UPSC CARE 29th August 2025 Current Affairs

News at a Glance(29-08-2025)

1. Economy: Issue of State compensation for GST reforms
2. Tariffs on Indian Exports: Sectoral Impact and Policy Response
3. Disaster Management: India’s Monsoon Vulnerabilities and Disaster Management
4. Environment and Ecology: 33 Years after the Rio Earth Summit
5. Social Justice: Women’s Safety in Urban India
6. India’s Demographic Dividend: From Opportunity to “Time Bomb”

Issue of State compensation for GST reforms

Source: The Hindu

UPSC Relevance: GS3 Economy

Context: GST reforms of 2025

Why in News

• The GST reforms of 2025 propose reducing the current four-tier structure into a two-tier (5% & 18%) system, raising concerns about revenue loss and possible compensation to States.

Introduction

• Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced next-generation Goods and Services Tax (GST) reforms as a “Deepavali gift.”
• The proposal involves rationalising the current four-tier GST rate system into a two-tier structure of 5% and 18%, along with lowering the average effective tax rate from ~11.5% to ~10%.
• While this reform aims at simplifying compliance and improving investment climate, it raises a critical question: Will the reduction in rates reduce State revenues, and if so, should States be compensated?

Impact of GST Rate Rationalisation on Revenues

1. Short-term Revenue Loss

   • Estimates suggest a loss of ₹60,000–₹1,00,000 crore annually (0.2–0.3% of GDP).
   • In FY2025-26 (partial implementation year), losses may be around ₹45,000 crore.

2. Sources of Loss

   • Items moving from 12% → 5% slab.
   • Items moving from 28% → 18% slab.
   • However, the 18% slab (70% of GST revenue) remains unchanged to protect revenue stability.

3. Offsetting Measures

   • Higher sin/luxury goods tax (~40%) to balance losses.
   • Consumption boost from lower taxes on essentials and durables.
   • Improved compliance & reduced leakages as more buyers shift into formal billing.

(Image Source: The Hindu)

Unequal Impact Across States

GST revenues are shared between Centre and States, but the burden of rate cuts will vary:

• Manufacturing & Service-heavy States (e.g., Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu): More vulnerable as their GST collections rely on higher-value goods (electronics, appliances).
  Example: 2018 GST rate cut led to a 3-4% dip in monthly revenues for these States.
• Agrarian & Low-industrial States (e.g., Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, North-East): Less affected, as consumption is tilted towards essentials, already at low or exempt rates.

Thus, asymmetric impact raises the demand for a compensatory mechanism.

The Compensation Debate

Background

• At GST’s launch in July 2017, Centre guaranteed States 5 years of compensation for revenue shortfall, funded by a compensation cess (on luxury/sin goods).
• This ended in June 2022. Since then, States have been demanding continued support, especially during COVID-19 disruptions.

Arguments Against Compensation

• Self-reliance principle: States must strengthen tax systems, attract investments, and widen base.
• Fiscal burden on Centre: Continuous compensation is unsustainable for Union finances.
• Global practice: Many federal GST systems (Australia, Canada) gave transitional support only, not permanent compensation.

Arguments For Compensation

• Unequal revenue shock: Larger industrial States face bigger immediate losses.
• Federal fairness: GST is a shared reform; burden-sharing should also be collective.
• International models: Some developed economies supplemented GST transition with grants from central funds in addition to cess-based compensation.

Possible Mechanisms Going Forward

1. Special Contingency/Equalisation Fund
   • Like Kerala’s flood cess model, a small portion of GST revenue could go into a stabilisation fund, disbursed to States facing disproportionate losses.
2. Consolidated Fund of India (CFI) Grants
   • Non-cess based support to specific States under Finance Commission-like transfers.
3. Performance-linked Transfers
   • Incentives for States improving compliance, plugging leakages, or digitising tax administration.
4. Targeted Transitional Support
   • Limited-duration packages for highly affected States until new consumption and compliance levels stabilise.

GST Council Dynamics

• The GST Council (Centre + States) has so far worked by consensus, with rare instances of voting.
• Given PM’s announcement and Ministry’s backing, consensus seems likely.
• Disagreements may arise only on:
  • Classification of goods (which fall into 5% or 18% slab).
  • Effective date of implementation.
  • Compensation arrangements for States.

Conclusion

• While continuous compensation is fiscally unsustainable, transitional and targeted support mechanisms may be justified to ensure States—specially manufacturing-heavy ones—are not disproportionately disadvantaged.
• GST reforms must be seen not merely as a tax change, but as a structural reform for investment and growth, with both Centre and States sharing the short-term burdens for long-term gains.

UPSC PYQ

Q.   Consider the following items: (2018)  

1. Cereal grains hulled
2. Chicken eggs cooked
3. Fish processed and canned
4. Newspapers containing advertising material

Which of the above items is/are exempted under GST (Good and Services Tax)?  

