority and rule of law. Comparative perspective: UK abolished “scandalising the court” in 2013; India retains it due to the higher public trust placed in the judiciary and the fragile rule-of-law ecosystem. Contemporary Concerns Social media amplification: Digital platforms can spread defamatory or misleading content rapidly, intensifying contemptuous impact. Public misperception: Criticism often crosses into vilification, confusing accountability with contempt. Institutional legitimacy: Repeated public disparagement can erode faith in judicial impartiality and weaken constitutional governance. Balancing Critique & Contempt Permissible Criticism Contemptuous Expression Academic/legal critique of a judgment Personal attacks on judges Highlighting judicial errors or bias through evidence Accusations of corruption without proof Debating judicial philosophy Mocking or demeaning the judiciary’s authority Advocacy for reform Campaigns that obstruct ongoing cases Way Forward Promote judicial literacy: Public understanding of judicial processes can prevent uninformed criticism. Encourage responsible media conduct: Enforce ethical reporting codes for judiciary-related matters. Develop social media protocols for contempt and misinformation. Codify fair criticism standards to demarcate dissent from defamation. Regular review of contempt powers to align with evolving democratic norms. Key Takeaway The Contempt of Court mechanism is not meant to shield the judiciary from scrutiny but to safeguard the integrity of justice delivery. In an era of digital expression, freedom with responsibility is vital to maintain the balance between democratic dissent and judicial dignity. The Forgotten Internationalists   Context The 2026 election for the next UN Secretary-General (UNSG) comes at a time when the UN faces a crisis of credibility and relevance. Rise of populist, ultra-nationalist governments worldwide is undermining multilateralism and the rules-based global order. Reflection on figures like U Thant (Burma) and K.M. Panikkar (India) highlights the role of the Global South in shaping internationalism during the Cold War and decolonisation era. Relevance: • GS-2 (International Relations): Analyses UN reforms, Global South diplomacy, and India’s historical role in shaping postcolonial internationalism. • GS-1 (Modern History): Examines figures like U Thant and K.M. Panikkar in Cold War and decolonisation contexts. The UN’s Current Crisis Erosion of Multilateralism: Populist leaders prioritise national sovereignty over collective global solutions, weakening cooperation in areas like climate change, migration, and conflict resolution. Power Imbalance: UNSC remains dominated by the P5 (US, UK, France, Russia, China) — representing the 1945 world order, not the 21st-century realities. Legitimacy Deficit: Growing disillusionment due to UN inaction on conflicts (Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan) and failure to reform veto and membership structures. Funding Constraints: Over 75% of the UN’s budget comes from less than 10 countries, allowing political leverage over UN operations. U Thant’s Legacy: Global South Diplomacy Tenure: 1961–1971 (First Asian and non-European UNSG). Crisis Management: Cuban Missile Crisis (1962): Brokered backchannel diplomacy between the US and USSR, averting nuclear war. Indo-Pak War (1965): Facilitated ceasefire and supported the Tashkent Agreement (1966). Congo Crisis: Ensured UN intervention supported decolonisation efforts. Institutional Reforms: Advocated financial autonomy for the UN; urged big powers to share the fiscal burden. Championed Afro-Asian solidarity and supported anti-colonial movements. Ideological Position: Argued for “world citizenship” over narrow nationalism — “Patriotism is good, but allegiance to the world community is essential.” Supported recognition of People’s Republic of China in 1971, showing foresight in global power balance. Challenges: US opposition during Vietnam War; accused of bias for criticising American aggression. Faced Western backlash for ordering UN peacekeepers to withdraw in the 1967 Six-Day War. K.M. Panikkar’s Vision: India’s Civilisational Diplomacy Background: Historian, freedom fighter, and diplomat; served as Ambassador to China (1948–55) and Egypt. Worldview: Advocated an “Asian Resurgence” based on shared civilisational heritage and anti-colonial solidarity. Coined the idea of India’s maritime power as a determinant of strategic autonomy — precursor to India’s Indo-Pacific policy. Diplomatic Contributions: Supported recognition of Communist China (1949) much before the West. Shaped India’s role during Suez Canal Crisis (1956) — upholding anti-imperialism. Opposed creation of Israel at the UNGA (1948) but later urged India to establish relations pragmatically. Criticisms: Misjudged China’s Tibet occupation (1950), leading to Sardar Patel’s reprimand. Accused of being overly conciliatory (“gone native”) — yet represented India’s non-aligned realism. Comparative Overview Aspect U Thant (UNSG) K.M. Panikkar (India’s Diplomat) Origin Burma (Myanmar), Global South India, Postcolonial Civilisational State Role Multilateral leadership National diplomacy within global framework Approach Peace diplomacy, decolonisation, moral persuasion Realist diplomacy rooted in Asian identity Conflict Mediation Cuban Missile Crisis, Indo-Pak War Tibet issue, Suez, recognition of China Legacy UN reformer and symbol of Global South assertion Architect of India’s strategic thought and maritime doctrine Relevance Today Resurgence of Nationalism: Echoes Thant’s warning — “My country, right or wrong” mindset is replacing international solidarity. Reclaiming Global South Voices: G-77 and BRICS+ are modern successors to the Afro-Asian internationalism Thant envisioned. India’s “Voice of the Global South Summit” (2023) mirrors Panikkar’s civilisational outreach. UN Reform Debate: Need for expansion of UNSC membership (India, Japan, Brazil, African Union). Calls for veto reform, financial independence, and revitalisation of UNGA authority. Lessons for Future UNSG (2026): Must blend moral authority (like Thant) with strategic pragmatism (like Panikkar). Reorient the UN toward equitable multipolarity rather than P5 dominance. India among countries with highest yield loss due to human-induced land degradation  Why in News ? FAO’s “State of Food and Agriculture (SOFA) 2025” report (Nov 3, 2025) warns of a global land degradation crisis affecting 1.7 billion people. India is among the countries with the highest agricultural yield losses due to human-induced land degradation — a major threat to food security, ecosystem stability, and poverty alleviation. Relevance: • GS-3 (Environment): Relates to land degradation, desertification, and India’s commitments under UNCCD and SDG 15.3. • GS-3 (Agriculture): Examines yield loss, soil fertility decline, and sustainable land management practices. • GS-3 (Economy): Links degradation with reduced productivity, rural distress, and food security threats. Key Global Findings Land degradation has reduced agricultural productivity across 1.7 billion people globally. 