Content

1. Poisoned promise: India among four major contributors to global pesticide toxicity
2. There is a dragon atop Iran’s Mount Damavand. Here is how its legend is connected to a story from the Rig Veda
3. Supreme Court strikes down age cap on maternity leave for adoptive mothers
4. Government clears 23 institutions to set up ‘quantum labs’
5. Sahitya Akademi announces literary awards for 2025
6. The fate of the Washington Consensus, once talisman
7. On scientific collaborations in BRICS
8. Why Transgender Protection (Amendment) Bill 2026 has attracted criticism

---

Poisoned promise: India among four major contributors to global pesticide toxicity

---

Why in News ?

• A 2026 study (journal Science, University of Kaiserslautern-Landau) shows rising global pesticide toxicity, with India among top contributors.
• India’s Indo-Gangetic plains and intensive agriculture regions show toxicity levels above global average, raising environmental and health concerns.

Relevance

• GS 1 (Geography & Environment):
  Biodiversity loss (pollinators, soil organisms), agro-ecosystem degradation, regional hotspots (Indo-Gangetic plains)
• GS 3 (Economy & Environment):
  Sustainable agriculture, input-intensive farming crisis, food security vs ecological sustainability, climate-resilient agriculture

Practice Question

Q. Rising pesticide toxicity in India reflects deeper structural issues in agricultural practices and governance. Examine the causes and suggest sustainable solutions. (15 Marks)

Nature of the Problem

Environmental / Biodiversity Dimension

• Study finds India, China, Brazil, and USA contribute 53–68% of global pesticide toxicity, indicating concentration of ecological risk in major agricultural economies.
• Toxicity impacts pollinators, fish, soil organisms, and arthropods, with insect populations declining globally at ~6.4% annually (Science, 2026).
• In India, Indo-Gangetic plains, Punjab, Haryana, Maharashtra, Telangana show toxicity levels above global average, threatening agro-ecosystem stability.

Agricultural Practices Dimension

• India’s pesticide consumption increased from 57,353 tonnes (2014-15) to 67,221 tonnes (2024-25) (~20% rise), indicating intensification of chemical-based farming.
• High toxicity linked to crops like cotton, rice, and sugarcane, with cotton contributing disproportionately due to pest intensity despite smaller acreage.
• Dominance of few high-toxicity chemicals (20 pesticides contributing >90% toxicity burden) reflects skewed pesticide usage patterns.

Human Health Dimension

• Exposure to pesticides linked to neurological disorders, cancers, and endocrine disruption, as recognised by WHO and FAO studies.
• Regions with intensive pesticide use show higher incidence of chronic diseases, indicating public health externalities.

Economic Dimension

• Farmers trapped in input-intensive agriculture model, leading to rising costs of pesticides and reduced profitability.
• Overuse reduces soil fertility and productivity in long run, undermining sustainability of agricultural growth.

Governance / Legal Dimension

• Current framework under Insecticides Act 1968 (to be replaced by Pesticide Management Bill 2025) focuses on safety but lacks strong biodiversity safeguards.
• Lack of integration between Biological Diversity Act 2002 and pesticide regulation, creating policy silos (as highlighted by PAN India experts).

Global Commitments Dimension

• Under CBD COP15 (2022), countries committed to reduce pesticide risk by 50% by 2030, using Total Applied Toxicity (TAT) metric (adopted at COP16, 2025).
• Study shows most countries, including India, are not on track, with toxicity trends worsening rather than declining.

Key Drivers of Rising Toxicity

Shift from Volume to Toxicity

• Even where pesticide volume stabilises, toxicity increases due to more harmful chemicals, indicating qualitative deterioration (Science study).

High-Risk Chemical Classes

• Organophosphates and pyrethroids dominate aquatic toxicity, while neonicotinoids severely affect pollinators, contributing to biodiversity loss.

Herbicide Intensification

• High-volume chemicals like glyphosate (~518,000 tonnes globally) and paraquat (~44,000 tonnes) significantly contribute to plant and ecosystem toxicity.

Weak Extension & Awareness

• Farmers lack access to scientific pest management knowledge, leading to overuse and misuse of pesticides.

Challenges

Policy Fragmentation

• Separation between agriculture policy and biodiversity conservation (NBA vs Agriculture Ministry) prevents holistic regulation of pesticide impacts.

Weak Regulatory Standards

• Draft Pesticide Management Bill 2025 uses broad language (“minimise risk”) without enforceable standards or mandatory biodiversity assessments.

Lack of Data Integration

• Absence of TAT-based monitoring system in India limits ability to assess real ecological impact of pesticide use.

Technological & Institutional Gaps

• Limited adoption of precision agriculture and biological pest control, especially among small and marginal farmers (~86% holdings).

Market & Incentive Failure

• Subsidies and market structures favour chemical-intensive farming, discouraging transition to sustainable alternatives.

Way Forward

Adopt TAT Framework in India

• Integrate Total Applied Toxicity (CBD COP16) into national policy for measuring pesticide impact beyond volume metrics.

Integrate Biodiversity into Regulation

• Mandate biodiversity impact assessment (via National Biodiversity Authority) for pesticide approval, renewal, and phase-out decisions.

Promote Sustainable Alternatives

• Scale up Integrated Pest Management (IPM), biological control agents, and natural farming (National Mission on Natural Farming).