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 and 3 only

(c) 1, 2 and 4 only

(d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

Ans: (c)

CARE MCQ

Q. Consider the following statements regarding the GST reforms of 2025:

1. The proposed two-tier GST structure will primarily consist of 5% and 18% slabs.
2. The estimated revenue loss from these reforms is around 0.2–0.3% of India’s GDP annually.
3. About 70% of current GST revenue comes from the 18% slab, which is left unchanged in the new reform.
4. The GST Council decisions have always been taken through voting, not consensus.

Which of the above statements are correct?

A. 1, 2 and 3 only
B. 2 and 4 only
C. 1 and 3 only
D. 1, 2, 3 and 4

Answer – A

Explanation

• Statement 1 is correct: The proposed GST reform simplifies the structure to two main slabs: 5% and 18%, replacing the earlier four-tier system. This was announced in August 2025 as part of “next-generation GST reforms.”
• Statement 2 is correct: The estimated revenue loss from these cuts is around ₹60,000–₹1,00,000 crore annually, which is approximately 0.2–0.3% of India’s GDP. For FY2025-26 (partial year), the loss is projected at ~₹45,000 crore.
• Statement 3 is correct: Nearly 70% of GST revenues currently come from the 18% slab. This slab has been deliberately kept unchanged in the reforms to protect revenue stability.
• Statement 4 is incorrect: The GST Council has historically taken almost all decisions by consensus, with only a couple of exceptions where voting was used.
• Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

U.S. Tariffs on Indian Exports: Sectoral Impact and Policy Response

Source: The Hindu

UPSC Relevance: GS 3 Economy

Context: Indian Exports

Why in News

The U.S. imposed 50% tariffs on Indian exports, severely impacting labour-intensive sectors such as shrimp, textiles, jewellery, and carpets, while others like chemicals, metals, and machinery face a modest effect.

Introduction

• Recently, the United States imposed 50% tariffs on imports from India, significantly raising trade barriers.
• Many Indian sectors, especially labour-intensive industries, are heavily dependent on U.S. demand and are witnessing a sharp decline in exports.
• This has created immediate stress for exporters, workers, and local economies.

(Image Source: The Hindu)

Framework to Assess the Impact of Tariffs

The extent of the damage can be analysed using three metrics:

1. Absolute export value to the U.S. (how much is sold in dollar terms).
2. Share of U.S. in India’s total exports of that sector.
3. Final tariff rate applied after the hike.

Sectors with high export dependence on the U.S. and steep tariff increases are worst hit.

Severely Affected Sectors

1. Shrimp Industry

• Exports to U.S. (2024-25): $2.4 billion (32.4% of total shrimp exports).
• Tariffs: From 10% earlier → now 60% total.
• Impact:
  • Prices of shrimp in Andhra Pradesh fell ~20% after an earlier 25% tariff.
  • Further fall expected, severely hurting farmers and exporters.
  • Employment in coastal aquaculture belt under stress.

2. Diamonds, Gold, and Jewellery

• Exports to U.S.: $10 billion (40% of total exports of this sector).
• Tariffs: From 2.1% → now 52.1%.
• Impact:
  • Surat diamond polishing industry employing ~12 lakh workers faces production cuts.
  • Export orders shrinking rapidly, threatening jobs and wages.

3. Textiles and Apparel

• Exports to U.S.: $10.8 billion (apparel alone $5.4 billion).
• U.S. share: ~35% of apparel exports.
• Tariffs: From 13.9% → now 63.9%.
• Impact (region-specific):
  • Tiruppur (Tamil Nadu): Exporters rushing shipments, cancelling new styles.
  • Noida–Gurugram: Expansion plans frozen, possible downsizing.
  • Ludhiana: Decline in yarn and fabric demand; working capital crunch.
  • Bengaluru: Shift cuts planned as buyers look elsewhere.
• Overall: Major labour-intensive industry faces widespread disruptions.

4. Carpet Industry

• Exports to U.S.: $1.2 billion (58.6% of India’s carpet exports).
• Tariffs: From 2.9% → now 52.9%.
• Impact: One of the highest export-dependent sectors, severely vulnerable.

5. Other Labour-Intensive Sectors

• Handicrafts, leather and footwear, furniture, agricultural products (basmati rice, spices, tea, pulses, sesame).
• These are employment-intensive and largely MSME-driven, facing immediate order cancellations.

Moderately Affected Sectors

1. Organic Chemicals

• Exports to U.S.: $2.7 billion (13.2% share).
• Tariffs: From 4% → 54%.
• Impact: Industry body CHEMEXCIL seeking relief. Pain is less severe due to lower U.S. share.

2. Metals (Steel, Aluminium, Copper)

• Exports to U.S.: $4.7 billion (17% share).
• Impact:
  • U.S. not the largest market, but critical for SMEs in Delhi-NCR engineering hubs and eastern foundries.
  • Tariffs threaten jobs in stainless steel, aluminium casting, copper goods.

