UPSC Daily Current Affairs – 10th December 2025

UPSC Daily Current Affairs - 10th December 2025

News at a Glance

Biostimulants: The Green Solution for Sustainable Indian Agriculture

Source: Down to earth

Relevance: GS Paper III – Agriculture, Biotechnology, Environment

Important Key Concepts for Prelims and Mains:

For Prelims:

Biostimulants, Fertiliser Control Order (FCO) 1985, Schedule VI, Protein Hydrolysates, Humic & Fulvic Acids, Seaweed Extracts, Bio-efficacy Trials, Circular Bioeconomy

For Mains:

Soil Fertility Decline, Climate Resilience, Sustainable Agriculture, Farmer Input Dependency, Blue Economy, Regulatory Governance, Eco-friendly Agro-inputs

Why in News?

India’s overdependence on chemical fertilisers has led to soil degradation, pollution, and high input dependency. Fertiliser use reached 139.81 kg/ha nationally and 247.61 kg/ha in Punjab, while contributing 19% of agriculture-related GHG emissions. With rising climate stress, biostimulants are gaining attention as a sustainable alternative.

What Are Biostimulants?

Biostimulants are eco-friendly agricultural inputs consisting of substances or micro-organisms that stimulate natural plant processes independent of nutrient content. They do not function as fertilisers but enhance the plant’s ability to utilise available nutrients, tolerate stress, and improve yield quality.

Their functions include:
• Enhancing nutrient uptake
• Boosting stress tolerance
• Improving crop quality
• Strengthening resilience under climate stress (heat, salinity, drought)

Biostimulants deliver ecosystem benefits such as improved nutrient efficiency, soil carbon sequestration, biodiversity enhancement, and promotion of circular bioeconomy pathways. Their alignment with SDGs—

Zero Hunger,
Climate Action,
Life on Land,
Sustainable Production—positions them as a cornerstone of green agriculture.

Why Biostimulants Matter for Agriculture

Biostimulants provide multiple agronomic and ecological advantages:

• Nutrient-use efficiency – Improved absorption and mobilisation of nutrients already present in the soil.
• Soil carbon sequestration – Strengthens soil structure and long-term fertility.
• Climate resilience – Enhances plant ability to withstand drought, salinity, and temperature fluctuations.
• Biodiversity enhancement – Supports beneficial soil microbes and ecological balance.
• Circular bioeconomy – Many biostimulants utilise agricultural and food waste, converting it into value-added products.

These benefits contribute to sustainable agriculture by reducing chemical dependency and improving environmental outcomes.

Challenges in the Adoption of Biostimulants

Despite their potential, biostimulants face several barriers:

• Limited farmer awareness and lack of field demonstrations
• Insufficient scientific understanding of plant-biostimulant interactions
• Variable performance across soil types and agro-climatic zones
• Weak extension services
• Presence of unregulated or substandard products in the past, reducing farmer trust

These challenges underline the need for regulation, education, and scientific validation.

India’s Regulatory Framework for Biostimulants

To address quality concerns and market proliferation, the Government of India introduced Schedule VI under the Fertiliser Control Order (FCO) 1985 in February 2021. Key provisions include:

• Classification of biostimulants into nine categories (botanical extracts, humic acids, protein hydrolysates, vitamins, antioxidants, live microbes, etc.)
• Mandatory bio-efficacy trials across agro-climatic zones
• Toxicity analysis, chemical characterisation, and heavy-metal testing

Initially, nearly 30,000 products operated with provisional approvals. After the expiry period on June 16, 2025, only 132 rigorously tested products remain approved. These products cater mainly to:

• Vegetables: 50%
• Cereals: 18%
• Pulses & oilseeds: 15%
• Fruits: 9%
• Cash crops: 7%

This regulatory tightening improves product reliability and enhances farmer confidence.

Seaweed-Based Biostimulants: India’s Emerging Opportunity

Seaweed extracts dominate 41% of the global biostimulant market. India has begun exploring seaweed farming as a high-potential, sustainable industry.

Applications of Seaweed Extracts

• Improve plant metabolism, root growth, disease resistance
• Enhance abiotic stress tolerance
• Provide valuable hydrocolloids (agar, alginate, carrageenan)
• Used in livestock feed, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics
• Serve as raw material for bioplastics, fertilisers, and biofuels

Seaweed farming is highly resource-efficient—it requires no freshwater, fertilisers, or arable land. According to ICAR–CMFRI, one hectare of Kappaphycus can generate ₹13.28 lakh annually, empowering coastal communities.