90% of global deforestation driven by agricultural expansion — mainly cropland conversion and grazing expansion. Between 2001–2023: Total agricultural land area fell by 78 million hectares (mha) (−2%). Cropland expanded by 78 mha, while meadows/pastures shrank by 151 mha. Regional patterns: Sub-Saharan Africa: +69 mha cropland, −72 mha forest. Latin America: +25 mha cropland, −85 mha forest. 3.6 mha of croplands are abandoned annually, largely due to soil degradation and unsustainable farming. India-Specific Insights India among the worst-hit nations in yield loss due to anthropogenic (human-induced) land degradation. High population density + intensive agriculture (Punjab, Haryana, UP plains) → rapid soil organic carbon loss, nutrient depletion, and salinisation. Desertification Atlas (ISRO 2021): 29.7% of India’s total land (≈ 97.8 mha) degraded. Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Karnataka, Jharkhand — major contributors. Wheat yield loss projected to be 6–9% by 2040 due to combined soil and climate stress. Land degradation linked to water overuse — India extracts ~230 billion m³ groundwater annually, the world’s highest. Drivers of Human-Induced Land Degradation Agricultural Expansion: Conversion of forests to croplands; intensive monocropping. Responsible for ~90% of deforestation globally. Unsustainable Input Use: Overuse of fertilisers (India: ~165 kg/ha vs. global avg 120 kg/ha). Decline in soil organic carbon (SOC) by up to 40% in Indo-Gangetic belt. Overgrazing and Pasture Decline: Global pasture loss: 151 mha since 2001. Urbanisation and Infrastructure: In India, ~1.2 mha agricultural land lost yearly to non-farm use. Economic and Food Security Impact Degraded croplands = reduced productivity, lower farm income, and greater food insecurity. Reversing 10% of human-induced degradation can restore production to feed 154 million people/year globally. Restoring abandoned croplands could feed 292–476 million people. FAO identifies 47 million stunted children under age 5 living in degradation hotspots (mostly in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa). Inequality in Land Use and Resource Access Farm size disparities amplify degradation and adaptation gaps: 85% of global farms <2 ha, cultivating just 9% of farmland. 0.1% of large farms (>1000 ha) control ~50% of farmland. Large farms: High-tech input use maintains yields but masks degradation. Example: Europe, North America — productivity maintained at rising ecological cost. Small farms: Struggle with degraded soils, low technology, and limited capital. Yet supply 16% of global calories, 12% of protein, 9% of fats — crucial for local food diversity. India’s Policy Response National Action Plan on Desertification and Drought (NAPDD) – aligns with UNCCD goals. India’s Commitment: Restore 26 million ha degraded land by 2030 (UNCCD COP14, New Delhi 2019). Integrate Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN) in agriculture, forestry, and watershed programmes. Flagship Initiatives: Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana (PMKSY) – water-use efficiency. Soil Health Card Scheme – nutrient balance. National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA) – soil organic matter management. Green India Mission – forest restoration for ecosystem balance. Private-sector participation emerging in soil carbon markets and regenerative agriculture pilots. Global and Multilateral Linkages UNCCD (1994): Framework for combating desertification and promoting sustainable land use. FAO, UNEP, and IPBES assessments: Link land degradation to biodiversity loss and climate vulnerability. SDG 15.3: Target to achieve Land Degradation Neutral World (LDNW) by 2030. FAO warns global land productivity is declining on 25% of agricultural land, threatening SDG 2 (Zero Hunger). Way Forward Integrated Land-Use Planning: Balance agriculture, forestry, and water use. Agroecological Practices: Crop rotation, conservation tillage, bio-fertilisers. Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES): Incentivise soil and forest conservation. Tech-enabled Monitoring: Remote sensing (ISRO’s Bhuvan platform) and AI-based soil diagnostics. South-South Cooperation: India can lead Global South collaboration under UNCCD and FAO platforms. 3rd Home for Cheetahs in India – Nauradehi Wildlife Sanctuary, Madhya Pradesh Why in News ? Madhya Pradesh government is preparing Nauradehi Wildlife Sanctuary (Sagar–Damoh–Narsinghpur belt) as India’s third cheetah site after Kuno National Park and Gandhi Sagar Sanctuary. The first batch of cheetahs to Nauradehi Wildlife Sanctuary is expected in 2026, but the major challenge is presence of ~25 tigers already in Nauradehi, posing risks to cheetah adaptation and survival. Relevance: • GS-3 (Environment & Biodiversity): Concerns species reintroduction, habitat restoration, and India’s cheetah meta-population model. • GS-3 (Conservation): Aligns with Green India Mission and UNCCD land restoration goals. • GS-3 (Geography): Studies central Indian landscape connectivity — Satpura–Panna–Bandhavgarh corridor. • GS-3 (Ecology & Sustainable Development): Promotes eco-tourism and community-led conservation for livelihood diversification. Background: Project Cheetah Launched: 2022; world’s first intercontinental large carnivore reintroduction project. Objective: Reintroduce Asiatic cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus venaticus) to India after their extinction in 1952. Implementation: Led by National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), MoEFCC, and WII in collaboration with Cheetah Conservation Fund (Namibia). Import sources: Namibia (2022, 8 cheetahs) and South Africa (2023, 12 cheetahs). Sites: Kuno National Park (Sheopur, MP) – 748 sq km Gandhi Sagar Sanctuary (Mandsaur–Neemuch, MP) – under preparation Nauradehi Wildlife Sanctuary (Sagar, Damoh, Narsinghpur, MP) – proposed new site About Nauradehi Wildlife Sanctuary Established: 1975; located between Satpura and Vindhya ranges. Area: ~1,197 sq km (core), part of a 5500 sq km landscape including buffer and corridors. Eco-significance: Forms a corridor between Panna Tiger Reserve and Satpura Tiger Reserve, and indirectly connects Bandhavgarh–Rani Durgavati–Satpura landscape. Potential “stepping stone” for meta-population connectivity across central India. Habitat: Dry deciduous forests, grasslands, scrub, rivers (Bewa, Kopra). Wildlife: Tiger (~25 individuals), leopard, chital, chinkara, nilgai, wild boar, hyena, crocodile. Prey base (2020 census): 4,788 nilgai, 1,796 chital, 1,556 chinkara. Average prey density: ~15.8 animals/sq km, comparable to Kuno’s carrying capacity. Cheetah Reintroduction Plan in Nauradehi Aim: Establish a viable third cheetah population in central India to reduce overdependence on Kuno. Habitat readiness: Good grassland quality (crucial for cheetah hunting). Existing infrastructure and staff from tiger management. Challenges: Presence of 25 tigers – potential predator conflict and competition. Relocation of local villages: 93 identified; 44 already shifted. Need for ₹8 crore (₹5.2 crore sanctioned) for habitat preparation and fencing. Water