Content

1. Ethanol Blending in India: Assessing the Impact of the E20 Policy
2. How ‘honour’ killings in India are reinforced and legitimised
3. Grasslands in Flux – Dibru-Saikhowa National Park (DSNP)
4. Biodiversity everywhere is ordered by a common ‘hidden’ pattern
5. Healthocide: war against healthcare

---

Ethanol Blending in India: Assessing the Impact of the E20 Policy

---

Concept and Context

• Ethanol Blending = Mixing ethanol (ethyl alcohol, C₂H₅OH, produced mainly from sugarcane, rice, maize etc.) with petrol.
• E20 = Petrol with 20% ethanol.
• Policy Goal: National Policy on Biofuels (2018) targeted 20% blending by 2030 → Achieved in 2025 (five years early).
• Global Context: Brazil and U.S. are ethanol leaders (blending rates >50%). India is catching up due to oil import dependency and climate goals.

Relevance : GS 3(Environment and Ecology) , GS 2(Governance)

Economic Impact

• Foreign Exchange Savings:
  • Since 2014–15, India claims savings of ₹1.4 lakh crore via petrol substitution.
• Public Sector Benefits:
  • PSUs (IOC, BPCL, ONGC) dividends surged (255% rise since 2022–23) but petrol prices passed to consumers dropped only ~2% despite ~65% fall in crude oil prices.
  • Suggests benefit absorbed by state revenues, not by end consumers.
• Farmer Income:
  • ~₹1.20 lakh crore paid to farmers since FY15 via ethanol procurement.
  • Sugarcane ethanol supply grew from 40 crore litres (FY14) → 670 crore litres (FY24).
• Agricultural Shift:
  • 22% of sugarcane projected to go to ethanol by 2034 (OECD-FAO).
  • But creates dependence on water-intensive sugarcane; diversification into rice, maize underway but leading to food–fuel trade-offs (e.g., India imported 9.7 lakh tonnes corn in 2024–25).

Environmental Impact

• Positive:
  • Govt claims 700 lakh tonnes CO₂ emission reduction due to ethanol blending.
  • Lower carbon intensity than petrol.
• Concerns:
  • Sugarcane water footprint: 60–70 tonnes of water required per tonne sugarcane.
  • Maharashtra & UP: excessive groundwater extraction → desertification & land degradation (30% of India’s land degraded).
  • Climate stress (heatwaves, droughts) worsens sustainability concerns.
• Diversification: Some ethanol now from rice, maize → but risks food security vs fuel security dilemma.

Consumer Impact

• Vehicle Compatibility:
  • Since 2023, all new vehicles E20-compatible.
  • Older vehicles: require material changes (rubber, elastomers, fuel system).
• Mileage & Maintenance:
  • Survey (LocalCircles): 2 in 3 vehicle owners oppose E20; only 12% support.
  • Concerns: reduced mileage (ethanol has lower energy density than petrol), higher maintenance costs.
• Govt Response:
  • Admits “marginal drop” in efficiency (~6-8%), claims can be offset with tuning.
  • NITI Aayog recommended tax incentives to offset consumer losses.

Geopolitical & Trade Dimensions

• U.S. Pressure: Trump-era & current U.S. trade reports label India’s ethanol import restrictions as “trade barriers.”
• Indian Stand: Domestic industry (ISMA) opposes relaxation; fears undermining investment in domestic ethanol capacity.
• Global Ethanol Market: Opening imports could lower prices but hurt Indian sugar mills and farmers.

Energy Transition Angle

• Short-term Role:
  • E20 helps cut oil imports, improves farmer income, and marginally lowers carbon emissions.
• Long-term Conflict with EV Push:
  • EV adoption = ~7.6% in 2024. Govt target = 30% sales by 2030 → requires >22% annual growth.
  • EVs have far greater decarbonisation potential than ethanol-blended petrol.
• Challenges to EVs:
  • Dependence on rare earths (magnets, batteries). India imports REEs, mostly from China → recent supply shocks (e.g., germanium export curbs).
  • Automakers (e.g., Maruti Suzuki) cutting EV production targets due to rare earth shortage.

