Content :

1. All eyes on Baku and the climate finance goal
2. All or any
3. India, Pakistan and modifying the Indus Waters Treaty
4. Are pro-natalist policies the way to address the ageing population problem?

---

All eyes on Baku and the climate finance goal

---

Context:

COP29 Details:

• Set to take place in Baku, Azerbaijan, from November 11 to 22, 2024.

•  Referred to as a “Finance COP” due to its special focus on climate finance.

New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG):

• It is a climate finance target set by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to replace the previous target of $100 billion annually by 2020, focusing on meeting the “needs and priorities of developing countries” per Article 9 of the Paris Agreement.

Relevance: GS 3 ( Environment )

Practice Question: Discuss the key expectations from the Baku Conference, with a focus on climate finance. Examine how the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) surpasses the previous $100 billion climate finance target. (250 words)

Key Challenges:

• Scope of NCQG: countries have different perspectives on financial structure, contributions, and timeframe.

• Developing Countries’ viewpoint:

• Demand equitable climate finance with clear targets and a strong emphasis on public funding, grants, and concessional loans.

• Advocates for fair financial responsibility.

• Call for transparent timeframes, e.g., five- or ten-year commitments.

• Developed Countries’ Approach:

• Emphasise flexible finance structures.

• Prioritise results-focused strategies around low emissions and climate resilience.

Distrust Rooted in Past Financial Commitments

• $100 Billion Pledge (2009): Originally set for 2020, the target was only met in 2022.

• Trillions Needed: Current climate action needs far surpass the $100 billion, with estimates reaching between $5 trillion and $7 trillion.

Adaptation Funding Gap :

• Adaptation vs. Mitigation: While clean energy projects attract private investments, adaptation efforts (like infrastructure resilience) are underfunded.

• Debt Concerns: Heavy reliance on loans is increasing the debt of vulnerable countries, stressing the need for grant-based support.

Expanding the Contributor Base:

• Canada and Switzerland’s Proposals:

• Demands strong contributions based on emissions and income levels, indirectly targeting China and oil-rich countries.

• Developing countries argue this undermines equity and historical responsibility principles.

• Risks of Delayed Negotiations: Expanding contributors may stall NCQG negotiations at COP29, jeopardising timely action.

Climate Finance Definition and the Issue of Additionality

• Updated Definition by Standing Committee on Finance (SCF): lacks mention of “additionality”—the need for new and incremental support.

• Investment vs. Finance: Counting private investments within NCQG risks weakening accountability, as private funds prioritize profits and lack climate-specific oversight.

Developing Countries’ Needs Beyond Finance

• Technology Transfer and Capacity Building: Critical to supporting both mitigation and adaptation efforts.

• Barriers to Funding Access: Multilateral mechanisms often prioritise cost-efficiency over genuine climate needs, complicating fund access for poorer nations.

Path Forward:

• Trust in Multilateralism: For NCQG to succeed, it must bridge the trust gap and address historical responsibilities.

• Core Question: Will COP29 deliver genuine outcomes for developing countries or just promises?

Conclusion:

As COP29 looms, the world watches to see if climate finance negotiations will prioritise equitable solutions or lean toward promises that lack substantive impact.

---

All or any

---

Constitutional Background :

• The Indian Constitution supports socialist principles, aiming to prevent wealth concentration and resource sharing.

• Articles 39(b) and 39(c) direct the state to:

• Distribute resources for the common good.

• Prevent economic systems that harm society.

Relevance: GS 2 (Indian Polity )

Practice Question: Analyze how Articles 39(b) and 39(c) of the Indian Constitution guide the state’s role in resource distribution for social welfare. Discuss the verdict’s implications on legislative discretion and economic equity in modern India. (250 words )

Supreme Court’s Key Ruling :

• The Court clarified that not every private asset falls under “material resources of the community.”

• Only specific resources, based on necessity and impact, qualify.

Factors for State Action:

• Nature and Scarcity of the Resource: Is it crucial for society?

• Community Need: Would public access to this resource help society?

• Impact of Private Ownership: Does private control harm public interest?

Approach to Modern Economic Needs

• Flexible Interpretation: The Court ruled that Articles 39(b) and (c) should be applied with today’s economic realities in mind, not through a strict ideological lens.

• Land and Natural Resource Rules:

• Land Acquisition: Justified under eminent domain for public necessity.

• Natural Resources: These should be distributed transparently to avoid unfair monopolies.

• Nationalization: Requires careful constitutional justification.

Dissenting View :

• Justice Dhulia’s Opinion: He argued that the scope of “material resources” should stay broad, allowing the legislature to act more freely, especially with existing social inequalities.

Verdict’s Implications

• Balance of Public Good and Private Rights: The decision supports state responsibility for public welfare but respects private rights by limiting unnecessary intervention.

• Emphasis on Legislative Discretion: The ruling suggests that elected lawmakers, not the courts, should lead on economic policy to address present challenges.

Conclusion

The verdict calls for a balance between economic equity and individual rights. States need to be flexible in adopting strategies as per dynamic economic needs.