scarcity, dry deciduous habitat limit prey in dry months. Mitigation: Create large enclosures (50–52 sq km) for soft release. Strengthen prey density and water availability. Relocate remaining human settlements before cheetah arrival (by 2026). Ecological & Administrative Significance Acts as a biological corridor within the Satpura–Panna–Bandhavgarh landscape, strengthening genetic flow. Opportunity to convert a neglected sanctuary into a global conservation site. Provides habitat redundancy – critical after cheetah mortalities in Kuno (9 deaths in 2023). May promote eco-tourism and conservation-linked livelihood for 50+ surrounding villages. Challenges & Concerns Predator coexistence: Cheetahs vulnerable to tiger and leopard attacks — need isolation enclosures. Human–wildlife conflict: Local grazing and fuelwood dependence persists. Climate & resource stress: Dry zones face summer prey depletion and fire risk. Connectivity vs. safety trade-off: Corridors beneficial for genetics but increase predator overlap. Financial & administrative delays: State demand for additional funding from NTCA. Comparative Data Parameter Kuno NP Gandhi Sagar Sanctuary Nauradehi WLS Area (sq km) 748 368 (core) 1,197 Apex predators None initially Few leopards 25 tigers Villages relocated 24 19 (in process) 44 done, 49 pending Habitat type Grassland–deciduous Semi-arid scrub Dry deciduous grassland Prey base ~3,500 ungulates Moderate ~8,000 ungulates Way Forward Habitat zoning: Demarcate cheetah-exclusive and tiger-dominant zones. Soft-release strategy: Gradual acclimatisation of cheetahs in fenced areas. Community-based conservation: Compensation, eco-tourism jobs, and grazing alternatives. Integrated landscape management: Link Satpura–Panna–Bandhavgarh corridor under a single conservation cluster. Monitoring via e-surveillance: Use drones, camera traps, and satellite collars. Broader Context India aims for a self-sustaining population of ~50 cheetahs across multiple sites by 2035. The meta-population model (similar to South Africa’s system) will ensure genetic exchange and species viability. Rewilding degraded grasslands aligns with India’s UNCCD land restoration target (26 mha by 2030). India’s 2024 Road Accident Report  Why in News? Provisional 2024 report by Ministry of Road Transport & Highways (MoRTH) indicates that India’s crash toll may surpass 2023 once West Bengal data is added. Despite declines in nine states, national road fatalities remain among the highest globally. Relevance: • GS-3 (Infrastructure & Transport): Evaluates safety performance under MoRTH, Motor Vehicles Act, and blackspot rectification policy. • GS-2 (Governance): Reflects Centre–State coordination and institutional accountability in road safety management. • GS-3 (Disaster Management): Links accident prevention, emergency response, and trauma care with SDG 3.6 (reduce deaths by 50% by 2030). National Overview (2024 vs 2023) 2024 (Provisional): 4.73 lakh accidents, 1.70 lakh deaths. 2023: 4.80 lakh accidents, 1.73 lakh deaths. Trend: National totals appear slightly lower, but inclusion of West Bengal (13,795 accidents, 6,027 deaths in 2023) will likely push 2024 above 2023. Long-term trend: Year-on-year increase in crashes since 2022, except during COVID-19 years (2020–21). Global context: India ranks #1 worldwide in road deaths, ahead of China and the US (World Road Statistics, IRF). State-wise Highlights (2024) Top 5 States by Road Accidents Rank State Accidents (2023) Accidents (2024*) Change 1 Tamil Nadu 67,213 67,526 ↑ 0.5% 2 Madhya Pradesh 55,327 56,669 ↑ 2.4% 3 Kerala 48,091 48,789 ↑ 1.4% 4 Uttar Pradesh 44,534 46,052 ↑ 3.4% 5 Karnataka 43,440 43,062 ↓ 0.9% Top 5 States by Road Fatalities Rank State Fatalities (2023) Fatalities (2024*) Change 1 Uttar Pradesh 23,652 24,118 ↑ 2.0% 2 Tamil Nadu 18,347 18,449 ↑ 0.6% 3 Maharashtra 15,366 15,715 ↑ 2.3% 4 Madhya Pradesh 13,798 14,791 ↑ 7.2% 5 Karnataka 12,321 12,390 ↑ 0.6% Positive Performers – States Showing Dual Decline 9 States/UTs recorded fall in both accidents & fatalities: Gujarat, Haryana, Punjab, Goa, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, J&K, Manipur, Nagaland. Examples: Gujarat: Accidents ↓ 4.6% (16,349→15,588); Fatalities ↓ 1.7% (7,854→7,717). Haryana: Accidents ↓ 6.3%; Fatalities ↓ 5.6%. Punjab: Accidents ↓ 3.3%; Fatalities ↓ 1.4%. Nagaland: Accidents ↓ 57% (303→129). Mixed Trends – Fall in One Metric, Rise in Another State Accidents Fatalities Observation Andhra Pradesh ↓ (19,949→19,557) ↑ (8,137→8,346) Higher severity Karnataka ↓ ↑ Severity rise Kerala ↑ ↓ Better post-crash response Tripura ↑ marginally ↓ Improved safety Delhi ↓ ↑ Rising fatal crashes Ladakh ↓ ↑ High-altitude risk profile Accident Severity (Fatalities per 100 Accidents) Uttar Pradesh: Highest severity – 52.37% (1 death in 2 accidents). Kerala: Lowest severity – ~7.6% (1 death in 13 accidents). Rajasthan: Third highest severity – 47.47%. Gujarat: Slight rise from 48.04% to 49.51%. Telangana: Largest improvement – severity dropped from 33.4% to 30.6%. Structural Insights Over 60% of fatalities occur on National & State Highways. Human error contributes to ~70% of accidents (speeding, distraction, fatigue). 2-wheeler riders account for ~44% of deaths, pedestrians ~19%, cyclists ~4%. Seatbelt & helmet non-compliance remain the biggest risk multipliers. Rural roads: ~60% of total crashes but only ~45% of registered vehicles. Road Safety Interventions (MoRTH & States) Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019: Stricter penalties, hit-and-run compensation (₹2 lakh). National Road Safety Policy: 4Es – Education, Engineering, Enforcement, Emergency care. Blackspot Rectification Programme: 789 blackspots identified; 60% under correction (2024). Good Samaritan Guidelines (2022): Legal protection to helpers of crash victims. Integrated Road Accident Database (iRAD): Data-driven interventions rolled out in 28 states. Swachhata Pakhwada–Road Safety Week 2024: Behavioural campaigns on helmets, seatbelts, and drink-driving. Global & Comparative Context India accounts for 11% of global road deaths, despite having only 1% of global vehicle population. WHO Global Status Report (2023): India’s fatality rate – 12.1 deaths per 1 lakh population (global avg ~9). UN Target: Reduce road deaths by 50% by 2030 (SDG 3.6) – India far off-track. Key Concerns Persisting urban–rural divide in enforcement and emergency response. Underreporting by states (~15–20% gap vs NCRB data). Delayed trauma care: 30–40% deaths occur within 1 hour (“golden hour loss”). Low deterrence: Poor conviction rate in traffic offences. Funding gaps in State Road Safety Funds (utilisation <60%). Way Forward Engineering: Crash barriers, rumble strips, lane segregation, better signage. Enforcement: AI-driven e-challan, speed cameras, night patrols. Education: Behavioural change campaigns, school road safety curriculum. Emergency Response: Expand NHAI’s 1033 helpline, integrate with eSanjeevani & 108 ambulance network. Accountability: Annual State Road Safety Index to link fund allocation with performance. Urban Mobility Planning: Safer pedestrian & cyclist infrastructure under Gati Shakti.