Unresolved Questions

• Beyond E20?
  • Petroleum Ministry suggested moving beyond 20% blending.
  • Govt (March 2025) clarified no decision yet.
  • Debate: Should India push for E30+ blending or focus resources on EV transition?

Summary of Impacts

• Positive:
  • Reduced crude oil import bill.
  • Higher farmer incomes via assured procurement.
  • Moderate CO₂ emission reduction.
• Negative/Concerns:
  • Water stress from sugarcane, land degradation.
  • Food vs fuel dilemma (rice/maize diversion).
  • Consumer resistance due to lower mileage & higher costs.
  • Benefits of forex savings not directly passed to public.
  • Risk of delaying EV transition due to heavy ethanol investment.

---

How ‘honour’ killings in India are reinforced and legitimised”

---

Basics and Context

• Definition: ‘Honour’ killing → Murder committed by family/community members to protect perceived “honour” when individuals defy caste, religious, or gender norms (usually in marriage/relationships).
• Legal Status: No specific law against “honour killing” in India; prosecuted under Indian Penal Code (302 – murder).
• Relevance: Represents intersection of caste, patriarchy, and family authority.
• Recent Case: C. Kavin Selvaganesh’s murder in Thoothukudi, Tamil Nadu (Aug 2025) underscores persistence of caste violence.

Relevance : GS 1(Society ) , GS 2(Social Issues, Constitution , Fundamental Rights)

Caste System as a Social Phenomenon

• Not an individual practice: Caste survives because of family structures, community reinforcement, and social customs.
• Transmission: Children internalize caste boundaries (who to talk to, marry, or avoid) long before reasoning age.
• Endurance: Despite education, urbanization, and democracy, caste remains resilient due to its deep embedding in rituals, marriage arrangements, and family honour.

The Role of Inter-Caste Marriage

• Statistical Reality:
  • National rate: ~5% (IHDS-II).
  • Higher rates in States like Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Kerala (where Dalit communities are more empowered).
• Paradox: These States also record higher honour killings → violence not where caste is strongest, but where it is most challenged.
• Reason: Inter-caste unions, especially Dalit men + dominant caste women, threaten entrenched hierarchies → provoke violent backlash.

Honour Killings as Hierarchy under Siege

• Misconception: Violence = strength of caste.
• Reality: Violence erupts when caste boundaries are breached → a sign of insecurity and resistance to losing control.
• Legitimisation: Families justify killings as protection of lineage, honour, or purity.

Tamil Nadu’s Caste Paradox

• Progressive Front: Strong anti-caste politics, social justice movements, and vibrant civil society openly condemn caste killings.
• Contradiction:
  • Public Sphere: Democratic voices, protests, legal activism.
  • Private Sphere: Family rituals, marriage negotiations, social media caste glorification.
• Result: Coexistence of anti-caste culture collectively and caste pride individually.
• Social Media Factor: Anonymity fosters defence of caste killings, reinforcing prejudice in hidden ways.

Family as the Core Vehicle of Caste

• Transmission Mechanism: Families enforce caste rules through:
  • Rituals (marriages, dining, festivals).
  • Social expectations (whom to marry, where to live).
  • Emotional pressure (honour/shame narratives).
• Family = Caste’s strongest institution → breaking family’s centrality may weaken caste.

Changing Family and Youth Dynamics

• Global Shifts (South Korea, Japan, etc.): Declining marriage rates, fertility collapse, rise of single living, cohabitation.
• India’s Youth Trends: Increasing focus on individual autonomy, emotional well-being, self-growth.
• Effect: As family weakens as the core social unit, caste loses its vehicle of survival.
• Not a revolution, but gradual lifestyle evolution undermining caste control.

Broader Social Justice Dimension

• Education + Employment Access (esp. Dalits): Equal interaction in workplaces, cities, colleges → caste hierarchies challenged.
• Romantic Relations: Represent both love and a political act of resistance to caste supremacy.
• Democratic Culture: Strong resistance movements (esp. Tamil Nadu) keep caste violence under public scrutiny, unlike in States where silence prevails.