India’s Untapped Potential

• Current production: 74,083 tonnes
• Estimated potential: 9.7 million tonnes

Constraints

• Weak supply chains
• Lack of transport and post-harvest facilities
• Limited training
• Ecological risks (pest grazing, climate variability)

Addressing these gaps can position India as a major global seaweed hub while reducing fertiliser imports.

Implications for India

Biostimulants offer multiple benefits for Indian agriculture:

• Reduce reliance on synthetic fertilisers and pesticides
• Improve soil health and long-term fertility
• Strengthen climate resilience across cropping systems
• Lower input costs and enhance farm profitability
• Support India’s commitments to low-carbon, sustainable agriculture
• Enable integration of bioeconomy and blue economy initiatives

The Way Forward

India needs an integrated strategy to realise the full potential of biostimulants:

• Farmer Capacity Building: Large-scale awareness campaigns, demonstrations, and digital advisory platforms.
• Strengthened R&D: Investment in molecular studies, crop-specific formulations, and synergy with biofertilisers.
• Policy Support: Streamlined approvals, strict quality checks, and incentives for biotech startups.
• Infrastructure Development: Seaweed processing units, agro-waste utilisation facilities, cold chains.
• Financial Access: Credit lines, subsidies, tax incentives for adoption.
• Public–Private Partnerships: Collaboration between research institutions, biotech firms, cooperatives, and global players.

A coordinated approach can anchor biostimulants into mainstream agricultural practice.

Conclusion

Biostimulants represent a transformative tool for India’s shift toward sustainable and climate-resilient agriculture. Their ability to improve nutrient efficiency, restore soil health, enhance biodiversity, and reduce chemical dependency makes them central to future farming systems. With robust regulation, scientific investment, and farmer empowerment, India can emerge as a global leader in biostimulant innovation while ensuring food security and ecological stability.

CARE MCQ

Q. Biostimulants differ from fertilisers primarily because they:

(a) Directly supply essential nutrients to plants
(b) Stimulate plant physiological processes independent of nutrient content
(c) Function as substitutes for insecticides
(d) Are only derived from microbial sources

Correct Answer: (b)

Explanation

Biostimulants do NOT act like fertilisers.
Fertilisers supply nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium directly to the plant. Their primary function is nutrient provision.
Biostimulants work differently:
They stimulate natural plant processes—such as nutrient uptake, hormone regulation, stress tolerance, root growth, and photosynthesis—without supplying nutrients themselves.
This is why the FCO (1985, amended 2021) defines biostimulants as substances whose primary function is physiological stimulation, not nutrient addition.
Option (c) is incorrect because biostimulants are not insecticides and are explicitly excluded from the Insecticides Act, 1968.
Option (d) is incorrect because biostimulants can be derived from both microbial and non-microbial sources (seaweed extracts, humic acids, protein hydrolysates, botanical extracts, etc.).

Karnataka’s Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill, 2025

Source: Indian Express , The Hindu

Relevance: Quick Facts about Hate speech and legal basis, (GS – Paper II, Government Policies & Interventions)

Important Key Concepts for Prelims and Mains:

For Prelims:

Law Commission Report 267, Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(2L), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Sections 196, 299, 353, SC judgements on hate speech, SC/ST Atrocities Act, PCR Act, RPA 1951, Section 66A IT Act (struck down)

For Mains:

Hate speech as governance & societal challenge, Legislative gaps in criminal law, Enforcement challenges & police reforms, Role of Supreme Court & committees, Educational and technological measures for social harmony

Why in News?

Karnataka has become the first state in India to introduce a dedicated law addressing hate speech and hate crimes, titled the Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill, 2025.
The Bill aims to fill a legislative vacuum because India has no statutory definition of hate speech despite its frequent use in society and media.

Background: The legislative gap on hate speech

Unlike many democracies, India lacks a specific, standalone hate speech law.
Existing provisions under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) only indirectly address hate speech by focusing on public order, not speech-based harm.
Low conviction rates (20.2% under previous IPC 153A in 2020 NCRB data).
Supreme Court repeatedly flagged a “climate of hate” and the need for suo motu police action.

Current legal framework for hate speech in India

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Section 196 (ex-IPC 153A): promoting enmity between groups.
Section 299 (ex-IPC 295A): deliberate acts insulting religion.
Section 353: incitement to commit offences endangering public order.
→ These laws regulate group harmony, not hate speech explicitly.

Information Technology Act

Section 66A (once widely used for online hate speech) struck down as unconstitutional in Shreya Singhal (2015).

Representation of People Act, 1951

Section 8 disqualifies persons convicted for promoting enmity.

SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

Punishes caste-based insults and humiliation.

Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955

Penalises inciting or encouraging untouchability.

Supreme Court interventions

Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan (2014)

Asked Law Commission to study and define hate speech.