Strengthen Pesticide Management Bill

• Introduce strict regulatory thresholds, accountability mechanisms, and inter-ministerial coordination in upcoming legislation.

Precision Agriculture & Technology

• Use AI, drones, and satellite-based advisories to optimise pesticide use and reduce over-application.

Farmer Incentives & Behavioural Change

• Link schemes like PM-PRANAM with reduced pesticide usage and incentivise eco-friendly practices through FPOs.

Prelims Pointers

• TAT (Total Applied Toxicity) → adopted at CBD COP16 (2025)
• CBD COP15 (2022) → target to reduce pesticide risk by 50% by 2030
• Pesticide Management Bill 2025 → to replace Insecticides Act 1968
• Neonicotinoids → pollinator toxicity
• Organophosphates → aquatic toxicity

---

There is a dragon atop Iran’s Mount Damavand. Here is how its legend is connected to a story from the Rig Veda

---

Why in News ?

• Renewed focus on India–Iran civilisational links amid geopolitical developments, with scholarly attention on mythological parallels between Vedic and Zoroastrian traditions.
• Article highlights Azi Dahaka (Iranian myth) and Vṛtra (Vedic myth) as symbolic narratives of cosmic struggle and order restoration.

Relevance

• GS 1 (Ancient History & Culture):
  Indo-European origins, Vedic–Avestan linkages, comparative mythology, concept of Ṛta vs Asha
• GS 2 (International Relations):
  Civilisational diplomacy (India–Iran), cultural soft power, historical linkages shaping modern relations

Practice Question

Q. Mythological parallels between the Rig Veda and Avesta highlight shared civilisational roots of India and Iran. Analyse their significance in understanding ancient societies and contemporary cultural diplomacy. (15 Marks)

Core Civilisational Linkages

Indo-European Cultural Origins

• Both Vedic Indians and ancient Iranians belonged to Indo-European linguistic-cultural group, explaining similarities in language (Sanskrit–Avestan) and mythological motifs.
• Scholars note parallels between Rig Veda (~1500 BCE) and Avesta (~1200–1000 BCE), indicating shared cultural heritage before geographical divergence.

Concept of Cosmic Order

• Vedic concept of Ṛta (cosmic order) parallels Asha in Zoroastrianism, both representing universal law, morality, and balance in nature and society.
• Mythological battles (Indra vs Vṛtra; Oraētaona vs Azi Dahaka) symbolise restoration of order from chaos, central to both traditions.

Dragon-Slaying Myth Motif

• In Rig Veda, Indra slays Vṛtra, releasing seven rivers (RV X.8.8-9), symbolising fertility and life.
• In Avesta, Azi Dahaka is defeated by Θraētaona, restoring balance and preventing destruction.
• Similar myths exist across Indo-European cultures (Greek Zeus vs Typhon), indicating shared proto-myth (~3000 BCE origin hypothesis).

Ecological & Anthropological Interpretation

Water-Centric Civilisations

• Indo-Iranian societies depended on rivers like Saraswati (India) and Oxus/Amu Darya (Central Asia), making water central to survival and mythology.
• Dragon (serpent) symbol often associated with blocking water or causing drought, reflecting ecological anxieties of early agrarian societies.

Symbolism of Fertility & Agriculture

• Release of waters in Vedic myth leads to fertility (cows symbolising abundance), linking mythology with agricultural cycles.
• Iranian myths similarly connect dragon-slaying with restoration of life, crops, and societal order.

Natural Phenomena Interpretation

• Mount Damavand (Iran), an active volcano (last eruption ~7300 years ago), is linked to myth of imprisoned dragon, reflecting geological memory encoded in folklore.

Cultural Continuity & Evolution

Zoroastrianism & Indian Parallels

• Zoroastrian deities like Vāiiu (wind god) resemble Vedic Vayu, showing continuity in religious concepts.
• Fire worship (Agni in Vedas; Atar in Zoroastrianism) reflects shared ritual traditions.

Shahnameh as Cultural Preservation

• Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh (~10th century CE, 50,000 couplets) preserved pre-Islamic Iranian myths, similar to how Puranas preserved Vedic traditions in India.
• Story of Zahhak (Azi Dahaka) and Faridun reflects resistance against tyranny and cultural continuity, even after Arab conquest (7th century CE).

Indo-Iranian Identity Linkages

• Genetic and cultural studies show links between Indo-Iranians and present communities (e.g., Yaghnobis, Pamiris), reinforcing shared ancestry narratives.

Broader Significance 

Cultural Diplomacy & Soft Power

• Shared heritage strengthens India–Iran civilisational diplomacy, complementing modern ties (e.g., Chabahar Port cooperation).

Comparative Mythology as Academic Tool

• Study of myths helps understand early human societies, ecological dependencies, and evolution of belief systems, relevant for anthropology and history.

Philosophical Insights

• Universal theme of good vs evil, order vs chaos reflects ethical frameworks underlying ancient societies and modern governance ideals.

Continuity of Tradition

• Demonstrates how cultures preserve identity through oral traditions, epics, and texts, even amid political and religious transformations.

Critical Analysis

Myth vs Historical Reality

• While myths provide cultural insights, they must not be interpreted as literal history, requiring careful academic distinction.