Daily PIB Summaries

PIB Summaries 05 November 2025

Content India’s Leap in Research and Innovation Access and Benefit-Sharing Framework India’s Leap in Research and Innovation Why in News? India launched the ₹1 lakh crore Research, Development and Innovation (RDI) Scheme on 3 November 2025 during ESTIC 2025 (Emerging Science, Technology and Innovation Conclave) at Bharat Mandapam, New Delhi. Marks a historic boost for private-led innovation to accelerate India’s transition toward Viksit Bharat@2047. Reflects India’s rising R&D expenditure and strategic focus on high-impact technologies like AI, Quantum, Semiconductors, Deep Ocean, and Biotechnology. Relevance GS-3 (Science & Technology): Boosts R&D and innovation through ₹1 lakh crore RDI Scheme 2025. Focus on AI, Quantum, Semiconductors, Space, and Biotech for Atmanirbhar Bharat. GS-3 (Economy): Promotes private-led R&D, tech-driven industries, and high-value job creation. Targets 2% R&D–GDP ratio for Viksit Bharat@2047. GS-2 (Governance): Institutional reforms via ANRF Act 2023, BioE3 Policy 2024, Indian Space Policy 2023. Strengthens PPPP model for innovation-led growth. Evolution of India’s R&D Ecosystem Objective: Build a self-reliant, knowledge-driven economy through science and innovation. Transformation: Shift from public-funded research to public–private innovation partnerships. Drivers: Policy reforms, digital infrastructure, innovation missions, and private sector participation. Key Data and Trends in India’s R&D Gross Expenditure on R&D (GERD): ₹60,196 crore (2010–11) → ₹1.27 lakh crore (2020–21) → projected ₹2.5 lakh crore (2025–26). R&D Share in GDP: ~0.7% (India) vs 2–3% (OECD average). Sectoral Contribution: Government: 64% of GERD Private sector: 36% (rising trend) Human Capital in Science: 40,813 PhDs awarded (2018–19), 60% in Science & Technology. India ranks 3rd globally after USA & China. Patents filed: 24,326 (2020–21) → 68,176 (2024–25). ₹1 Lakh Crore RDI Scheme (2025) – The Game Changer Launch Context: ESTIC 2025 (3–5 Nov 2025), Theme – “Viksit Bharat 2047: Pioneering Sustainable Innovation.” Aim: Build a private-sector-driven innovation ecosystem with long-term, low-cost financing for R&D. Core Features Long-term refinancing with low or nil interest rates for R&D projects. Growth and risk capital for private research in strategic sectors. Deep-Tech Fund of Funds to strengthen financing for start-ups. Encourages commercialisation of high-end research. Objectives Private Sector Push: Expand R&D in sunrise and strategic sectors. Transformative Financing: Fund advanced technology readiness projects. Tech Acquisition: Support access to critical technologies of strategic value. Deep-Tech Focus: Foster start-ups in AI, quantum, space, bio, and defense tech. Institutional and Policy Pillars of India’s Innovation Framework Anusandhan National Research Foundation (ANRF) Legal Basis: ANRF Act, 2023 (effective Feb 2024). Goal: Mobilise ₹50,000 crore (2023–28). Funding Mix: ₹14,000 crore (Govt) + ₹36,000 crore (Industry & Philanthropy). Focus: Strengthen academia–industry linkage and fund high-impact research. National Geospatial Policy, 2022 Liberalised geospatial data access for research and governance. Target: Comprehensive Digital Elevation Model by 2030. Promotes open-data ecosystem for innovation in mapping and planning. Indian Space Policy, 2023 Enables private participation in end-to-end space activities. IN-SPACe acts as regulator and facilitator. Supports commercial space manufacturing and international collaboration. BioE3 Policy, 2024 (Biotechnology for Economy, Environment, Employment) Promotes bio-manufacturing, bio-AI hubs, and biofoundries. Encourages sustainable, circular, and bio-based industries. Atal Innovation Mission (AIM) 2.0 Continuation till March 2028 with ₹2,750 crore. Network of Atal Tinkering Labs & Atal Incubation Centres. Builds innovation culture among students and MSMEs. National Missions Driving Frontier Technologies Mission Year Key Focus Budget/Outlay National Quantum Mission (NQM) 2023 Quantum computing, secure comms ₹6,003.65 crore National Mission on Interdisciplinary Cyber-Physical Systems (NM-ICPS) 2018 AI, Robotics, IoT, Cybersecurity ₹3,660 crore National Supercomputing Mission (NSM) 2015 HPC systems, digital knowledge network ₹4,500+ crore India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2021 Chip design, fabrication, packaging ₹76,000 crore PLI Deep Ocean Mission (DOM) 2021 Marine resources, Blue Economy ₹4,077 crore IndiaAI Mission 2024 AI infra, ethics, innovation ₹10,371.92 crore Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) – Foundation of Modern Innovation Purpose: Democratises data, improves governance, and supports R&D scalability. Platform Function Key Figures (as of 2025) UPI Digital payments backbone ₹24.85 lakh crore/month; 7-country presence Co-WIN Vaccination logistics & health data 220+ crore doses delivered DigiLocker Verified document repository 60.35 crore users Aadhaar & e-KYC Identity authentication 143+ crore Aadhaar IDs DBT Platform Direct subsidy transfer ₹43.95 lakh crore cumulative transfers Challenges in India’s R&D Landscape Low Private Investment: 36% vs >70% in OECD economies. Fragmented Research Institutions: Weak industry–academia collaboration. Brain Drain: Skilled researchers migrating for better opportunities. Limited IP Commercialisation: Patent filings high but technology transfer low. Underdeveloped Venture Capital: Especially in deep-tech and early-stage research. Way Forward – Towards Viksit Bharat @2047 Enhance R&D–GDP Ratio to 2% by 2047. Institutionalise Public–Private–Philanthropy Partnerships (PPPP). Promote Multidisciplinary Research Universities. Incentivise Private R&D Investments through tax credits and equity support. Leverage Digital Infrastructure for data-driven research and innovation. Strengthen Intellectual Property (IP) Regime and technology transfer pathways. Significance Economic: Enhances global competitiveness and productivity. Strategic: Builds self-reliance in defense, space, and critical technologies. Social: Solves challenges in health, energy, agriculture, and climate. Global Standing: Positions India among the top 5 global R&D powers. Access and Benefit-Sharing Framework Why in News? The National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) has released ₹3 crore under the Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) mechanism to 199 beneficiaries — including 198 Red Sanders farmers and the University of Andhra. Marks a major milestone in linking biodiversity conservation with community livelihoods under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. Focus species: Red Sanders (Pterocarpus santalinus) — an endemic, high-value and endangered tree species native to the Eastern Ghats of Andhra Pradesh. Relevance   GS-3 (Environment & Ecology): Implements Biological Diversity Act, 2002 and Nagoya Protocol for equitable benefit-sharing. Promotes conservation and legal trade of Red Sanders through incentive-based ABS. GS-2 (Governance): Decentralised biodiversity governance via NBA–SBB–BMC structure. Advances India’s global biodiversity commitments. GS-3 (Economy): Links biodiversity with livelihoods and rural income generation. Supports Mission LiFE, Green Credit, and National Biodiversity Mission. Context and Background Red Sanders is listed in CITES Appendix II (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species). Known for its deep red timber, used in musical instruments, furniture, and traditional medicine. Historically subject to illegal felling and smuggling, leading to stringent controls on trade. Biological Diversity Act, 2002 and Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) mechanism aim to ensure equitable sharing of benefits from the use of biological resources and associated traditional knowledge. The Current Initiative (2025) Amount Released: ₹3.00 crore Beneficiaries: 198 farmers + 1 academic institution (University of Andhra) Facilitated by: Andhra Pradesh State Biodiversity Board Districts Covered: Chittoor, Tirupati, Nellore, and Cuddapah (48 villages) Benefit Range: ₹33,000 – ₹22 lakh per farmer (based on quantity supplied) Outcome: Payments exceed market sale value — incentivising conservation and legal cultivation. Broader NBA Initiatives on Red Sanders Year / Phase Recipient Amount Purpose Earlier Releases AP & Karnataka Forest Depts, AP Biodiversity Board ₹48.00 crore Conservation of Red Sanders forests Tamil Nadu Farmers (2023) Individual cultivators ₹55.00 lakh Incentive for cultivated Red Sanders Current Phase (2025) AP farmers & University of Andhra ₹3.00 crore Fair benefit sharing under ABS Policy and Institutional Foundations Biological Diversity Act, 2002 Legal framework for conservation, sustainable use, and fair benefit-sharing. National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) oversees implementation. State Biodiversity Boards (SBBs) and Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs) facilitate local participation. Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) Mechanism Access: Regulates utilisation of biological resources by companies, researchers, or exporters. Benefit Sharing: Ensures that local communities and custodians receive a share of monetary and non-monetary gains. Promotes incentive-based conservation. Expert Committee on Red Sanders (2015) Developed Policy for Conservation, Sustainable Use and Fair & Equitable Benefit Sharing of Red Sanders (2019). Recommended mechanisms to legalise cultivated Red Sanders trade. DGFT Policy Relaxation (2019) Allowed export of Red Sanders from cultivated sources, aligning trade policy with conservation and livelihood goals. Significance of the 2025 ABS Disbursement Environmental Promotes in-situ and ex-situ conservation of a critically threatened endemic species. Reduces illegal logging and trafficking by incentivising legal cultivation. Socio-Economic Empowers local farmers by converting conservation into an income-generating activity. Encourages community stewardship of biodiversity. Demonstrates fair benefit-sharing in action — farmers receiving more than market value. Governance and Policy Operationalises the Nagoya Protocol (2010) on ABS, to which India is a signatory. Reinforces the decentralised governance structure of biodiversity conservation. Acts as a model for benefit-sharing in other bioresource sectors (e.g., medicinal plants, NTFPs). Challenges Low awareness among local communities about ABS provisions. Complex approval processes for resource access. Valuation issues in determining benefit share for cultivators vs wild resources. Need for traceability systems to distinguish cultivated from wild-sourced products. Way Forward Scale up ABS Implementation: Extend similar frameworks to other bioresource-rich states (e.g., NE India, Western Ghats). Capacity Building: Strengthen SBBs and BMCs for local biodiversity governance. Digital Monitoring: Use blockchain or GIS to trace bioresource use and ensure transparency. Mainstream Biodiversity Economy: Integrate ABS into agri-exports, biopharma, and forestry sectors. Enhance Farmer–Industry Linkages: Facilitate contracts between cultivators and legal exporters. Broader Significance for India Aligns with SDGs: Especially SDG 15 (Life on Land) and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption & Production). Supports National Missions: Complementary to Mission LiFE, Green Credit Programme, and National Biodiversity Mission. Strengthens India’s Global Leadership: Demonstrates compliance with Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and Nagoya Protocol commitments. Conclusion The ₹3 crore ABS release for Red Sanders farmers represents India’s evolving biodiversity governance model — where conservation, commerce, and community welfare converge. It showcases how economic incentives can drive sustainable utilisation of natural resources while ensuring fair equity for biodiversity custodians. With stronger implementation, India’s ABS framework could become a global exemplar of inclusive biodiversity economics.