3. Machinery & Mechanical Appliances

• Exports to U.S.: $6.7 billion (20% share).
• Impact: Likely drop in demand, but more diversified export base provides some cushion.

Government Response

Short-Term Measures

• Multi-ministry relief plan under consideration (as reported by The Hindu, Aug 13).
• Focus:
  • Working capital support for exporters.
  • Possibly extending credit guarantees.
  • Temporary subsidies/tax relief for export-driven industries.

Medium to Long-Term Strategy

1. ‘Swadeshi’ and ‘Vocal for Local’ campaigns to reduce dependence on exports.
2. Diversification of markets: Expanding presence in Europe, ASEAN, Africa, West Asia.
3. Better use of FTAs (e.g., with UAE, Australia, EFTA).
4. RBI support: Governor Sanjay Malhotra stated readiness to provide liquidity and credit support.

Conclusion

• The new 50% U.S. tariffs pose a serious challenge to India’s export sectors, particularly labour-intensive industries like shrimp, textiles, jewellery, and carpets, which are heavily dependent on the U.S. market.
• While organic chemicals, metals, and machinery will face a modest impact, the broader concern lies in employment loss and working capital stress.
• India’s response will need to balance short-term relief for exporters with long-term strategies for diversification and domestic resilience, ensuring that the blow to millions of workers in export hubs does not derail broader economic stability.

UPSC PYQ

Q.    Increase in absolute and per capita real GNP do not connote a higher level of economic development, if (2018) 

(a) Industrial output fails to keep pace with agricultural output.

(b) Agricultural output fails to keep pace with industrial output.

(c) Poverty and unemployment increase.

(d) Imports grow faster than exports.

Ans: (c) 

CARE MCQ

Q. Consider the following statements regarding the impact of recent U.S. tariffs on Indian exports:

1. India’s shrimp exports to the U.S., worth about $2.4 billion, now face a total tariff of 60%.
2. The textiles and apparel sector, which sends 35% of its exports to the U.S., now faces tariffs raised from 13.9% to 63.9%.
3. India’s organic chemical exports to the U.S. account for nearly one-third of its total exports in this category.
4. The diamond, gold, and jewellery sector exports about 40% of its total shipments to the U.S., and tariffs have risen from 2.1% to 52.1%.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 1, 2 and 4 only
(c) 2, 3 and 4 only
(d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

Answer- B

Explanation

• Statement 1 is correct: India exported about $2.4 billion worth of shrimp to the U.S. in 2024-25, which formed 32.4% of its total shrimp exports. Earlier tariffs were 10%, but after the new hike, the total duty now stands at 60%.
• Statement 2 is correct: The U.S. is India’s largest market for textiles and apparel, accounting for about 35% of exports. The tariff has risen from 13.9% to 63.9%, leading to order cancellations and production cuts in hubs like Tiruppur, Noida, and Bengaluru.
• Statement 3 is incorrect: Organic chemical exports to the U.S. stood at $2.7 billion, forming only 13.2% of India’s total exports in this category, not one-third.
• Statement 4 is correct: India exported $10 billion worth of diamonds, gold, and jewellery to the U.S., making up about 40% of total sectoral exports. Tariffs have indeed risen from 2.1% to 52.1%, forcing production cuts in Surat.
• Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

India’s Monsoon Vulnerabilities and Disaster Management

Source: The Hindu

UPSC Syllabus Relevance: GS 3 Disaster Management

Context: India’s Monsoon Vulnerabilities

Why in News

• The increasing erraticism of India’s monsoon exposes the country’s ecological and infrastructural vulnerabilities and calls for a shift from reactive relief to preventive resilience.

Introduction

• Heavy monsoon rains in August 2025 caused widespread destruction in North India — floods in Punjab and Delhi, landslides in Himachal Pradesh, and loss of lives in Jammu & Kashmir.
• These events highlight not only the intensity of rainfall but also India’s structural vulnerability to monsoon variability, worsened by unplanned development, weak preparedness, and climate change.

Monsoon and Its Emerging Pattern

• Erraticism: Rainfall is arriving in concentrated bursts instead of evenly distributed showers.
• Extremes: Shifts between heavy floods and dry spells within the same season.
• Impact on terrain:
  • Himalayas: Landslides, slope destabilisation.
  • Plains: Riverbank breaches, flash floods.
  • Urban areas: Waterlogging due to poor drainage and concretisation.

Forward Linkage (Climate Science):

• IPCC reports and IMD data show a rising trend of intense rainfall over short periods in South Asia due to global warming.
• This increases the risk of “compound disasters” — floods, landslides, soil erosion, and crop loss.

(Image Source: The Hindu)

Structural Vulnerabilities Exposed

(a) Ecological Fragility

• Himalayan states: Road-widening, hydroelectric projects, and deforestation are weakening slope stability.
• Catchment degradation: Shrinking forest cover reduces natural water absorption → higher runoff and siltation in rivers/dams.