Selective Interpretation Risks

• Overemphasis on similarities may ignore distinct developments in Indian and Iranian traditions post-divergence (e.g., Zoroastrian dualism vs Vedic pluralism).

Limited Public Awareness

• Despite strong links, India–Iran civilisational connections remain underexplored in mainstream discourse, limiting their potential in cultural diplomacy.

Way Forward

Promote Comparative Civilisational Studies

• Encourage research on Indo-Iranian linkages in universities (ICHR, ICCR initiatives) to deepen academic understanding.

Cultural Diplomacy Initiatives

• Use shared heritage for India–Iran cultural exchanges, museum collaborations, and joint heritage projects.

Integrate into Education

• Include comparative mythology and Indo-European studies in curricula to enhance awareness of global cultural linkages.

Digital Preservation

• Digitise texts like Rig Veda, Avesta, Shahnameh, ensuring accessibility and preservation of shared heritage.

Prelims Pointers

• Rig Veda → Indra vs Vṛtra
• Avesta → Azi Dahaka myth
• Shahnameh → Ferdowsi, 10th century CE
• Mount Damavand → highest peak in Iran (5609 m)
• Ṛta vs Asha → cosmic order concepts

Conclusion

• The tale of Azi Dahaka and Vṛtra is more than mythology—it represents shared civilisational consciousness rooted in ecology, ethics, and survival.
• Recognising such linkages helps position India not just as a nation-state, but as part of a larger interconnected civilisational continuum.

---

Supreme Court strikes down age cap on maternity leave for adoptive mothers

---

Why in News ?

• In Hamsaanandini Nanduri v. Union of India (2026), Supreme Court struck down Section 60(4) of Social Security Code 2020, which restricted maternity leave for adoptive mothers to children below 3 months.
• Court granted 12 weeks maternity leave irrespective of child’s age, and urged government to introduce paternity leave as social security benefit.

Relevance

• GS 1 (Society):
  Changing family structures, recognition of adoptive motherhood, gender roles in caregiving
• GS 2 (Polity & Governance):
  Article 14 & 21 interpretation, judicial activism, social security law (Social Security Code 2020), welfare state

Practice Question

Q. The Supreme Court’s ruling on maternity leave for adoptive mothers marks a shift towards inclusive social security. Discuss its constitutional basis and socio-economic implications. (15 Marks)

Constitutional & Legal Dimensions

Violation of Article 14 (Equality)

• Court held classification based on child’s age (<3 months) lacks rational nexus with objective of maternity benefits, thus violating reasonable classification test under Article 14.
• Majority of adoptions occur beyond 3 months due to CARA procedures, making provision discriminatory against most adoptive mothers.

Expansion of Article 21 (Right to Life & Dignity)

• Court recognised adoption as part of reproductive autonomy under Article 21, equating it with biological motherhood.
• Emphasised that childcare, bonding, and emotional adjustment are central to dignity and family life, not childbirth alone.

Interpretation of Social Security Code 2020

• Struck down restrictive reading of Section 60(4) and reinterpreted it to grant 12 weeks leave to all adoptive and commissioning mothers.
• Aligns with welfare intent of Maternity Benefit Act 1961 (amended 2017), which expanded leave to 26 weeks for biological mothers.

Governance & Policy Dimensions

Gap in Adoption Ecosystem

• Court noted practical issue: due to legal adoption procedures (CARA guidelines), children are rarely adopted before 3 months, making earlier provision “illusory”.

Child-Centric Policy Approach

• Judgment prioritises best interests of child, aligning with UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), to which India is a signatory.
• Recognises need for bonding period and psychological integration irrespective of child’s age.

Recognition of Diverse Family Structures

• Expands state recognition beyond traditional families, including adoptive and commissioning mothers (surrogacy cases under Surrogacy Act 2021).

Social & Ethical Dimensions

Redefining Motherhood

• Court emphasised that motherhood is not limited to childbirth, but includes caregiving, nurturing, and emotional labour, reflecting evolving societal norms.

Gender Equality & Care Economy

• By urging paternity leave, Court highlights unequal burden of caregiving on women, consistent with Time Use Survey 2019 showing women spend ~5x more time in unpaid care work.

Inclusion & Non-Discrimination

• Earlier provision excluded adoptive mothers of older children, creating hierarchy between biological and adoptive motherhood, now corrected.

Economic Dimension

Workforce Participation

• Better maternity benefits improve female labour force participation (FLFP ~37% in 2023-24, PLFS) by supporting work-life balance.

Corporate & Social Security Implications

• Expanding benefits may increase employer compliance costs, but enhances human capital retention and productivity.

Criticisms

Absence of Paternity Leave Law

• India lacks statutory paternity leave in private sector; only 15 days for central government employees, reflecting policy gap.

Implementation Challenges

• Informal sector (over 90% workforce) remains outside formal maternity benefits, limiting real impact of judgment.

Limited Coverage of Social Security Code

• Social Security Code 2020 yet to be fully implemented, raising concerns over uniform enforcement of benefits.

Employer Resistance

• Private sector concerns over cost burden and compliance, especially for MSMEs, may affect implementation.

Way Forward

Enact Paternity Leave Law

• Introduce statutory paternity leave (2–4 weeks minimum) as recommended by SC, aligning with global practices (ILO standards).