Daily Editorials Analysis

Editorials/Opinions Analysis For UPSC 05 November 2025

Content India’s forests hold the future Compound effect India’s forests hold the future  Why in News? Government released the revised blueprint of the Green India Mission (GIM), targeting restoration of 25 million hectares of degraded forest and non-forest land by 2030. It aligns with India’s NDC goal of creating an additional carbon sink of 2.5–3.0 billion tonnes of CO₂ equivalent by 2030. Relevance : GS-3 (Environment & Ecology): Forest management, afforestation policy, carbon sink creation, biodiversity conservation. GS-2 (Governance): FRA implementation, community participation, federal coordination. GS-3 (Economy): Green financing, carbon markets, sustainable livelihoods. Practice Question : India’s afforestation drive must evolve from increasing canopy cover to restoring ecological functionality.” Examine in the context of the revised Green India Mission (2025).(250 Words) Basics Launched: 2014, under the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC). Nodal Ministry: Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC). Objective: Enhance ecosystem services — carbon sequestration, biodiversity conservation, and livelihood security. Initial Target: 10 million ha (5 mha forest, 5 mha non-forest) — now expanded to 25 mha by 2030. Context and Background Between 2015–2021: GIM supported afforestation on 11.22 mha, with ₹575 crore disbursed to 18 states. Forest & Tree Cover: Increased from 24.16% (2015) → 25.17% (2023). CAMPA Funds: ₹95,000 crore corpus for compensatory afforestation, but underutilisation (Delhi used only 23% between 2019–2024). Scientific Insight – Declining Forest Efficiency IIT Kharagpur–IIT Bombay–BITS Pilani (2025) study: Found 12% decline in photosynthetic efficiency of dense forests. Causes: Rising temperature and soil desiccation. Implication: “More trees ≠ more carbon sinks.” Need climate-resilient, native ecosystem restoration, not monocultures. Major Features of the Revised GIM Restoration Focus: Prioritises biodiversity-rich and climate-vulnerable landscapes — Aravallis, Western Ghats, Mangroves, Himalayan catchments. Integration: Aligns with National Agroforestry Policy, CAMPA, and Watershed Mission. Species Choice: Shift from monoculture plantations (eucalyptus, acacia) to native species (mahua, sal, teak). Community-Centric Planning: Incorporates Joint Forest Management Committees (JFMCs) and FRA, 2006 provisions. Capacity Building: Utilises forest training institutes (Uttarakhand, Coimbatore, Byrnihat). Persistent Challenges Community Exclusion: 200 million Indians depend on forests. Afforestation drives often bypass FRA rights → social conflict, low legitimacy. Ecological Design Gap: Past reliance on fast-growing exotics reduced biodiversity and groundwater recharge. Financing & Utilisation: Huge CAMPA pool underused; implementation efficiency <50% in many states. Institutional Capacity: Limited ecological expertise among frontline staff; target-oriented rather than resilience-oriented afforestation. Innovative State Models Odisha: Integrated JFMCs into planning & benefit-sharing. Chhattisgarh: Biodiversity-sensitive plantations; mahua-based livelihood model. Tamil Nadu: Doubled mangrove cover in 3 years. Himachal Pradesh: Biochar programme — carbon credits + fire management. Uttar Pradesh: 39 crore saplings; linking panchayats with carbon markets. Way Forward Ecological Restoration over Plantation: Focus on soil, hydrology, and native diversity. Empowered Communities: FRA-based participatory planning and monitoring. Financial Efficiency: CAMPA + Carbon Market + CSR synergy. Transparency: Public dashboards for fund use, species mix, survival rate. Skill Development: Upgrade training for forest officials in restoration ecology. Research Collaboration: Partner with IITs, ICFRE, and local universities for adaptive strategies. Compound effect Why in News? The Supreme Court has ordered a comprehensive inquiry into the rising menace of digital scams in India, focusing on ‘digital arrest’ frauds where criminals impersonate law enforcement to extort money. The Court highlighted the transnational and organized nature of these scams and their human trafficking linkages. Relevance GS-2 (Governance & IR): Cybercrime governance, international cooperation, trafficking. GS-3 (Internal Security & Technology): Cybersecurity architecture, RBI’s digital risk management, cryptocurrency regulation. GS-1 (Social Issues): Human trafficking and modern slavery dimensions. Practice Question : “Digital arrests and cryptocurrency-based scams represent the convergence of cybercrime, organised crime, and human trafficking.” Discuss with suitable examples.(250 Words) Basics Digital Scam: Online fraud involving deception through digital means (calls, social media, investment apps, crypto platforms). Digital Arrest Scam: Criminals pose as police/CBI/ED officers, accuse victims of fake crimes, and extort money for “bail” or “settlement.” Pig Butchering Scam: A long-term manipulation involving fake romantic/investment relationships to defraud victims, often through crypto. Global Architecture of Scams Operated from scam compounds in Myanmar, Cambodia, and Laos, often within conflict zones and special economic zones (SEZs). Victims are trafficked from India and Southeast Asia via fake job offers — especially through Bangkok exploiting visa-free travel. Myanmar’s Border Guard Forces (BGF), allied with the military junta, host and profit from these scam centres. Chinese organized crime networks control many of these transnational rackets. Modus Operandi Victims trafficked to compounds → trained/coerced under torture → forced to scam people globally. Scams include: Romance-investment (Pig Butchering) Crypto frauds Loan app blackmail Fake digital arrests Money flow: victims → “money mules” → shell accounts → conversion into cryptocurrency → laundering via Huione Pay (Cambodia) and other shadow networks. Scale and Nature Industrial-scale cybercrime with estimated global losses in billions of dollars annually. Thousands of Indians trafficked as scam labourers; thousands more duped online. Myanmar’s civil war post-2021 coup created a lawless ecosystem for such operations. Implications for India Security: Cross-border crime and trafficking threaten internal security. Economy: Erodes trust in digital platforms, impacts fintech growth. Governance: Tests cybercrime policing capacity and diplomatic leverage. Human Rights: Indians trapped in forced scam labour — a modern slavery form. Government & Institutional Role RBI: To run awareness campaigns and enhance detection of mule accounts. Union Home Ministry & State Cyber Cells: Strengthen cybercrime coordination and forensic capacity. MEA: Use diplomatic channels with Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia, China for rescue and crackdown. CERT-In & National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal: To improve response time and citizen redress. International Response Needed Regional coordination with ASEAN and SAARC nations. UN intervention: Recognise and act against “forced cybercrime labour” as modern slavery. Global cooperation in crypto regulation, extradition, and information sharing. Way Forward Launch “Digital Literacy & Scam Awareness” campaigns nationwide. Set up Cyber Scam Task Force under MHA integrating RBI, CERT-In, and MEA. Collaborate with Interpol and FATF to trace crypto-laundered money. Push for UN resolution treating digital scam slavery as an international crime.