(b) Inadequate Preparedness

• Forecasting gap: IMD has improved rainfall prediction but translation to ground-level, actionable warnings is weak.
• Evacuation & drills: Community preparedness and pre-positioned relief supplies remain insufficient.
• Reactive approach: Relief operations dominate; preventive planning is sidelined.

(c) Developmental Choices

• Infrastructure expansion: Strategic highways, tunnels, and urbanisation are pursued even in eco-sensitive zones.
• Climate-resilient infrastructure lag: Drainage, slope stabilisation, urban flood management are inadequate.
• Compensatory afforestation mismatch: Replanted trees often lack the same biodiversity, resilience, and soil-holding capacity of natural forests.

Consequences of Current Approach

• Human loss: Deaths, displacement, and recurring distress migration.
• Economic cost: Crops destroyed, infrastructure damaged, massive relief expenditure.
• Ecological stress: River siltation, loss of topsoil, shrinking water-holding capacity of catchments.
• Policy inertia: Treating every disaster as “unprecedented” ignores repeated patterns and lessons.

Needed Shift: From Response to Prevention

(a) Infrastructure Reorientation

• Adopt slope-safe engineering in Himalayan projects.
• Mandate urban flood-proofing: stormwater drains, wetland restoration, and permeable surfaces.
• Prioritise climate-resilient infrastructure investment in National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP).

(b) Strengthening Early Warning & Preparedness

• Translate IMD forecasts into localised, last-mile warnings using AI, GIS, and mobile alerts.
• Regular mock drills, community training, and pre-positioned relief kits.
• District-level disaster plans updated annually under NDMA/SDMA.

(c) Ecological Safeguards

• Strict zoning laws: No construction in floodplains and high-risk slopes.
• Strengthen catchment area protection, restore wetlands and natural drainage systems.
• Ensure qualitative compensatory afforestation with native species.

(d) Institutional Measures

• Integrate climate-risk assessments into project clearances.
• Promote cooperative federalism: Joint Centre-State frameworks for Himalayan sustainability.
• Link relief funds to preventive measures to incentivise long-term planning.

Way Forward

• Policy shift: From celebrating “resilience” post-disaster to reducing vulnerabilities beforehand.
• People-centric approach: Empower local communities with knowledge, skills, and resources for adaptation.
• Long-term vision: Align urban planning, road construction, and agriculture with National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) and State Action Plans on Climate Change (SAPCCs).
• International linkage: India can also draw from global best practices in floodplain zoning (Netherlands), slope stabilisation (Japan), and community-based disaster preparedness (Philippines).

Conclusion:

• India cannot afford to treat extreme monsoon events as “unprecedented”.
• The evidence shows a recurring pattern. Unless preventive strategies — resilient infrastructure, ecological safeguards, and local preparedness — are prioritised alongside relief, every monsoon will trigger a cycle of loss and recovery.
• Reducing vulnerabilities, not just boosting response, is the real measure of resilience.

UPSC PYQ

Q. With reference to ‘Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD)’ sometimes mentioned in the news while forecasting Indian monsoon, which of the following statements is/are correct? (2017)

1. The IOD phenomenon is characterized by a difference in sea surface temperature between tropical Western Indian Ocean and tropical Eastern Pacific Ocean.
2. An IOD phenomenon can influence an El Nino’s impact on the monsoon.

Select the correct answer using the code given below:

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(c) Both 1 and 2

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Ans: (b)

CARE MCQ

Q. Consider the following statements about India’s monsoon vulnerabilities:

1. Erratic monsoon rainfall in India increasingly arrives in concentrated bursts, causing floods in plains and landslides in the Himalayas.
2. Despite improved forecasting, the translation of heavy rainfall predictions into reliable ground-level warnings remains inadequate.
3. Compensatory afforestation undertaken after developmental projects often restores the same biodiversity and soil-holding capacity as the original forests.
4. Current disaster management in India relies more on post-disaster relief operations than on preventive measures such as slope-safe engineering and community preparedness.

Which of the above statements are correct?

(A) 1 and 2 only
(B) 1, 2 and 4 only
(C) 2, 3 and 4 only
(D) 1, 2, 3 and 4

Answer- B

Explanation

• Statement 1 is correct: Rainfall patterns have shifted to short, intense bursts instead of evenly spread showers. This results in flash floods in plains (e.g., Punjab, Delhi) and landslides in fragile Himalayan slopes (e.g., Himachal Pradesh, J&K).
• Statement 2 is correct: The IMD’s forecasting capacity has improved, but effective last-mile warning systems and community-level preparedness remain weak, leaving populations vulnerable.
• Statement 3 is incorrect: Compensatory afforestation is often quantitative, not qualitative. Replanted forests do not match the biodiversity, soil-binding capacity, or ecological services of the natural forests lost to development projects.
• Statement 4 is correct: India’s disaster management remains largely reactive, focusing on relief and rescue after the damage. Preventive strategies such as slope-safe engineering, urban flood-proofing, and systematic drills are insufficiently implemented.
• Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

33 Years after the Rio Earth Summit

Source: Down To Earth

UPSC Syllabus Relevance: GS3 Environment and Ecology

Context: Rio Earth Summit

Why in News?