Universalise Social Security

• Extend maternity and parental benefits to informal sector workers via schemes like e-Shram and PMMVY expansion.

Gender-Neutral Care Policy

• Move towards parental leave model instead of gender-specific benefits, promoting shared caregiving responsibilities.

Strengthen Adoption Ecosystem

• Simplify and expedite CARA procedures, reducing delays and improving child welfare outcomes.

Corporate Incentives

• Provide tax incentives/subsidies to employers for compliance, reducing resistance and promoting inclusive workplace policies.

Prelims Pointers

• Social Security Code 2020 → Section 60(4)
• Maternity Benefit Act 1961 (Amended 2017) → 26 weeks leave
• CARA (Central Adoption Resource Authority) → adoption regulation
• Surrogacy Act 2021 → commissioning mothers
• Article 14 & 21 → equality and dignity

Conclusion Frameworks

• Rights-Based Approach:
  “Ensuring equal maternity benefits for adoptive mothers reinforces constitutional guarantees of equality and dignity in family life.”
• Gender Justice Approach:
  “True gender equality in caregiving requires moving beyond maternity benefits to inclusive parental leave frameworks.”

Conclusion

• The judgment corrects a structural inequity in social security law, affirming that motherhood is defined by care, not biology.
• It opens the path toward inclusive, child-centric, and gender-equitable family policies, but requires legislative follow-up, especially on paternity leave and universal coverage.

---

Government clears 23 institutions to set up ‘quantum labs’

---

Why in News ?

• Government approved 23 quantum teaching labs across institutions, with 100 more proposals under evaluation, indicating expansion of India’s quantum ecosystem (DST, March 2026).
• NQM targets development of 50–1,000 qubit quantum computers, satellite-based secure communication, and quantum sensors, marking India’s entry into next-gen computing race.

Relevance

• GS 2 (Governance):
  Science policy, institutional coordination (DST, NRF), strategic technology governance
• GS 3 (Science & Technology / Security):
  Quantum computing, quantum communication (QKD), national security, innovation ecosystem

Practice Question

Q. India’s National Quantum Mission aims to position the country in the global race for next-generation technologies. Evaluate its strategic significance and challenges. (15 Marks)

Core Features of National Quantum Mission

Financial & Institutional Framework

• NQM approved with ₹6003.65 crore (2023–2031), implemented by Department of Science & Technology (DST) to create national quantum ecosystem.
• Establishment of quantum hubs, teaching labs (23 approved), and NRF-linked research funding, strengthening academia–industry collaboration.

Quantum Computing Targets

• Aim to develop intermediate-scale quantum computers (50–1,000 qubits), enabling complex computations beyond classical systems.
• Current global benchmark: IBM (1000+ qubit roadmap) and China’s superconducting quantum processors, highlighting competitive gap India seeks to bridge.

Quantum Communication

• Focus on satellite-based Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) for ultra-secure communication, resistant to hacking even by quantum computers.
• Builds on ISRO’s progress, including quantum communication experiments (2022 free-space QKD test).

Quantum Sensing & Materials

• Development of high-precision quantum sensors for applications in navigation, defence, geology, and medical imaging.
• Advanced materials research to enable quantum devices and superconducting systems.

Significance of NQM

Strategic & National Security Dimension

• Quantum communication enables unhackable encryption, critical for defence and intelligence, especially amid cyber warfare threats.
• Applications in navigation systems (GPS-independent) benefit Indian Navy and defence operations (context: planned navigation satellite launch 2026).

Economic & Industrial Dimension

• Quantum computing expected to revolutionise sectors like drug discovery, finance, logistics, and AI, with global market projected to reach $90 billion by 2040 (BCG estimates).
• Enhances India’s position in high-tech manufacturing and semiconductor ecosystem.

Scientific & Innovation Ecosystem

• Establishment of quantum labs (23 approved, 100 under review) builds skilled workforce and research capacity.
• Integration with Anusandhan National Research Foundation (NRF) strengthens funding and interdisciplinary research.

Global Competitiveness

• India currently lags behind:
  • USA → National Quantum Initiative (2018)
  • China → $10 billion quantum programme
• NQM helps India avoid technological dependence and strategic vulnerability.

Challenges

Technological Lag

• India lacks advanced infrastructure compared to US (Google, IBM quantum systems) and China (quantum satellite Micius).

Skilled Manpower Deficit

• Limited pool of quantum physicists, engineers, and interdisciplinary experts, necessitating large-scale capacity building.

High Cost & Complexity

• Quantum technologies require cryogenic systems, precision engineering, and high R&D investment, increasing cost barriers.

Institutional Coordination Issues

• Multiple agencies (DST, ISRO, DRDO, academia) require strong coordination to avoid duplication and inefficiency.

Private Sector Participation

• Limited involvement of Indian startups and industry compared to global players like IBM, Google, Alibaba, slowing innovation ecosystem.

Way Forward

Strengthen Human Capital

• Expand quantum labs, fellowships, and interdisciplinary courses, integrating physics, computer science, and engineering.

Public-Private Partnerships

• Encourage collaboration with startups and industry (e.g., Indian deep-tech firms) for faster innovation and commercialization.

Global Collaboration

• Partner with EU, US, and Japan quantum programmes, leveraging technology transfer and research collaboration.

Focus on Niche Areas

• Prioritise areas like quantum communication and sensing, where India has comparative advantage over full-scale quantum computing.