Daily Current Affairs

Current Affairs 05 November 2025

Content How BRICS is Challenging SWIFT SC to Review Surrogacy Ban on Couples with One Child As Umngot River Turns Muddy, Residents Blame Road Project Discovery of a New Spider Species — Pilia malenadu — in Chikkamagaluru Stop Wildlife Imports to India Until Proper Checks in Place: CITES Report Inequality fuels pandemics and prolongs crises — UNAIDS Report (2025) How BRICS is challenging SWIFT  Why in News ? At the Kazan Summit 2024, BRICS leaders unveiled a prototype of BRICS Pay, a cross-border payment system aimed at reducing dependence on the US dollar and SWIFT network. This represents a concrete step in the long-term BRICS strategy (since 2014) to build alternative global financial architecture led by developing nations. Relevance : GS Paper II (International Relations): Rise of multipolar financial order and reform of global governance institutions. South-South cooperation and de-dollarisation debates. India’s role in shaping alternative global financial frameworks (BRICS, NDB, CRA). GS Paper III (Economy): Impact on global trade, finance, and monetary policy. Digital payment systems and financial sovereignty. Currency internationalisation and fintech diplomacy. Background – BRICS’ Financial Autonomy Journey 2014 Fortaleza Summit: Turning point where BRICS established its own financial institutions: New Development Bank (NDB): Development financing for emerging economies. Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA): Financial safety net for liquidity crises. First time developing countries created such institutions independent of the IMF–World Bank system. Post-2014 (Crimea Crisis): Western sanctions on Russia catalysed BRICS’ efforts to expand local currency usage in trade and finance. 2017 Xiamen Summit: Agreement to enhance currency cooperation — currency swaps, local currency settlements, and direct investments. Early 2020s: Formation of BRICS Payments Task Force (BPTF) to explore interoperable payment systems and digital infrastructure. The 2024 Kazan Summit – Key Milestones Launch of BRICS Pay Prototype: Demonstrated in Moscow (Oct 2024). Strategic Focus: Develop a BRICS-led cross-border payments network independent of the SWIFT system (controlled by G-10 central banks). Strengthen correspondent banking networks within BRICS. Enable settlements in local currencies. Symbolic Act: BRICS Banknote unveiled, igniting debate on a potential BRICS common currency. Geopolitical Trigger: Inclusion of Iran (2024) – long targeted by US sanctions – added urgency. Threat from Donald Trump (President-elect) to impose 100% tariffs if BRICS moved to replace the dollar. Why BRICS Wants to De-dollarise ? Reduce vulnerability to US-dominated sanctions and monetary policy. Increase autonomy of developing economies in global finance. Challenge unequal financial architecture dominated by Bretton Woods institutions. Enhance South-South financial cooperation. Support intra-BRICS trade through local currencies, lowering transaction costs and volatility risks. Existing National Payment Systems (Building Blocks for BRICS Pay) Country System Features / Strengths Russia SPFS (System for Transfer of Financial Messages) Domestic alternative to SWIFT, post-2014 sanctions. China CIPS (Cross-Border Interbank Payment System) Supports RMB settlements; participants from 120+ countries. India UPI (Unified Payments Interface) Fast, interoperable digital payment infrastructure; accepted in 9 countries. Brazil Pix Operated by central bank; regional expansion in Latin America.   Challenge: Interoperability and harmonisation among these diverse systems. Opportunity: Integrate these networks to create a BRICS Financial Grid. Challenges & Divergences Differing ambitions: China seeks RMB internationalisation via CIPS. India aims to globalise UPI. Brazil promotes Pix regionally. Lack of common regulatory & cybersecurity standards. Political coordination needed among diverse governance models. Resistance from global markets tied to dollar liquidity and SWIFT security protocols. Strategic Implications For Global Finance: Marks the rise of a multipolar monetary order. Could weaken dollar’s hegemony over time. Encourages digital currency integration among emerging economies. For Developing Countries: Offers an alternative payment route immune to Western sanctions. May facilitate South-South trade settlements in local currencies. For the West: Seen as a challenge to the financial dominance of the US and EU. Could trigger financial fragmentation and geopolitical countermeasures. Way Forward Technical: Develop secure, scalable interoperability architecture among SPFS, CIPS, UPI, and Pix. Institutional: Empower the BRICS Payment Task Force to draft unified regulatory and cybersecurity protocols. Strategic: Gradually expand to include other Global South economies (ASEAN, Africa, Latin America). Political: Balance China’s dominance to ensure equitable governance. BRICS — Quick Summary Origin: Coined by Jim O’Neill (2001); formal group in 2009 (BRIC); South Africa joined 2010 → BRICS. Members (2025): Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa + Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE (BRICS+). Objective: Reform global governance, promote multipolarity, enhance trade, tech & development cooperation. Institutions: New Development Bank (NDB) – HQ: Shanghai. Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) – $100 bn liquidity pool. Business Council, Think Tank, Academic Forum. Significance: ~45% of population, ~30% of global GDP (PPP). Driving de-dollarisation & Global South solidarity. India’s Focus: Multilateral reform, digital public goods, resilient supply chains, climate finance. SC to review surrogacy ban on couples with one child  Why in News ? Supreme Court (Nov 2025) decided to review the constitutionality of Section 4(iii)(C)(II) of the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021, which bans married couples with one living child from availing surrogacy, even if they suffer from secondary infertility. The Centre defended the ban, asserting no fundamental right to surrogacy, while petitioners argued it violates reproductive autonomy and right to privacy. Relevance : GS Paper II (Polity & Governance): Judicial review of legislation — Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021. Reproductive rights under Article 21 (Right to Privacy, Autonomy). Role of Supreme Court in balancing ethics and personal liberty. Gender justice and family policy frameworks. GS Paper I (Society): Changing family structures and reproductive health rights. Ethical and social implications of assisted reproduction. Surrogacy Regulation Framework in India Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021: Regulates and restricts surrogacy to altruistic (non-commercial) arrangements only. Commercial surrogacy banned to prevent exploitation of poor women. Allows surrogacy only for Indian married couples (5+ years marriage), with proven infertility. Eligibility clause [Section 4(iii)(C)(II)]: A couple must not have any surviving child (biological, adopted, or through surrogacy). Exception: If existing child is mentally/physically challenged or has a life-threatening disorder. ART (Assisted Reproductive Technology) Act, 2021 complements this by regulating fertility clinics and ART procedures (IVF, etc.). What is Secondary Infertility? Inability to conceive after having at least one biological child. Globally affects ~10–15% of couples (WHO). In India, often under-recognised and socially stigmatized; medically and emotionally distressing. Centre’s Stand No fundamental right to surrogacy under the Constitution. Surrogacy involves use of another woman’s body, hence cannot be demanded as a personal right. Supported by Article 21 interpretation limits (right to life/personal liberty ≠ right over another’s body). Surrogacy should be last resort, only after failure of all other natural and ART options. The law’s restriction is reasonable, aimed at: Preventing misuse and commercialization. Protecting surrogate mothers from exploitation. Avoiding repeated pregnancies for non-essential reasons. Petitioners’ Arguments Violation of reproductive autonomy (Article 21) — right to make reproductive choices is part of personal liberty (K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, 2017). Discriminatory restriction: India has no one-child policy, so the law creates an artificial cap on family size. Couples facing secondary infertility are denied reproductive justice. Emotional & social toll of infertility not considered — secondary infertility is as distressing as primary infertility. Requested Court to read down Section 4(iii)(C)(II) to allow such couples to avail surrogacy. Supreme Court’s Observations (Nov 2025 Hearing) Bench: Justice B.V. Nagarathna (noted for gender-rights jurisprudence). Court to examine whether the restriction violates reproductive choice and privacy of citizens. Justice Nagarathna observed: India’s demographic profile shows no need for a one-child-like restriction. Provision seems reasonable, but requires nuanced scrutiny balancing autonomy vs ethical regulation. Constitutional Dimensions Issue Provision / Case Law Implication Reproductive Choice Article 21 (Right to Life & Personal Liberty) Includes right to procreate (Puttaswamy, Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Admin, 2009). Equality Article 14 Blanket ban may violate equality and non-arbitrariness. Privacy & Autonomy Puttaswamy Judgment (2017) Protects decisional autonomy, including family planning choices. State’s Regulatory Power Reasonable restrictions permissible To prevent exploitation of women and commodification of surrogacy.  