Challenges in Addressing Honour Killings

• Legal Gap: No special law criminalising honour-based crimes (though Prohibition of Unlawful Assembly for Honour and Tradition Bill was proposed).
• Community Silence: Collective justification/normalisation of violence makes prosecution harder.
• Digital Glorification: Social media reinforcing caste pride anonymously.
• Victim Protection: Inter-caste couples face social boycott, harassment, lack of institutional support.

Way Forward

• Legal:
  • Specific legislation recognising “honour crimes.”
  • Fast-track courts + victim protection mechanisms.
• Social:
  • Strengthen inter-caste youth movements.
  • Counter caste glorification on social media with digital counter-narratives.
• Cultural:
  • Reform family as an institution → promote values of autonomy, choice, dignity.
  • Integrate anti-caste education in schools, popular media, and cultural narratives.
• Policy: Incentivise inter-caste marriages (schemes like Dr. Ambedkar Scheme must be strengthened).

---

Grasslands in Flux – Dibru-Saikhowa National Park (DSNP)

---

Basics – Location and Background

• Location: Assam, North-East India, situated in Tinsukia and Dibrugarh districts.
• Geography:
  • Lies between Brahmaputra and Lohit rivers.
  • Characterized by floodplain ecosystem, wetlands, grasslands, and forest patches.
• Status:
  • Declared a National Park in 1999 (earlier a Wildlife Sanctuary since 1986).
  • Also recognized as a Biosphere Reserve (1997) due to its rich biodiversity.
• Size: Around 765 sq km (core + buffer).

Relevance : GS 3(Environment and Ecology)

Ecological Features

• Grassland Ecosystem:
  • DSNP has large patches of alluvial grasslands, which are dynamic and seasonally changing due to floods.
  • Supports unique species adapted to disturbance (floods, erosion, silt deposition).
• Forest and Wetlands: Mix of semi-evergreen forests, moist deciduous forests, bamboo, and “beels” (oxbow lakes).
• Riverscape Dynamics: Brahmaputra’s changing course constantly reshapes landforms, creating habitat flux.

Biodiversity Significance

• Flora: Tall grasses (Saccharum, Phragmites, Arundo), swamp vegetation, aquatic plants.
• Fauna:
  • Mammals: Feral horses (unique attraction), tiger, leopard, elephants, Asiatic water buffalo, Gangetic river dolphin.
  • Birds: Over 300 species; critically endangered species like White-winged Wood Duck, Bengal Florican.
  • Aquatic: Rich ichthyofauna due to riverine network.
• Conservation Value: Grasslands of DSNP are critical for endangered birds and large herbivores.

Grasslands in Flux – Core Issue

• Dynamic Grasslands:
  • Annual floods deposit new silt and erode old patches.
  • Grassland cover fluctuates, making it unstable for species needing permanent grassland.
• Successional Change:
  • Without regular flooding/fire, grasslands naturally succeed into woodland.
  • This reduces open habitats for grassland specialists like Bengal Florican.
• Anthropogenic Impact:
  • Encroachment, grazing, and fuelwood collection accelerating grassland degradation.
  • Oil exploration and industrial activity in Assam’s upper Brahmaputra valley threaten ecosystem stability.

Human and Livelihood Context

• Local Communities: Depend on park’s grasslands and wetlands for grazing, fishing, fuelwood, reeds.
• Conflicts: Displacement due to floods + restrictions from conservation → pressure on resources.
• Tourism Potential: River island safaris, bird-watching, feral horses. But unregulated tourism can disturb fragile grasslands.

Conservation Challenges

• Hydrological Alterations: Embankments, dams upstream affect natural flood cycles essential for grassland regeneration.
• Encroachment & Agriculture: Grassland converted into croplands in fringe areas.
• Invasive Species: Mimosa and water hyacinth spread in wetlands, choking native vegetation.
• Oil & Gas Exploration: Repeated conflicts between conservation and industrial interests in DSNP region.
• Climate Change: Erratic flood patterns + river course shifts increasing ecosystem instability.