Policy & Regulatory Framework

• Develop national quantum strategy with cybersecurity, export controls, and ethical guidelines, ensuring responsible deployment.

Prelims Pointers

• NQM (2023–31) → ₹6003.65 crore
• Qubit → basic unit of quantum information
• QKD → Quantum Key Distribution
• 23 quantum labs approved (2026)
• DST → nodal agency

 Conclusion

• NQM represents a forward-looking investment in frontier technology, aiming to bridge India’s gap with global leaders in quantum science.
• Its success depends on skilled manpower, institutional coordination, and industry participation, ensuring India transitions from technology adopter to technology leader.

---

Sahitya Akademi announces literary awards for 2025

---

Why in News ?

• Sahitya Akademi Awards 2025 announced for 24 recognised languages, after a delay due to Union Ministry of Culture’s directive on restructuring process (Dec 2025).
• Awards include 8 poetry, 4 novels, 6 short stories, 2 essays, 1 literary criticism, 1 autobiography, 2 memoirs, reflecting diversity of literary forms.

Relevance

• GS 1 (Art & Culture):
  Literary diversity, linguistic plurality, preservation of regional languages
• GS 2 (Governance):
  Autonomy of cultural institutions, state oversight vs independence, cultural policy

Practice Question

Q. The functioning of cultural institutions like the Sahitya Akademi raises questions about autonomy and accountability. Critically examine. (15 Marks)

About Sahitya Akademi 

Institutional Framework

• Established in 1954, Sahitya Akademi is India’s National Academy of Letters, promoting literature across 24 recognised languages (including English, Sanskrit, and tribal languages like Santali).
• Functions as an autonomous body under Ministry of Culture, alongside Sangeet Natak Akademi and Lalit Kala Akademi.

Award Structure

• Annual awards recognise outstanding literary works, selected by expert jury panels, ensuring peer-reviewed credibility.
• Award includes ₹1 lakh, copper plaque, and shawl, symbolising national recognition.

Key Highlights of Sahitya Akademi Awards 2025

Diversity of Literary Genres

• Awards distributed across genres:
  • Poetry (8 awards)
  • Novels (4)
  • Short stories (6)
  • Memoirs (2), essays (2), criticism (1), autobiography (1)
• Reflects broad literary ecosystem, moving beyond traditional fiction to include critical and autobiographical writing.

Linguistic Diversity

• Winners span 24 Indian languages, including Hindi (Mamta Kalia), English (Navtej Sarna), Tamil (Sa Tamilselvan), Telugu (Nandini Sidha Reddy).
• Inclusion of Santali, Manipuri, Rajasthani, Sindhi reflects commitment to linguistic inclusivity and preservation of regional literature.

Representation of Contemporary Themes

• Works include memoirs, literary criticism, and modern narratives, indicating shift toward personal histories, social critique, and evolving literary discourse.

Governance & Institutional Issues

Delay due to Government Intervention

• Awards announcement delayed after Ministry of Culture directive (Dec 2025) mandating prior approval for restructuring of awards process.
• Indicates increasing administrative oversight over autonomous cultural bodies.

Autonomy vs Accountability Debate

• Sahitya Akademi is designed as autonomous institution, but MoU (July 2025) requires consultation with Ministry for major decisions.
• Raises concerns about erosion of institutional independence, affecting credibility of cultural recognition systems.

Broader Governance Context

• Similar oversight applied to NSD, Sangeet Natak Akademi, Lalit Kala Akademi, indicating systemic trend in cultural governance.

Significance of Sahitya Akademi Awards

Cultural Integration

• Promotes unity in diversity, recognising literature across languages and regions, strengthening national cultural identity.

Preservation of Linguistic Heritage

• Supports endangered and regional languages like Santali and Manipuri, aligning with Eighth Schedule expansion debates.

Encouragement of Literary Excellence

• Provides national platform for authors, encouraging creative writing, critical thought, and intellectual discourse.

Soft Power & Cultural Diplomacy

• Indian literature contributes to global cultural presence, with authors like Rabindranath Tagore (Nobel laureate) setting precedent for literary diplomacy.

Challenges

Politicisation of Cultural Institutions

• Government intervention raises concerns about bias, censorship, or influence, potentially undermining credibility of awards.

Delayed Announcements

• 2025 awards announced after 3-month delay, affecting institutional reputation and predictability of processes.

Limited Public Engagement

• Despite diversity, awards often remain confined to literary circles, with limited outreach to wider audience.

Language Hierarchies

• Perception that dominant languages (Hindi, English) receive more visibility compared to tribal and regional languages.

Way Forward

Strengthen Institutional Autonomy

• Ensure clear boundaries between Ministry oversight and Akademi independence, preserving credibility of award process.

Transparent Selection Process

• Publish jury criteria, evaluation process, and timelines, enhancing trust and accountability.

Promote Regional Literature

• Increase translation initiatives (e.g., Sahitya Akademi Translation Programme) to expand readership across languages.

Digital Outreach

• Use digital platforms, e-books, and literary festivals to make award-winning works accessible to wider audience.

Cultural Policy Reform

• Develop comprehensive framework balancing autonomy, accountability, and cultural promotion, aligning with constitutional values.