Social and Ethical Dimensions Concerns addressed by ban: Exploitation of poor surrogate mothers. Health risks from repeated surrogacies. Commercialisation of motherhood. Criticisms of ban: Denies medical solutions to genuine infertility cases. Ignores emotional distress and family aspirations. Overregulation may drive cross-border surrogacy or illegal arrangements. Global Comparison Country Policy UK Only altruistic surrogacy permitted; regulated. USA Varies by state; many allow compensated surrogacy. Russia Allows commercial surrogacy; liberal framework. China Complete ban on surrogacy. India Altruistic only, with strict eligibility — among the most restrictive globally.  Policy Implications Need for graded, empathetic regulation distinguishing between misuse and genuine cases. Review to incorporate medical definitions of infertility (primary vs secondary). Expand framework to include single parents, widows/divorcees, as suggested by earlier petitions. Potential alignment with reproductive rights jurisprudence under Article 21. Way Forward Judicial clarity on scope of reproductive autonomy under surrogacy laws. Legislative reconsideration of Section 4(iii)(C)(II) to include medically certified secondary infertility. Ethical safeguards for surrogate mothers — health insurance, counselling, consent protocols. Public awareness to destigmatize infertility. As Umngot River Turns Muddy, Residents Blame Road Project Why in News ? Meghalaya’s Umngot River, known for its crystal-clear water and a key tourism attraction in Dawki and Shnongpdeng, has turned muddy and opaque this October 2025. Locals and environmentalists blame construction debris and soil dumping from the Shillong–Dawki road upgrade project carried out by NHIDCL (National Highways & Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd.). The issue has prompted intervention requests to the Union Ministers for Transport and Environment by local MP Ricky Syngkon. Relevance : GS Paper III (Environment & Ecology): Environmental impact of infrastructure in ecologically fragile zones. River sedimentation, erosion control, and bioengineering methods. Role of EIA, NHIDCL, and sustainable tourism in hill ecosystems. GS Paper I (Geography): Human–environment interaction in the hilly regions. Impact of development on river systems and livelihoods. Basic Facts River: Umngot River Location: Flows through West Jaintia Hills District, Meghalaya Tributary of: Not a major tributary, but part of the Umngot–Myntdu system Tourism Importance: Dawki and Shnongpdeng—famous for boating on transparent water Project Involved: Upgradation of 81 km Shillong–Dawki highway to a two-lane highway (10 m carriageway) Ecological Concerns Loss of water clarity affects aquatic life and local livelihoods dependent on tourism and fishing. Sedimentation alters river ecology, reduces light penetration, and harms species diversity. Tourism Decline: Tourists deterred due to loss of visual appeal, affecting the local economy. Soil Dumping Issue: Improper stabilization and containment of excavated material on steep slopes causing run-off during rainfall. Way Forward  Immediate Actions: Remove dumped debris near the river. Enforce strict adherence to environmental SOPs for hilly construction zones. Conduct Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) review for ongoing segments. Long-Term: Adopt bioengineering methods (vegetative stabilization, silt traps). Continuous water quality monitoring of Umngot and similar hill rivers. Integrate eco-tourism safeguards into infrastructure policy in ecologically sensitive zones. Discovery of a New Spider Species — Pilia malenadu — in Chikkamagaluru Why in News ? Researchers have discovered a new species of jumping spider belonging to the Pilia genus at Madhugundi village, Mudigere taluk, Chikkamagaluru district (Karnataka). The species has been named Pilia malenadu, after the locality where it was found. The discovery has been published in the international journal Zootaxa and marks the first recorded sighting of this genus in over 120 years. Relevance : GS Paper III (Environment & Biodiversity): Discovery of new species — importance for taxonomy and conservation. Biodiversity significance of the Western Ghats (UNESCO site). Threats to microhabitats and endemic fauna. Role of local biodiversity registers and community participation. GS Paper I (Geography): Biodiversity hotspots and biogeographical zones of India. Basic Facts Scientific Name: Pilia malenadu Genus: Pilia (Family: Salticidae — Jumping spiders) Discovered by: Ajit Padiyar, naturalist at Madhugundi Location: Madhugundi village, Western Ghats (Chikkamagaluru, Karnataka) Specimens Found: 24 individuals (17 males, 3 females, 4 juveniles) About the Genus Pilia Pilia genus of jumping spiders (Salticidae) was first described in 1902 in Kerala — over 123 years ago. Till now, Pilia species were rarely observed and not documented elsewhere in India since the early 20th century. These spiders are small, agile predators known for excellent vision and jumping ability. Significance of the Discovery Taxonomic Importance: Extends scientific knowledge of the Pilia genus. First time both male and female specimens of Pilia genus have been found. Biodiversity Indicator: Discovery in the Western Ghats, a UNESCO World Heritage biodiversity hotspot, underscores its ecological richness. Suggests healthy and intact microhabitats at the foothills of the Western Ghats. Historical Significance: Rediscovery of a genus after over a century highlights the underexplored fauna of the Ghats. Habitat   Habitat-specific — found only around two plant species: Memecylon umbellatum Memecylon malabaricum Indicates narrow ecological niche and dependence on specific vegetation. Conservation Concerns Habitat Specificity: Such species are vulnerable to habitat loss, deforestation, and land-use change. Researchers warn that if the habitat is disturbed, the species could face extinction. Conservation Priority: Protection of Western Ghats ecosystems essential for preserving microfaunal diversity. Reinforces the need for localized biodiversity monitoring and microhabitat protection. Broader Implications For Science: Encourages continued taxonomic surveys in underexplored ecosystems. For Policy: Highlights importance of community–based biodiversity conservation in Western Ghats. For Education: Adds to India’s growing record of new endemic species — particularly arachnids and insects. Related Context Western Ghats Biodiversity: One of eight “hottest” biodiversity hotspots globally. Home to over 7,400 plant species and 139 mammal species, many endemic. New species of amphibians, spiders, and plants continue to be discovered annually. Recent Discoveries in Region: Hygrocrates wayanadensis (spider, Kerala) Raorchestes chalazodes (frog rediscovery, Tamil Nadu) Nasikabatrachus bhupathi (purple frog, Western Ghats) Way Forward Conduct micro-faunal mapping of Western Ghats regions. Include local naturalists in biodiversity documentation programs. Integrate findings into State Biodiversity Boards’ People’s Biodiversity Registers (PBRs). Promote eco-sensitive zone management around Chikkamagaluru and Kodagu. Stop Wildlife Imports to India Until Proper Checks in Place: CITES Report Why in News ? A CITES verification mission (Sept 2025) has recommended that India halt imports of wild animals — especially criticallyendangered species such as gorillas, orangutans, chimpanzees, and