The 1992 Rio Earth Summit enshrined Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR), but 33 years later its principles are diluted in climate and trade talks.

Introduction

• The 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), popularly called the Rio Earth Summit, was a watershed moment in global environmental governance.
• It established the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and enshrined the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR), recognising that while climate change is a shared challenge, developed nations—historically responsible for emissions—must take the lead in mitigation and provide financial and technological support to the developing world.
• Now, 33 years later, the promises of Rio remain only partially realised. A new conversation has emerged around equity, development, and the need for contextualised pathways in the Global South.
• The reflections of Sunita Narain and Anumita Roychowdhury from the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) provide key insights into what Rio achieved, what went wrong, and how to move forward.

(Image Source: yves-rocher-fondation)

The Mood at Rio (1992): Principles and Promise

• Unprecedented participation: 125 countries, 100 heads of state, 12,000 delegates—signalling global urgency.
• Key outcomes of Rio Declaration:
  • CBDR principle – historic emitters to lead in reducing emissions.
  • Sovereign rights over resources – preventing external policing of forests and ecosystems.
  • Sustainable consumption – recognising limits to resource use.
  • Non-discriminatory trade safeguards – preventing misuse of environmental norms as protectionist tools.
• Global South’s success:
  • Prevented a binding Forest Convention pushed by the North.
  • Secured a Biodiversity Convention and a Desertification Treaty.
  • United under the G77, countries like India and China argued for fairness in climate governance.

Rio thus provided a moral framework: equity, fairness, and trust as the foundation of climate negotiations.

What Went Wrong: From Rio to Paris

1. Dilution of Principles

   • While Rio laid down CBDR, subsequent processes weakened it.
   • The Paris Agreement (2015) shifted to voluntary pledges (Nationally Determined Contributions), abandoning the rules-based, equity-driven framework of Rio.

2. Geopolitical Shifts

   • With the fall of the Berlin Wall, global commerce and WTO-driven trade liberalisation overshadowed environmental commitments.
   • Manufacturing moved to China, making it the largest emitter, while Western nations avoided deep cuts.

3. Finance and Technology Gaps

   • Developed nations promised $100 billion annually for climate finance but consistently fell short.
   • Transfer of green technology remained limited, keeping developing nations dependent.

4. Climate Justice Diluted

   • The original idea of Annex 1 countries (historical polluters) taking the lead was blurred.
   • Developed nations externalised their carbon footprint through offshoring production.

The Missing Link: Development-Centric Environmentalism

• At Rio: Environment was framed as a global commons issue, but the link with development pathways was underemphasised.
• Today: The Global South recognises that environmentalism cannot be anti-growth. Instead, it must be about co-benefits—green growth, livelihoods, and resilience.

Examples:

• West emphasises electric cars; India talks about mobility transformation for efficient use of scarce minerals.
• South demands solutions that reduce debt burdens, not more loans.

Thus, the environmental agenda must align with developmental justice.

Rethinking Equity Today

Equity in 2025 goes beyond carbon space allocation:

1. Trade Equity: Preventing environmental norms from becoming hidden protectionism.
2. Financial Equity: Ensuring access to affordable capital for green transitions.
3. Technological Equity: Sharing green technologies without restrictive IPR regimes.
4. Developmental Equity: Allowing 70% of the world—still in need of development—the right to grow sustainably.

Equity today means embedding fairness into markets, supply chains, and trade policies, not just emissions negotiations.

The Way Forward: Towards a Green Development Regime

1. Neolocalisation and Resilience: Strengthening local economies, livelihoods, and food systems to counter global shocks.
2. South-South Cooperation: New alliances in green technology, renewable energy, and climate finance.
3. Contextualised Pathways: Different regions adopting diverse green solutions suited to their circumstances.
4. Rewriting Global Trade Rules: Integrating climate justice into WTO frameworks to prevent growth–environment trade-offs.
5. Operationalising Equity: Moving from abstract principles to concrete mechanisms in finance, technology transfer, and trade.

Conclusion

• The soul of Rio (1992)—equity, fairness, and justice—remains more relevant than ever. But the past three decades show that principles without institutionalisation lead to dilution.
• For the Global South, the challenge is not to resist environmentalism but to own it as a development agenda.
• As the world faces intensifying climate turbulence, the task is to rewrite the rules of trade, finance, and cooperation so that sustainability becomes synonymous with growth.

UPSC PYQ

Q. With reference to the Agreement at the UNFCCC Meeting in Paris in 2015, which of the following statements is/are correct? (2016)

1. The Agreement was signed by all the member countries of the UN and it will go into effect in 2017.
2. The Agreement aims to limit the greenhouse gas emissions so that the rise in average global temperature by the end of this century does not exceed 2ºC or even 1.5ºC above pre-industrial levels.
3. Developed countries acknowledged their historical responsibility in global warming and committed to donate $ 1000 billion a year from 2020 to help developing countries to cope with climate change.