Prelims Pointers

• Sahitya Akademi → established 1954
• Recognises 24 languages
• Award includes ₹1 lakh + plaque + shawl
• Works selected by jury panels
• Autonomous body under Ministry of Culture

Conclusion

• Sahitya Akademi Awards 2025 reaffirm India’s literary diversity and creative vitality, while also exposing governance challenges in cultural institutions.
• Ensuring institutional autonomy, transparency, and inclusivity will be key to sustaining the Akademi’s role as the custodian of India’s literary heritage.

---

The fate of the Washington Consensus, once talisman 

---

Why in News ?

• Article argues that Washington Consensus (WC) — based on liberalisation, privatisation, deregulation (LPG) — is no longer relevant in a multipolar, digital, and geopolitically fragmented world (2025–26 context).
• Global shift toward protectionism, industrial policy, and state intervention seen in US tariffs (Trump-era revival), EU subsidies, China’s state-led model.

Relevance

• GS 2 (International Relations):
  Global economic governance, IMF–World Bank role, multipolarity
• GS 3 (Economy):
  Liberalisation, industrial policy, inequality, globalisation vs protectionism

Practice Question

Q. The decline of the Washington Consensus reflects changing realities of the global economic order. Analyse with reference to emerging development models. (15 Marks)

What was the Washington Consensus? 

Core Principles (John Williamson, 1989)

• Ten policy prescriptions including fiscal discipline, tax reforms, trade liberalisation, FDI openness, privatisation, deregulation, and property rights protection.
• Promoted by IMF, World Bank, and US Treasury, especially during Latin American debt crisis (1980s).

Ideological Foundations

• Rooted in Reaganomics (USA) and Thatcherism (UK), emphasising free markets and minimal state intervention.
• Operationalised through Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs) imposed on developing countries.

Legacy & Outcomes 

Mixed Economic Outcomes

• Some success stories:
  • Chile (1980s reforms)
  • East Asian economies (partial adoption with state control)
• Failures:
  • Latin America debt crises (1980s–90s)
  • Post-Soviet transitions → inequality, economic collapse (World Bank studies)

Financial Instability

• Asian Financial Crisis (1997) exposed risks of capital account liberalisation without regulatory capacity.
• Global Financial Crisis (2008) highlighted dangers of excess deregulation in financial markets.

Rising Inequality

• IMF later acknowledged (2016 report) that neoliberal policies increased inequality, contradicting earlier “trickle-down growth” assumption.

Policy Space Constraints

• WTO rules like TRIPS and TRIMs limited developing countries’ ability to pursue industrial policy and subsidies.
• Contradiction: Countries like South Korea, Taiwan, Japan industrialised using state intervention, not WC prescriptions.

Why Washington Consensus is Obsolete Today ?

Multipolar World Order

• Rise of China, India, Global South challenges US-led economic order, reducing dominance of WC institutions.

Geopolitics & Economic Nationalism

• Revival of tariffs and subsidies (US CHIPS Act 2022, EU Green Deal subsidies) shows shift toward strategic protectionism.
• Supply chains reoriented for national security (China+1 strategy, friend-shoring).

Digital Economy Transformation

• WC did not anticipate AI, digital trade, data governance, now central to economic policy (India’s Digital Public Infrastructure model).

Climate & Sustainability Imperatives

• Need for green subsidies, carbon policies, climate finance, contradicting WC’s minimal state intervention approach.

Social Equity & Welfare

• Growing focus on inequality, social safety nets, redistribution, especially after COVID-19 (global fiscal stimulus > $10 trillion, IMF).

Emerging Alternatives  

Post-Washington Consensus

• Emphasises:
  • State intervention + market efficiency
  • Social safety nets
  • Inclusive growth
• Example: India’s welfare + growth model (DBT, PLI schemes, infrastructure push).

Beijing Consensus Model

• Based on:
  • State-led industrial policy
  • Gradual liberalisation
  • Authoritarian governance with economic focus
• Example: China’s rise to world’s second-largest economy (GDP ~$18 trillion, 2025 IMF).

Pragmatic Eclecticism (Current Reality)

• Countries adopt hybrid models:
  • Markets + state intervention
  • Trade openness + strategic protectionism
  • Growth + redistribution

India’s Perspective

India’s Departure from Pure WC

• 1991 reforms adopted LPG model, but India retained:
  • Public sector role (PSUs, welfare schemes)
  • Industrial policy (PLI schemes, Make in India)

Current Policy Mix

• Combines:
  • Fiscal prudence (FRBM framework)
  • State intervention (₹10 lakh crore infra push, Union Budget)
  • Digital governance (UPI, Aadhaar)

Strategic Autonomy

• India balances:
  • Global integration (FTAs)
  • Domestic protection (tariffs, Atmanirbhar Bharat)

Challenges of New Paradigm

Risk of Protectionism

• Excessive tariffs may reduce efficiency and global trade integration, as seen in WTO stagnation (Doha Round failure).

Policy Uncertainty

• Absence of clear consensus leads to fragmented global economic order, increasing unpredictability for developing countries.

Inequality & Governance Issues

• Even new models risk elite capture and uneven redistribution, requiring strong institutions.

Way Forward

Context-Specific Policy Framework

• Move away from one-size-fits-all models toward country-specific development strategies, aligned with institutional capacity.