---

India, Pakistan and modifying the Indus Waters Treaty

---

Context: On August 30, 2024, India formally served a notice under Article XII(3) of the IWT to review and modify the treaty.

Indus Water Treaty:

• It is a water-distribution treaty between India and Pakistan, brokered by the World Bank and signed on September 19, 1960. The treaty was signed by then-Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and then-Pakistani President Ayub Khan

• India controls the three eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej), while Pakistan has control over the three western rivers (Indus, Chenab, and Jhelum)

Relevance GS 2 ( International Relations )

Practice Question Why is India seeking changes to the Indus Waters Treaty? Discuss the challenges between India and Pakistan regarding water use and the impact of climate change.

Reasons Cited by India:

• Growing Domestic Water Needs: Addressing water needs with rising population and agricultural demands.

• Clean Energy Goals: Ensuring water use aligns with India’s sustainable energy targets.

• Cross-Border Tensions: Highlighting terrorism’s impact on smooth IWT operations.

Treaty Modification: Article XII

• High Bar for Amendment: Modifications require a new ratified treaty agreed upon by both nations.

• Historical Precedent: Past disagreements (e.g., Kishenganga arbitration) suggest finding a mutual modification formula is challenging.

Key Differences in Water Use Approaches :

• India (Upper Riparian): Aims for optimal use of water resources within treaty allowances.

• Pakistan (Lower Riparian): Prioritises uninterrupted flow of western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab).

• Case Reference: The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) allowed India’s hydropower projects on the Kishanganga River but required a minimum flow to prevent harm to Pakistan.

Structural Challenges in Resource Management

• River Partition: The IWT divides rivers by region (eastern for India, western for Pakistan), disrupting natural hydrological connections.

• Cooperation Gaps: Lack of joint resource management undermines effective use and adaptation to modern challenges.

• No-Harm Rule: Though not explicitly in the treaty, this customary international law requires avoiding significant harm in shared water projects, especially those with potential cross-border impacts.

Climate Change and Equitable Utilisation

• ERU Principle: The 1997 UN Watercourses Convention’s Equitable and Reasonable Utilisation (ERU) principle may guide resource-sharing adjustments in response to climate changes, such as glacial depletion.

• Joint Engineering Projects: Article VII of the IWT allows for collaborative projects, potentially enabling both nations to manage climate-driven water variability better.

Recommendations

• Memorandum of Understanding (MoU): Establish MoUs within the IWT framework to address emerging issues without full treaty renegotiation.

• Enhanced Cooperation: Building trust through cooperative projects could help both countries better manage shared resources amidst environmental and political challenges.

Are pro-natalist policies the way to address the ageing population problem?

India’s Population Landscape :

• Declining Fertility: India’s Total Fertility Rate (TFR) dropped to 1.9 in 2021, below the replacement level fertility of 2.1.

• Regional Variations: Northern states have a younger population, while southern states (like Kerala and Tamil Nadu) are ageing faster due to lower fertility and increased longevity.

---

Pro-Natalist Policies :

---

Government initiatives are designed to encourage higher birth rates and support families in having more children. These policies aim to counteract declining population growth and address ageing demographics.

Relevance: GS 1(Society ), GS 2 (Social Justice).

Practice Question: Are pro-natalist policies the way to address the ageing population problem? Suggest key measures .(250 words )

Issues with Pro-Natalist Policies :

Previous Policy Shifts:

• India once discouraged large families (e.g., forced sterilizations during the 1970s).

• Shifting to encourage more births can create chaos due to non-alignment with people’s actual desires or needs.

Challenges in Encouraging Higher Birth Rates:

• High Living Costs: Raising children is costly due to housing, education, and healthcare.

• Opportunity Cost for Women: Women often bear the burden of childcare, which affects their careers and financial independence.

Global Experiences:

• Countries like Hungary, Poland, and Sweden offer incentives (maternity/paternity leave, tax breaks) but still face resistance due to economic and social pressures.

Alternatives to Pro-Natalism:

• Dynamic View of Ageing:

• Rather than viewing ageing populations as a burden, consider life expectancy and productivity.

• Silver Economy: Older adults can continue contributing to less physically demanding, skill-based jobs.

• Care Economy :

• Promote opportunities for trained caregivers for the elderly, addressing both ageing population needs and employment challenges.

• Healthcare and Social Support:

• Build robust healthcare, affordable eldercare, and social security for an ageing population to reduce dependency on family size.

• Ecological Considerations:

• Moving towards a sustainable population size aligns with environmental needs, supporting resource conservation and balanced development.

Key Takeaways :

• Supportive structures focus on ageing, balanced resource use, and gender equality.

• Policies should prioritise human rights, work-life balance, and the quality of life.

• Representation metrics should recognise demographic shifts without pressuring families to increase size artificially.

Conclusion :

The focus should be on holistic social and economic policies that support ageing gracefully, equitably, and sustainably, which are likely to be more effective in addressing India’s demographic challenges.