Tehseen Poonawalla judgment (2018)

Guidelines for preventing mob lynching: nodal officers, fast-track trials, victim compensation.

Shaheen Abdulla v. Union of India (2022)

SC noted increasing climate of hate.
Directed police to file suo motu FIRs without waiting for complaints.

Extension to all states (2023)

SC observations in 2025

Court declined ongoing monitoring.
Emphasised responsibility of police stations and High Courts.

Attempts to define hate speech before the Karnataka Bill

Law Commission Report 267 (2017)

Recommended introducing:

Section 153C → criminalising incitement to hatred
Section 505A → criminalising provocation of violence

Private Member Bill (2022): Hate Speech & Hate Crimes Bill

Provided detailed definitions for hate speech & hate crimes.
Included gender identity and sexual orientation.
Not passed.

Committee recommendations

Viswanathan Committee (2015) → suggested adding offences targeting identity-based prejudice.
Bezbaruah Committee (2014) → proposed amendments addressing racial and regional discrimination.

Key provisions of the Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill, 2025

Definition of hate speech

Expression causing injury, disharmony, hostility, or discrimination based on:

Religion
Race
Caste
Gender
Sexual orientation
Disability
Place of birth

Collective liability

If an organisation is linked to hate speech, office-bearers can be held criminally liable.

Internet regulation

State empowered to block or remove hateful online content.

Punishment

The punishment for hate crime includes imprisonment from one to seven years and a fine of ₹50,000.
For subsequent crimes or repetitive offences, the punishment would be not less than two years, and it would be extended up to 10 years with a fine of ₹1 lakh.
The offences are cognisable, non-bailable, and triable by the Judicial Magistrate First Class.
The above provisions would not extended to any textbook, pamphlet, paper, writing, drawing, painting representation or figure in the electronic media or the publication of which is proved to be justified in the interest of the public good.

Significance of the Karnataka Bill

First formal statutory definition of hate speech in India.
Expands protected categories beyond BNS (includes gender, sexual orientation).
Recognises organisational propaganda and assigns accountability.
Bridges gap between judicial expectations and legislative reality.
Addresses digital hate speech, one of the fastest growing threats.

Challenges in implementation

Risk of misuse against political dissent or satire.
Difficulty in defining “injury” or “disharmony” in constitutional terms.
Enforcement unevenness due to police delays or bias.
Potential Centre–State conflict since criminal law is a Concurrent List subject.
Balancing fundamental freedom under Article 19(1)(a) with restrictions under Article 19(2).
Digital platforms may resist state directives without central harmonisation.

Measures needed to effectively curb hate speech

Legal reforms

Introduce clear, narrow, constitutionally valid definition of hate speech.
Adopt Law Commission’s recommendations (Sections 153C and 505A).
Harmonise state law with BNS for national consistency.

Educational measures

Include critical thinking and digital literacy in school curricula.
Promote interfaith and intercultural dialogue.
Sensitise youth to consequences of hate propaganda.

Social measures

Encourage community leaders, NGOs, and civil society to counter polarisation.
Create safe platforms to report hate speech with anonymity.

Technological measures

Use AI-based monitoring tools with privacy safeguards.
Partner with social media companies for faster removal of harmful content.
Strengthen cyber units for early detection of hate trends.

Conclusion

The Karnataka Bill is a pioneering attempt to explicitly legislate against hate speech and hate crimes in India. Its success depends on precise definitions, strong safeguards against misuse, balanced enforcement, and complementary social, educational, and technological strategies. Hate speech is not just a legal challenge—its deeper roots lie in societal attitudes and political polarisation, requiring holistic solutions.

UPSC PYQ

Q1. ‘Right to Privacy’ is protected under which Article of the Constitution of India? (2021)

(a) Article 15

(b) Article 19

(d) Article 29

Ans: (c)

CARE MCQ

Q. Consider the following statements regarding hate speech regulation in India:

The Karnataka Hate Speech Bill is the first legislation in India to formally define “hate speech”.
Section 196 of BNS directly defines hate speech as an offence.
Section 66A of the IT Act continues to be used for online hate speech cases.
The Law Commission’s 267th Report proposed adding two new sections to define hate speech and provocation of violence.

How many of the above statements are correct?

(a) Only One
(b) Only Two
(c) Only Three
(d) All four

Answer: (b)

Statement 1 – Correct
Karnataka’s Bill is indeed the first to define hate speech formally.
Statement 2 – Incorrect
BNS 196 does not define hate speech; it deals with promoting enmity.
Statement 3 – Incorrect
Section 66A was struck down in Shreya Singhal (2015).
Statement 4 – Correct
Law Commission proposed 153C (incitement to hatred) and 505A (provocation of violence).