Balanced State-Market Approach

• Combine:
  • Market efficiency
  • Strategic state intervention
  • Strong regulatory institutions

Focus on Human Capital

• Invest in education, healthcare, and skilling, as seen in East Asian success models.

Climate & Digital Integration

• Develop policies for green growth, AI governance, and digital trade, addressing 21st-century challenges.

Reform Global Institutions

• Strengthen IMF, World Bank, WTO reforms, ensuring greater voice for Global South (India, Africa).

Prelims Pointers

• Washington Consensus → 1989, John Williamson
• SAPs → IMF/World Bank reforms
• TRIPS/TRIMs → WTO agreements
• Asian Financial Crisis → 1997
• Global Financial Crisis → 2008

Conclusion

• The Washington Consensus is not entirely irrelevant, but its universalist, rigid application has lost credibility in today’s complex global landscape.
• The emerging paradigm is one of pragmatic pluralism, where nations design policies suited to their economic, political, and technological realities, marking the end of a single dominant economic doctrine.

---

On scientific collaborations in BRICS

---

Why in News ?

• BRICS emerging as a key platform for Science, Technology & Innovation (STI) cooperation amid techno-nationalism, sanctions, and export controls (2020s).
• Expansion to BRICS+ (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Iran, Ethiopia, Indonesia) enhances Global South collaboration but raises coordination challenges.

Relevance

• GS 2 (International Relations):
  BRICS+, global governance, South-South cooperation, New Development Bank
• GS 3 (Science & Technology / Economy):
  Innovation ecosystems, AI governance, R&D collaboration, digital public goods

Practice Question

Q. BRICS cooperation in science and technology represents an emerging alternative innovation ecosystem for the Global South. Discuss its potential and limitations. (15 Marks)

Institutional & Policy Framework

Evolution of STI Cooperation

• STI formally recognised in 2011, strengthened via 2015 MoU, making it a core pillar of BRICS cooperation.
• BRICS Action Plan for Innovation (2017–2020) institutionalised collaboration via STIEP Working Group focusing on entrepreneurship, tech transfer, and incubation.

Key Institutional Mechanisms

• Annual STI Ministerial Meetings approve joint research agendas and funding priorities.
• National agencies (India: CSIR, DBT) coordinate calls, reflecting decentralised yet coordinated model.

Emerging Platforms

• BRICS Technology Transfer Centre (TTC) → facilitates cross-border commercialisation of technologies.
• iBRICS, BRICS Institute of Future Networks → focus on ICT, AI, and digital ecosystems.

Key Areas of Cooperation

Frontier Technologies

• Focus areas include AI, High-Performance Computing (HPC), advanced materials, ICT, and space cooperation (2021 agreement).

Development-Oriented Research

• Shift toward energy, water, health, environment, especially post-COVID, prioritising public health, vaccines, and digital health systems.

AI Governance

• BRICS 2025 AI Declaration elevates AI as central pillar, advocating inclusive, development-oriented governance, countering Western tech dominance.

Significance of BRICS STI

Alternative to Western Tech Hegemony

• Provides Global South platform against US-led tech restrictions and export controls (e.g., semiconductor bans on China).

Resource & Demographic Advantage

• BRICS accounts for:
  • ~40% global population
  • Significant share of global GDP (~30% PPP)
• Enables scale in innovation, data economy, and resource-based technologies.

Development Finance Linkages

• Through New Development Bank (NDB), supports innovation-led infrastructure and sustainable development projects.

Challenges

Low R&D Investment

• Except China, BRICS countries have low GERD (<1% of GDP for India) compared to South Korea (~4.8%), indicating innovation gap.

Institutional Weakness

• Lack of permanent secretariat or central funding mechanism, with rotating presidency limiting long-term continuity.

Uneven Participation

• New BRICS+ members show limited engagement (only Egypt & Iran joined recent calls), reflecting integration challenges.

Limited Mega-Science Projects

• Areas like ocean research, polar science, particle physics lag due to high capital and coordination requirements.

Heterogeneity of Members

• Wide differences in economic development and scientific capacity hinder consensus-building (as noted by Irina Dezhina).

Way Forward

Establish Permanent STI Secretariat

• Modelled on EU Horizon Programme, to manage funding, evaluation, and long-term projects.

Scale Mega-Science Projects

• Launch flagship projects in climate tech, space, biotech, enhancing global scientific relevance.

Increase R&D Investment

• Target GERD ≥2% of GDP, especially for India and emerging BRICS members.

Strengthen South-South Collaboration

• Promote paired collaborations (India–Brazil, China–South Africa) for focused outcomes.

Focus on AI & Digital Public Goods

• Leverage India’s Digital Public Infrastructure (UPI, Aadhaar) as model for Global South tech cooperation.

Prelims Pointers

• BRICS+ expansion (2023–25)
• NDB → Shanghai HQ
• STIEP → innovation working group
• GERD (India ~0.7% GDP)
• AI Declaration 2025 (BRICS)

Conclusion

• BRICS STI cooperation has moved from symbolic collaboration to strategic innovation partnership, but requires institutional deepening and funding scale-up to become globally transformative.

BRICS – Basics

Formation & Members

• BRIC coined in 2001 (Jim O’Neill, Goldman Sachs); formal grouping in 2009 (Yekaterinburg Summit), with South Africa added in 2010 → BRICS.