Ecological Importance of Grasslands in DSNP

• Carbon Sink: Tall grasses act as carbon sequestration zones.
• Flood Mitigation: Absorb excess water, reduce erosion.
• Biodiversity Hotspot: Grassland-specialist species depend on its survival.
• Cultural & Livelihood Value: Traditional dependence of locals on reeds, thatch, grazing.

Policy and Legal Framework

• Protected under Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.
• Biosphere Reserve status provides additional management framework.
• Subject to national policies on wetlands, grassland conservation, and disaster risk management (flood-prone ecosystem).
• Supreme Court and NGT have intervened in cases against oil drilling inside DSNP.

Way Forward – Management Strategies

• Adaptive Grassland Management: Controlled burning, flood simulation, and removal of invasive species.
• Community Participation: Eco-development committees for grazing regulation, eco-tourism benefit-sharing.
• Hydrological Restoration: Maintaining flood cycles by reducing embankment pressures.
• Biodiversity Monitoring: Long-term mapping of grassland area shifts and species population dynamics.
• Integrated Landscape Approach: Link DSNP with larger Brahmaputra floodplain conservation strategy.

---

Biodiversity everywhere is ordered by a common ‘hidden’ pattern

---

Basics & Context

• Biogeographical regions:
  • Earth divided into large regions (e.g., Nearctic, Afrotropical, Indo-Malayan) hosting unique species shaped by history, climate, barriers (oceans, mountains).
  • For two centuries, assumed that inner layouts of species within each region were idiosyncratic.
• Known global rule:
  • Tropics richer in biodiversity, poles poorer.
  • But: is there a universal rule within each region?
• New finding (Nature Ecology & Evolution, July 2025):
  • Biodiversity is structured like an onion → dense unique cores, grading outward to porous transition zones.

Relevance : GS 3(Environment and Ecology)

The Study: Methods

• Data used:
  • 30,000 species (birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, rays, dragonflies, trees).
  • Sources: IUCN Red List, BirdLife International, US Forest inventories.
• Approach:
  • Earth divided into equal-sized grid cells (~111 sq. km for land animals).
  • Recorded species in each cell.
  • Used Infomap (network analysis) → grouped co-occurring species into clusters = biogeographical regions.
  • Tagged species as:
    • Characteristic → core, endemic, tied to that region.
    • Non-characteristic → spill-over from neighbouring regions.
• Diversity metrics per cell:
  • Species richness, overlap, occupancy, endemicity.

Key Findings: The Onion Model

• Seven repeating biogeographical sectors → appeared in every major region, across all taxa.
• Layered structure:
  • Core hotspots: High richness, high endemicity, minimal outsiders.
  • Inner layers: Still rich, more widespread species.
  • Middle layers: Moderate richness, mix of characteristic & non-characteristic species.
  • Transition zones: Species-poor, dominated by wide-ranging generalists from multiple regions.
• Environmental filters:
  • 98% accuracy in predicting sector using only temperature + rainfall models.
  • Shows that only species tolerating local conditions persist.
• Subset principle:
  • Outer layers = fewer specialists, not entirely new assemblages.

Scientific Significance

• Universal rule: First large-scale, data-backed confirmation that biodiversity within regions follows a generalisable pattern.
• Ecological insight: Assemblage shaped by climate filters, not random distributions.
• Conceptual shift: From “messy quilt” to ordered layered mosaics of biodiversity.

Conservation Implications

• Target protection:
  • Core hotspots = highest payoff for conservation (rich + endemic + unique).
  • Transition zones = important for corridors and resilience under climate change.
• Climate change lens:
  • Rising temperatures and rainfall shifts → re-structuring of onion layers.
  • Example: Himalayas (already warming fast, rainfall shifting) → frontline for biodiversity turnover.
• Beyond protected areas:
  • Focus on altitudinal zones, habitat corridors, ecological gradients.
• Global South gaps:
  • Underrepresentation of dragonflies (Eurasia), trees (N. America), tropical taxa (India, Africa).
  • Need for regional research to complement global models.

