What to Read in The Hindu Editorial( Topic and Syllabus wise)

Editorial 1: Progress should not just be fast but future-proof

Context

India lacks a full plan to track climate risks, so its responses are often late and unplanned.

Introduction

India’s climate future isn’t fate — it’s shaped by rising heat, unpredictable rains, and worsening disasters. Over 80% of Indians live in areas at risk, says the World Bank. From floods in the northeast to crop loss in central India, these are now serious, ongoing threats. Yet, poor planning and weak risk assessment keep India exposed, with reactive rather than proactive responses.

Escalating Climate Physical Risks (CPRs)

• Climate changeis intensifying, leading to more frequent and severe extreme weather.
• CPRsgo beyond just natural disasters and include:
  • Acute shocks: such as floods, heatwaves, and cyclones
  • Chronic stresses: including shifting monsoonsand prolonged droughts
• Early warning systemsand weather forecasts help with short-term risk reduction.
• However, CPRs demand long-term planningand climate projections, not just daily forecasts.

Mitigation vs Adaptation: The Global Dilemma

Climate Strategy	Focus Area	Current Trend	Issues
Mitigation	Reducing emissions	Majority of climate funding directed here	Skewed investments towards decarbonisation
Adaptation	Preparing for climate impacts	Underfunded despite being a global necessity	Needed by both Global South and Global North

• Events like wildfires, heatwaves, and cyclonesshow that adaptation is essential worldwide.
• According to the UN Environment Programme, every $1 spent on adaptationbrings a $4 return through avoided economic damage.

Understanding CPRs: More Than Just Weather

• CPRsare determined by more than extreme events; they depend on:
  • Hazard: Nature of the event (e.g., floods, heatwaves)
  • Exposure: Who or what is in harm’s way (people, assets, infrastructure)
  • Vulnerability: Ability to resist, cope with, and recoverfrom the hazard

CPR Component	Description
Hazard	Type of event (e.g., flood, cyclone, drought)
Exposure	Populations and assets at risk
Vulnerability	Capacity to withstand and bounce back

• Together, these three elements determine the true scale of climate risk.

Financial Stability and Climate Risk Reporting

• Regulators worldwideare shifting from voluntary to mandatory climate risk disclosures.
• In India:
  • Reserve Bank of India (RBI)is integrating climate risk into regulation.
  • IFRS ISSB S2sets a global standard for CPR disclosures.
• CPR assessmentsare now critical for business continuity, not just environmental goals.

India’s Fragmented CPR Assessment Landscape

• India’s CPR assessment remains scattered and inconsistentacross sectors:
  • Multiple agencies and platformsuse different data and methods
  • No unified national frameworklike in the S., U.K., or New Zealand

Source/Agency	Contribution	Limitation
IIT Gandhinagar	Flood maps	Localised, not standardised nationally
India Meteorological Department (IMD)	Vulnerability Atlases	Not integrated with other datasets
National Institute of Disaster Management	Disaster Risk Frameworks	Not linked to climate projections

• Climate models like Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs)and Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs):
  • Are designed globally, but miss India’s local climate realities
• The absence of a centralised climate data repositoryhampers informed decision-making by businesses and policymakers.

Steps taken to fill the gaps

• Recognising existing gaps, India has taken steps to incorporate climate hazardsinto its National Adaptation Plan (NAP), aligned with Article 7 of the Paris Agreement, which requires all countries to develop NAPs by 2025 and show progress by 2030.
• To support this, India prepared an Adaptation Communicationand submitted its first report in 2023. A more detailed NAP report is in progress, addressing nine thematic sectors with district-level detail.
• Although this is a positive beginning, India needs to advance by developing a Climate Physical Risk (CPR) assessment toolto aid both public and private sectors in decision-making.
• Such a tool will help the public sectorcreate climate-resilient policies, plan infrastructure efficiently, and allocate resources effectively.
• For the private sector, it will facilitate risk assessment across value chains, guide operational and expansion strategies, and meet increasing investor expectations.

Conclusion

The creation of an India-specific framework is essential—one that integrates localised climate models, granular risk assessments, a centralised climate risk data hub, and transparent, science-driven methodologies supported by iterative feedback loops. As India advances towards Viksit Bharat, such robust climate risk assessments are crucial to ensure that development is not only accelerated but also resilient and future-ready.

 

Editorial 2: ​​Stitch in time

Context

Imposing steep fines on illegal units may offer only a weak deterrent.

Introduction

In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court of India declared two notifications by the Union Environment Ministry as illegal, reinforcing the core principle of prior environmental clearance under the EIA Notification, 2006. The move addresses longstanding concerns about regulatory dilution, as past policies allowed industrial projects to bypass legal scrutiny, citing economic and procedural justifications.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Environment Ministry Notifications

• Illegal Notifications Quashed:
  • The Supreme Court declared two notifications by the Union Environment Ministry as “illegal”.
  • These allowed industrial units to start, expand, or modify operationswithout obtaining prior environmental clearance.

Importance of Prior Clearance in Environmental Law

• Central to EIA 2006:
  • The Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006, is built around the principle of prior approval.
  • The Ministry’s actions were seen as undermining this foundational requirement.

The Centre’s Actions and Justifications

• March 2017 Notification:
  • Provided a “one-time” six-month windowfor violators to apply for environmental clearance retrospectively.
• 2021 Standard Operating Procedure (SOP):
  • Allowed continued regularisation of violating projects, even those outside the 2017 window, through payment of heavy fines.
• Bypassing Parliamentary Process:
  • These changes were issued via executive orders, rather than amending the Environment Protection Act through Parliament.

Government’s Three-Fold Rationale

1. Historical Precedent:
   • Claimed that the UPA government in 2012–2013had begun similar regularisation processes.
   • Those efforts were struck down on procedural, not substantive, groundsby the Jharkhand High Court and the National Green Tribunal.
2. Economic and Environmental Disruption:
   • Argued that shutting down operational unitscould hurt employment and the economy, while possibly worsening pollution.
   • Cited judicial supportfor a balanced approach in past industrial disputes.
3. Imposition of Penalties:
   • Claimed industries were being penalised for past violations, making regularisation a corrective mechanism.

Supreme Court Verdict: Emphasis on ‘Prior’ Clearance

• Reaffirmed Legal Principle:
  • The Court reiterated the inviolability of prior environmental clearanceas a legal requirement.
  • Projects regularised under 2017 and 2021 orders will remain unaffected, despite the ruling.

Systemic Failure and Future Implications

• Failure of Enforcement Bodies:
  • The mushrooming of illegal industrial unitshighlights the failure of regional environmental boards in enforcing regulations.
• Ineffective Penalty Mechanism:
  • The Court implied that merely collecting fines from violatorsis insufficient if regulatory enforcement is weak.
• Call for Stronger Enforcement:
  • The judgment is a warning against future government attemptsto legalise violations in the name of economic growth.
  • Emphasises the need for robust on-ground implementation and monitoring.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s verdict reinforces the primacy of environmental law and sets a critical precedent against the dilution of regulatory norms. While regularised industries remain unaffected, the ruling sends a strong message: economic convenience cannot override legal obligations. Future policy must focus not just on penalties, but on robust monitoring, accountability, and genuine environmental protection.