Select the correct answer using the code given below:

(a) 1 and 3 only
(b) 2 only
(c) 2 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3

Ans: (b) 

CARE MCQ

Q. With reference to the Rio Earth Summit, 1992, consider the following statements:

1. The principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR) was formally recognised in the Rio Declaration.
2. The Summit led to the adoption of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
3. The legally binding Forest Convention was adopted at Rio to regulate the world’s forests.

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

A. 1 and 2 only
B. 2 and 3 only
C. 1 and 3 only
D. 1, 2 and 3

Answer- A

Explanation –

• Statement 1 is correct: The Rio Declaration (1992) enshrined the principle of CBDR, recognising differentiated obligations for developed and developing countries in addressing global environmental challenges.
• Statement 2 is correct: The UNFCCC was adopted at the Rio Earth Summit and came into force in 1994, laying the foundation for later climate treaties like the Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement.
• Statement 3 is incorrect: The proposed Forest Convention—pushed by developed countries—was opposed by the Global South (with India playing a key role). Instead, only non-binding forest principles were agreed upon, not a binding convention.
• Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

Women’s Safety in Urban India

Source: The Hindu

UPSC Syllabus Relevance: GS2 Social Justice

Context: NARI 2025 Index

Why in News?

The NARI 2025 Index ranked Kohima, Visakhapatnam, Bhubaneswar, Aizawl, Gangtok, Itanagar, and Mumbai as the safest cities for women, while Patna, Jaipur, Delhi, and Kolkata ranked among the least safe.

Introduction

• Women’s safety remains one of the most critical indicators of a society’s inclusiveness and progress.
• Despite legal reforms, government initiatives, and civil society engagement, women’s lived experiences often reflect continuing vulnerabilities in public and private spaces.
• The National Annual Report and Index on Women’s Safety (NARI) 2025, based on the perceptions of 12,770 women across 31 cities, provides fresh insights into the condition of safety, highlighting regional disparities, institutional strengths, and persistent social challenges.

Key Findings of the NARI 2025 Index

1. National Safety Score

• The national average safety score was 65%.
• Cities were categorized as “much above,” “above,” “below,” or “much below” this benchmark.

2. Top-Ranked Cities

• Kohima, Visakhapatnam, Bhubaneswar, Aizawl, Gangtok, Itanagar, and Mumbai emerged as the safest.
• Their strength lies in gender equity, strong civic participation, better policing, and women-friendly infrastructure.

(Image Source: The Hindu)

3. Lowest-Ranked Cities

• Patna, Jaipur, Faridabad, Delhi, Kolkata, Srinagar, and Ranchi scored the lowest.
• They suffer from weak institutional responsiveness, patriarchal norms, and gaps in infrastructure.

4. Perceptions of Safety

• 6 in 10 women felt safe in their city.
• 40% still felt “not so safe” or “unsafe.”
• Safety was perceived highest in educational institutions (86%) during the day, but dropped sharply at night or in off-campus areas.
• Public transport and recreational spaces recorded low safety confidence, particularly after dark.

5. Workplace Safety

• 91% of women reported feeling safe at workplaces.
• However, half were unsure about POSH (Prevention of Sexual Harassment) policies.
• Where such policies existed, they were generally rated as effective.

6. Harassment Trends

• 7% of women reported harassment in public spaces in 2024.
• Among women under 24, this doubled to 14%.
• Neighbourhoods (38%) and public transport (29%) were flagged as harassment hotspots.
• Only 1 in 3 victims reported incidents, leading to major under-reporting in NCRB data.

7. Trust in Authorities

• Only 25% trusted authorities to act effectively on complaints.
• 69% found current efforts somewhat adequate, while over 30% noted major gaps.
• 65% believed safety had improved between 2023–24, though progress was uneven.

Broader Dimensions of Women’s Safety

The report, supported by the NCW, emphasized that women’s safety must be seen beyond law-and-order and linked to:

1. Physical Security – Protection from violence, harassment, and unsafe public spaces.
2. Psychological Security – Freedom from fear and mental harassment.
3. Financial Security – Equal opportunities, wages, and workplace dignity.
4. Digital Security – Cybercrimes, online harassment, and data misuse.

Institutional and Social Measures Highlighted

Positive Steps

• Rising representation of women in police forces (up to 33% in some UTs) boosted trust.
• Helplines, CCTV coverage in smart cities, women drivers in public transport, and safer railway/bus depots were cited as confidence-building measures.

Gaps and Challenges

• Patriarchal norms and weak institutional accountability in many cities.
• Under-reporting of harassment incidents due to lack of trust and fear of stigma.
• Poor safety infrastructure in public spaces, particularly toilets, lighting, and surveillance.
• Limited awareness about workplace safety mechanisms like POSH.