Indian Context

• Himalayas & Western Ghats:
  • Core zones highly endemic (amphibians, plants).
  • Transition zones critical under climate-driven species migration.
• Policy relevance:
  • National Biodiversity Mission (NBM), National Wildlife Action Plan → can integrate core-to-transition layering in site prioritisation.
  • Helps India balance conservation + development (hydropower, roads in Himalayas).
• Case study use in UPSC:
  • Supports questions on ecosystem resilience, biodiversity conservation, climate change adaptation strategies.

Critiques & Limitations

• Geographical gaps → some taxa and regions underrepresented.
• Data bias → relies heavily on well-studied groups, less on microbes/invertebrates.
• Still correlative → shows patterns, not always causal mechanisms.

Way Forward

• Refine models with more regional data (esp. tropics, Global South).
• Integrate with climate projections to predict biodiversity shifts.
• Policy uptake: Prioritise conservation in cores, maintain ecological connectivity in outer layers.
• Collaborative monitoring: Expand citizen science + global biodiversity inventories.

Conclusion

The “onion model” of biodiversity transforms our understanding of how life is organised across Earth’s regions. It reveals that biodiversity cores hold the densest, most unique life forms, while layers outward reflect climate filters and species tolerance. For conservation, this means protecting cores first while ensuring transition zones remain permeable to climate-driven movements — a sharper, more strategic lens for safeguarding life on a changing planet.

---

Healthocide: war against healthcare

---

Basics & Context

• Definition (new term): Healthocide coined by researchers (American University of Beirut, Aug 2025, BMJ Global Health).
• Meaning: Large-scale, deliberate destruction of health ecosystems in conflict zones — beyond sporadic “attacks on healthcare.”
• Comparison: Frames destruction of health systems as akin to genocide → intentional destruction of a collective good essential to life and dignity.

Relevance : GS 2 (Governance, Social Justice) + GS 3 (Disaster/Conflict Management, Health Security)

Why a New Term?

• “Attacks on healthcare” = episodic, localized incidents.
• “Healthocide” = systemic, coordinated, large-scale assault on entire health ecosystems.
• Captures pattern + intention + consequence → not just collateral damage but weaponisation of healthcare.

Dimensions of Healthocide

• Direct violence: Killing doctors, nurses, and healthcare staff.
• Infrastructure destruction: Bombing hospitals, clinics, pharmacies, labs.
• Mobility blockade: Blocking ambulances, restricting patient evacuation.
• Supply-chain disruption: Cutting off medicines, vaccines, equipment, and oxygen supplies.
• Long-term impact: Erodes population’s capacity for care, undermines right to life and dignity.

Legal & Ethical Dimensions

• International Humanitarian Law (IHL): Already protects medical personnel, facilities, and patients (Geneva Conventions).
• Gap identified: Large-scale systemic destruction not fully captured by existing terms → requires stronger recognition and enforcement.
• Moral framing: Equates to genocide → elevates legal/ethical urgency.

Responsibilities & Response

• Physicians & educators: Document violations, raise awareness, pressure governments.
• Governments & UN bodies: Enforce IHL, investigate and penalize perpetrators.
• Medical community: Avoid complicity (by silence, inaction, or collaboration with aggressors).
• Civil society/media: Mobilize public opinion, highlight systematic destruction.

Debates & Criticism

• Skepticism (Len Rubenstein): Argues term doesn’t add much → existing frameworks already recognize sanctity of healthcare in conflict.
• Support (Amal Elamin): New term is valuable as it highlights that attacks are now systemic, widespread, and not isolated.
• Underlying tension: Semantic debate vs. advocacy utility — whether new vocabulary galvanizes stronger action.

Broader Implications

• Global health governance: Push for recognition of “healthocide” in UN/IHL frameworks.
• Precedent-setting: If accepted, could reframe narratives around Gaza, Syria, Ukraine, Yemen, Sudan.
• Accountability: Potential to strengthen legal cases against states/non-state actors for crimes against humanity.
• Human rights dimension: Reinforces healthcare as a collective right integral to dignity and survival.

Way Forward

• Codify “healthocide” in international law alongside genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.
• Strengthen global monitoring (WHO, Red Cross, NGOs) of healthcare-targeted violence.
• Build coalitions of medical professionals, educators, and activists for documentation and advocacy.
• Pressure governments to impose sanctions and legal action against violators.