snow leopards — until stronger verification, control, and traceability mechanisms are in place. The report found gaps in India’s due diligence and verification of animal origin, as several wild species imported as “captive bred” raised concerns about illegal wildlife trade. Relevance : GS Paper III (Environment & Biodiversity): CITES Convention — structure, appendices, and India’s obligations. Wildlife trafficking, traceability, and captive-breeding loopholes. Role of MoEFCC, WCCB, and compliance mechanisms. Ethical and legal aspects of animal trade. GS Paper II (Governance & International Relations): India’s global environmental diplomacy and treaty compliance. Coordination between international and domestic wildlife laws. Basic Facts CITES: Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (1973); India a party since 1976. Objective: Ensure that international trade in wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival. Appendix I: Species threatened with extinction — trade only under exceptional circumstances. Appendix II: Species not necessarily threatened but could become so if trade is not regulated. Indian Authority: Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB), Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC). Key Findings of the CITES Verification Mission Mission Period: September 15–20, 2025 Sites Inspected: Vantara’s Greens Zoological Rescue and Rehabilitation Kingdom (GZRRK), Gujarat Radha Krishna Temple Elephant Welfare Trust (RKT EWT), Jamnagar Findings: India imported a range of critically endangered species reportedly under “captive bred” status. 41,839 animals at GZRRK and 594 at RKT EWT—claimed to be under legal acquisition. CITES Secretariat noted irregularities in import documentation, raising doubt over the legality of the source. Invoices from exporters (e.g., Czech Republic, Germany) contradicted India’s claims about animals’ captive-bred status. Specific Red Flags GZRRK imported two snow leopards (Appendix I species) from Togo with claimed zoo-trade code (Z). Germany and CITES Secretariat found inconsistencies. India imported elephants from Myanmar and lions from Burkina Faso, but documentation lacked traceable origin data. CITES report: Some animals listed as “bred in captivity” were actually wild-caught and reclassified before export — violating Article IV of CITES. Highlighted misuse of purpose codes (T – trade, Z – zoo) and source codes (C – captive-bred, W – wild) in documentation. Core Concerns Traceability Failure: Lack of verification on whether imported animals were genuinely captive-bred. Regulatory Gaps: India’s import permits sometimes issued without CITES Secretariat cross-verification. Potential Illegal Trade Route: Exported from wild-capture countries (Togo, Myanmar) Reclassified via intermediate nations (e.g., Germany, Czech Republic) Imported into India as captive-bred zoo specimens. Due Diligence Deficit: CITES noted India must verify “source, purpose, and transaction authenticity” before granting permits. Recommendations by CITES Suspend imports of wild animals declared as “captive-bred” until India: Strengthens verification and control mechanisms. Ensures traceable documentation of origin and breeding. Submits compliance report to CITES Secretariat. Mandate proof of legal acquisition from exporters. Reassess import permits granted between 2020–2025. India’s Position India stated that no wild specimens were imported and all animals met CITES norms. Claimed animals were rescued or zoo-bound, not for commercial trade. MoEFCC assured strict adherence to CITES guidelines and readiness to enhance traceability systems. Global Context Similar controversies have arisen in Thailand, Myanmar, and African states regarding reclassification of wild-caught animals as “captive-bred”. Reflects a global loophole in wildlife trade regulation, often exploited by private zoos and exotic pet traders. Environmental & Ethical Implications Encourages illegal poaching in source countries. Threatens biodiversity conservation goals under SDG-15 (Life on Land). Undermines India’s global image as a wildlife conservation leader. Violates Article 51A(g) of the Indian Constitution — duty to protect environment and wildlife. Way Forward  Establish National CITES Verification Authority for real-time tracking of imports. Implement DNA profiling and microchipping for imported species. Enforce import moratorium on high-risk species until compliance verified. Increase bilateral coordination with exporting nations and CITES Secretariat. Integrate digital permit traceability (blockchain-based) for transparency. Inequality fuels pandemics and prolongs crises — UNAIDS Report Why in News ? The UNAIDS Global Council on Inequality, AIDS and Pandemics released its report “Breaking the Inequality–Pandemic Cycle: Building True Health Security in a Global Age” on November 3, 2025, ahead of the G20 Summit in Johannesburg, South Africa. It warns that inequality within and between nations increases vulnerability to pandemics, worsens their impact, and prolongs global crises like COVID-19 and HIV/AIDS. Relevance : GS Paper II (International Relations & Governance): Global health governance and UN institutions (UNAIDS, WHO). Role of G20 in equitable health architecture. Public health equity and pandemic preparedness. GS Paper III (Economy & Disaster Management): Pandemic management, inequality, and economic vulnerability. IP rights, access to health technologies, and vaccine equity. GS Paper I (Society): Inequality as a structural determinant of health and vulnerability. Key Findings of the Report Scope of Study: Based on two years of research. Data from 217 countries (HIV) and 151 countries (COVID-19) analyzed using regression models. Core Conclusion: Higher inequality = higher infection and mortality rates. More equal societies = better resilience and quicker recovery during pandemics. Examples: Africa: Informal settlements show higher HIV prevalence than formal housing. Namibia: Poorer, less-educated women have higher HIV rates. England: Overcrowded housing linked to higher COVID-19 mortality. Brazil: People without primary education had multiple times higher COVID-19 fatality. Migrants: 84% higher COVID-19 infection risk than non-migrants (meta-analysis of 53 million). South Africa: Unemployed individuals face higher HIV infection odds (2016 DHS data). Major Causes Identified Unequal access to healthcare, housing, education, and employment. Limited access to vaccines, medicines, and diagnostics in low-income countries. Weak global cooperation on intellectual property waivers and local manufacturing. Socioeconomic exclusion of migrants and informal workers. Global Inequality Dimensions Within countries – poverty, informal housing, unemployment, and poor education increase exposure and limit access to treatment. Between countries – wealthier nations corner medical innovations, leaving poorer nations vulnerable to prolonged outbreaks. Systemic gap – low-income countries depend on external supplies; global financing and IP regimes slow emergency responses. Impacts Highlighted Health impact: Higher mortality, slower containment of epidemics. Economic impact: Extended recovery periods, deepened poverty cycles. Social impact: Widened distrust in governance and global health institutions. Recommendations by UNAIDS Equitable access to medicines and health technologies across nations. Automatic IP waivers once a pandemic is declared. Investment in local and regional manufacturing of health products. Integrated pandemic preparedness linking health, housing, and employment policies. Focus on prevention and equity, not only emergency response. Broader Context The report builds on lessons from COVID-19 and HIV/AIDS—showing that structural inequality directly determines who lives and who dies in pandemics. Aligns with SDG-3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG-10 (Reduced Inequalities). Comes as the G20 debates reforming global health architecture, financing, and technology-sharing frameworks. India Relevance India’s health disparities (urban–rural divide, gendered access, digital inequality) mirror global findings. Strengthening domestic manufacturing (e.g., vaccines, diagnostics) and community-based health networks (ASHA, PHC) aligns with report’s equity vision. India’s role in G20 and Global South leadership positions it to advocate for equitable global health governance.

Facebook Instagram YouTube LinkedIn TelegramGroup Website TelegramChat
Terms and Conditions Privacy Refund Policy Learning Management System by Testpress