Policy Significance

The NARI index stresses that official crime data (NCRB) underrepresents women’s real experiences, as two out of three incidents of harassment go unreported. Perception-based surveys like NARI are thus critical for:

• Evidence-based policymaking.
• Designing city-specific interventions tailored to urban realities.
• Linking women’s safety with broader development goals of education, mobility, employment, and health.

Recommendations

1. Integrating NCRB data with perception-based surveys for a holistic picture.
2. Strengthening urban infrastructure – street lighting, last-mile transport, clean toilets, safe recreational areas.
3. Expanding women’s participation in policing and civic administration.
4. Enforcing POSH policies uniformly across workplaces and ensuring awareness.
5. Community engagement – involving local bodies, RWAs, and civil society in safety drives.
6. Cybersecurity safeguards – stronger mechanisms against online harassment and data misuse.
7. Public accountability mechanisms – ensuring grievance redressal systems are transparent and trusted.

Conclusion

• The NARI 2025 Index shows that while progress has been made in creating safer environments for women, particularly in certain northeastern and coastal cities, deep challenges remain in many urban centers due to entrenched patriarchal attitudes, weak institutions, and infrastructural deficits.
• Women’s safety must be treated not just as a law-and-order issue, but as a developmental imperative linked to mobility, education, employment, and dignity.

UPSC PYQ

Q.  Which of the following gives ‘Global Gender Gap Index’ ranking to the countries of the world? (2017)
(a) World Economic Forum
(b) UN Human Rights Council
(c) UN Women
(d) World Health Organization

Ans- a

CARE MCQ

Q. Consider the following statements regarding the National Annual Report and Index on Women’s Safety (NARI) 2025:

1. The NARI index is based on a survey of over 12,000 women across 31 Indian cities.
2. Kohima, Visakhapatnam, and Mumbai ranked among the safest cities for women.
3. Patna, Jaipur, and Kolkata ranked among the least safe cities.
4. The NARI index is published by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB).

Which of the statements given above are correct?

A. 1, 2 and 3 only
B. 1 and 4 only
C. 2, 3 and 4 only
D. 1, 2, 3 and 4

Answer- A

Explanation –

• Statement 1 is correct: The NARI index 2025 is based on a survey of 12,770 women across 31 cities, making it perception-based rather than purely crime-statistics based.
• Statement 2 is correct: Cities like Kohima, Visakhapatnam, Bhubaneswar, Aizawl, Gangtok, Itanagar, and Mumbai emerged as the safest cities for women, with higher scores linked to gender equity, better policing, and women-friendly infrastructure.
• Statement 3 is correct: Cities such as Patna, Jaipur, Faridabad, Delhi, Kolkata, Srinagar, and Ranchi ranked the lowest, reflecting poor institutional responsiveness, patriarchal norms, and infrastructural gaps.
• Statement 4 is incorrect: The NARI index is not published by NCRB. It has been conceived by Pvalue Analytics, The NorthCap University, and Jindal Global Law School, and is published by the Group of Intellectuals and Academicians (GIA).
• Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

India’s Demographic Dividend: From Opportunity to “Time Bomb”

Source: The Hindu

UPSC Syllabus Relevance: GS2 Social Justice

Context: India’s Demographic Dividend

Why in News?

India’s demographic dividend—its large youth population—risks turning into a liability due to the mismatch between education, skills, and employability in the age of AI and automation.

Introduction

• India’s demographic dividend refers to the economic growth potential arising from the relatively large share of its working-age population (15–64 years), which currently forms around two-thirds of the total.
• With more than 800 million youth below 35, India has often been called the “youngest major economy.” This youth bulge is expected to remain advantageous till the 2040s.
• However, a serious concern looms: if education, skilling, and job creation do not keep pace with technological and economic transformations, this dividend could turn into a demographic liability or even a time bomb, leading to unemployment, social unrest, and wasted potential.

Current Status: The Paradox at Scale

• Youth Advantage: India’s demographic window of opportunity is unmatched globally.
• Skills Gap: According to employer surveys, only 42–43% of Indian graduates are job-ready.
• Career Misalignment: 93% of high school students know only 6–7 career options, mostly traditional (doctor, engineer, lawyer), whereas the modern economy offers 20,000+ career paths.
• AI Disruption: By 2030, global estimates suggest 170 million new jobs will be created, but 92 million will be displaced due to automation and AI-driven changes.
• Graduate Employability: Nearly 40–50% of engineering graduates remain unemployed or underemployed.
• Women in Workforce: Female labour force participation has risen recently but remains dominated by low-paying informal/self-employment.

(Image Source: the Hindu)

Challenges

1. Education–Employment Mismatch

• Outdated curricula lag behind fast-changing industry needs.
• Education system is examination-centric with limited focus on practical skills, creativity, or problem-solving.
• Internships and apprenticeships are exceptions, not the norm.