Current Members (Expanded BRICS+)

• Core: Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa
• New entrants (2023–25): Saudi Arabia, UAE, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia

Objectives

• Promote multipolar world order, reducing Western dominance (US-led institutions).
• Enhance cooperation in economy, trade, development finance, and global governance reforms.

Key Features

• Represents:
  • ~40–45% global population
  • ~30% global GDP (PPP basis)
• Major players in energy, minerals, agriculture, and manufacturing.

---

Why Transgender Protection (Amendment) Bill 2026 has attracted criticism

---

Source : The Indian Express

Why in News ?

• Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) (Amendment) Bill, 2026 criticised for removing self-identification of gender and introducing mandatory medical certification.
• Seen as a rollback of Supreme Court’s NALSA (2014) judgment, triggering protests by LGBTQ+ groups across India.

Relevance

• GS 1 (Society):
  Gender identity, social inclusion, marginalised communities
• GS 2 (Polity & Governance):
  NALSA judgment (2014), Articles 14 & 21, rights-based vs regulatory approach

Practice Question

Q. The Transgender Persons (Amendment) Bill, 2026 raises concerns about the balance between state regulation and individual autonomy. Critically examine. (15 Marks)

Constitutional & Legal Dimensions

Violation of NALSA Judgment (2014)

• In National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014), SC recognised right to self-identify gender as part of Article 21 (dignity and autonomy).
• Amendment removes self-perceived gender identity, contradicting SC’s recognition of “third gender” and self-identification rights.

Article 14 (Equality) Concerns

• Mandatory medical certification creates unequal treatment, as cisgender individuals do not require such validation for identity recognition.
• Excludes groups like trans men and non-binary persons, violating reasonable classification principle.

Article 21 (Right to Dignity & Privacy)

• Medical verification intrudes into bodily autonomy and privacy, recognised in Puttaswamy judgment (2017).
• Pathologises identity, undermining dignity of transgender persons.

Conflict with International Norms

• Violates Yogyakarta Principles (2006) which affirm self-determined gender identity as a human right.
• Contradicts India’s obligations under ICCPR and UN Human Rights frameworks.

Governance & Administrative Dimensions

Shift to Medicalised Bureaucracy

• Requires certification by medical boards, increasing dependence on state-controlled institutions.
• Risks delays, corruption, and exclusion due to limited healthcare access in India (rural–urban divide).

Implementation Challenges

• India lacks adequate gender-sensitive healthcare infrastructure, making certification process impractical for many.
• Could exclude economically weaker transgender persons (~90% informal workforce, community estimates).

Graded Punishments Provision

• Bill introduces graded penalties for crimes (abduction, forced labour, exploitation), strengthening protection framework.
• However, activists argue criminal provisions cannot compensate for denial of identity rights.

Social & Ethical Dimensions

Erasure of Identity

• Narrow definition excludes:
  • Trans men
  • Non-binary persons assigned female at birth
• Leads to identity invisibilisation, affecting access to welfare schemes and legal recognition.

Pathologisation of Gender

• Medical certification treats transgender identity as a “condition” requiring validation, reinforcing stigma.
• Activists term it “transpathia”, reversing progress toward de-medicalisation of gender identity.

Impact on Marginalised Communities

• Transgender community already faces:
  • High unemployment (~90% informal sector)
  • Limited education access (literacy ~56%, Census 2011)
• Additional barriers worsen social exclusion and vulnerability.

Economic Dimension

Access to Welfare & Employment

• Identity recognition is prerequisite for:
  • Reservation policies (as per NALSA)
  • Government schemes (SMILE scheme, scholarships)
• Medical certification may delay or deny access, affecting economic empowerment.

Key Criticisms

Rollback of Hard-Won Rights

• Removes self-identification, core achievement of NALSA judgment, seen as constitutional regression.

Exclusionary Definition

• Narrow definition ignores diverse gender identities, especially modern non-binary expressions.

Accessibility Issues

• Medical certification is costly, inaccessible, and bureaucratic, disproportionately affecting poor and rural trans persons.

Overemphasis on Control

• Shifts focus from empowerment → regulation, undermining trust between state and community.

Way Forward

Restore Self-Identification Principle

• Align law with NALSA (2014) by reinstating self-perceived gender identity without medical requirement.

Inclusive Definition

• Expand definition to include trans men, non-binary persons, and diverse gender identities, ensuring inclusivity.

Strengthen Welfare Framework

• Improve schemes like SMILE (Support for Marginalised Individuals for Livelihood and Enterprise) for socio-economic upliftment.

Sensitisation & Institutional Reform

• Train medical boards, police, and administrators to reduce discrimination and improve service delivery.

Gender-Neutral Policy Approach

• Move toward rights-based, dignity-centric framework, integrating transgender rights into broader social justice policies.

Prelims Pointers

• NALSA v. Union of India (2014) → right to self-identification
• Transgender Persons Act 2019 → definition includes intersex, genderqueer, sociocultural identities
• Puttaswamy (2017) → right to privacy
• Yogyakarta Principles (2006) → gender identity rights

Conclusion

• The Amendment Bill, 2026 risks reversing progressive jurisprudence by undermining self-identification and imposing medical barriers.
• Ensuring inclusive, rights-based, and dignity-centric legal frameworks is essential for advancing substantive equality for transgender persons in India.

---