2. Narrow Career Awareness

• Most students lack career guidance and are pushed into “safe” but saturated degrees.
• More than 65% of high school graduates pursue degrees misaligned with their aptitude or market demand.

3. Technology & AI Disruption

• Routine jobs (clerical, repetitive cognitive/manual) are at high risk of automation.
• Emerging sectors (AI, data science, renewable energy, fintech, EVs, health tech, creative industries) need new-age skills.
• Curriculum update cycles (3–4 years) fail to match industry cycles (6–18 months).

4. Quality of Skilling Initiatives

• Skill India Mission aimed to train 400 million by 2022 but fell short; many schemes saw low placement conversion rates.
• Fragmentation of programmes (PMKVY, PMKK, PM-DAKSH, SANKALP, JSS, PM Vishwakarma) leads to inefficiency.

5. Social Risks

• Educated unemployment leads to frustration, brain drain, or social unrest.
• Historical precedent: student agitations during the Mandal Commission (1990s) escalated into widespread violence.
• Rising unemployment among educated youth can destabilize the social contract.

Government Initiatives

1. National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 – holistic, multidisciplinary education, vocational integration, multiple entry-exit system.
2. National Credit Framework (NCrF) – seamless transfer of academic, vocational, and skill credits.
3. Apprenticeship Schemes – NAPS 2.0, NATS for on-the-job training.
4. National Skill Development Mission (NSDM) – umbrella framework for skilling.
5. PMKVY, PM-DAKSH, PM Vishwakarma Yojana, Jan Shikshan Sansthan (JSS) – targeted skilling for youth, artisans, and marginalized groups.
6. Digital India & Atal Tinkering Labs – pushing early exposure to innovation and technology.
7. Start-up India & Stand-up India – encouraging entrepreneurship as an alternative to wage employment.

The Way Forward

1. Align Education with Future of Work

• Curricula must embed digital literacy, AI-awareness, green skills, entrepreneurship.
• Regular industry-academia dialogue for real-time updates.
• Promote work-integrated learning and apprenticeships across disciplines.

2. Expand Career Counselling & Guidance

• Integrate career awareness frameworks at school level.
• Use digital platforms for guidance on 20,000+ career pathways.

3. Skilling & Reskilling at Scale

• Create a National Reskilling Mission for youth and mid-career workers.
• Focus on cross-skilling and life-long learning, especially for AI-disrupted roles.

4. Entrepreneurship & Innovation Push

• Make start-ups, gig work, and social entrepreneurship mainstream career pathways.
• Strengthen credit access, incubation, and mentorship ecosystems.

5. Inclusivity

• Special attention to women, rural youth, and marginalized groups.
• Promote flexible, digital-first learning models to overcome geographic and gender barriers.

Conclusion

• India stands at a decisive demographic crossroads.
• The youth bulge can either propel the nation into becoming a global digital powerhouse or degenerate into a crisis of educated unemployment and social unrest.
• Nobel laureate Tagore’s words ring true: “Don’t limit a child to your own learning, for she was born in another time.”
• India must prepare its youth not for the jobs of yesterday but for the careers of tomorrow.
• The next decade will decide whether the demographic dividend is harnessed as an asset or wasted as a time bomb.

UPSC PYQ

Q. Consider the following specific stages of demographic transition associated with economic development: (2012)

1. Low birthrate with low death rate
2. High birthrate with high death rate
3. High birthrate with low death rate

Select the correct order of the above stages using the codes given below:

(a) 1, 2, 3

(b) 2, 1, 3

(c) 2, 3, 1

(d) 3, 2, 1

Ans: (c)

CARE MCQ

Q. With reference to India’s demographic dividend, consider the following statements:

1. The demographic dividend refers to economic growth potential arising from a higher proportion of working-age population relative to dependents.
2. India’s demographic window is expected to remain favourable until the 2040s.
3. According to recent surveys, more than 80% of Indian graduates are considered job-ready by employers.
4. The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and the National Credit Framework (NCrF) aim to align education with evolving skill requirements.

Which of the above statements are correct?

A. 1 and 2 only
B. 1, 2 and 4 only
C. 1, 3 and 4 only
D. 2 and 3 only

Answer- B

Explanation –

• Statement 1 is correct: The demographic dividend refers to the potential for higher economic growth when the working-age population (15–64 years) is larger relative to dependents (children and elderly). This favourable ratio can increase savings, productivity, and growth if matched with jobs and skills.
• Statement 2 is correct: India’s demographic window of opportunity is projected to continue until the 2040s, giving it a few more decades to reap the benefits of its youth bulge.
• Statement 3 is incorrect: Contrary to the claim, only around 42–43% of graduates are considered job-ready according to employer surveys. This indicates a significant skills–jobs mismatch, not 80% readiness.
• Statement 4 is correct: The NEP 2020 emphasizes multidisciplinary, skill-oriented education, while the NCrF allows seamless credit transfer across academic, vocational, and skill-based learning — both aiming to align education with future workforce needs.
• Therefore, option B is the correct answer.