Animal Health Security Project  

GS 3: Economy: Economics of Animal Rearing

Why is it in the news?

• The Indian government has recently launched the Animal Health Security Strengthening in India for Pandemic Preparedness and Response project, a key initiative to improve the nation’s ability to prevent, detect, and respond to animal health threats that could lead to future pandemics.
• This project aims to bolster India’s animal health infrastructure to protect both public health and economic stability from zoonotic diseases.

More about the news

• The project is financed by the Pandemic Fund, established by G20 countries under Indonesia’s presidency in 2022 to aid low- and middle-income countries in pandemic preparedness.
• In its first investment round, the Fund raised $2 billion, receiving 350 expressions of interest and 180 full proposals from various countries.
• India’s proposal, developed by the Union animal husbandry department, was among 19 selected, securing a $25 million grant to support this initiative.
• Scheduled for completion by August 2026, the project will be carried out with the support of three international agencies: the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the World Bank, and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
• These agencies will assist India in meeting its objectives of enhancing animal health monitoring systems and controlling zoonotic diseases.

Key Interventions

• The project will focus on several crucial interventions to establish a strong animal health system which includes strengthening disease surveillance and early warning systems, upgrading laboratory networks, improving interoperable data systems, and enhancing data analytics and risk communication.
• It will also address transboundary animal disease security and foster regional cooperation through cross-border collaboration.
• The overarching goal is to reduce the risk of pathogen transmission from animals to humans, thereby protecting public health, nutritional security, and the livelihoods of vulnerable populations.

Rationale for the Project

• The initiative responds to an urgent need, as five of the six public health emergencies declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) in recent decades were zoonotic, including COVID-19.
• With two-thirds of infectious diseases affecting humans originating from animals, a robust focus on animal health security is crucial for future pandemic prevention.
• India, with its large livestock population of 536 million, needs robust systems to prevent, manage, and respond to infectious disease outbreaks effectively.

Expected Outcomes

• The Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry, and Dairying has identified five main outcomes for the project.

1) Enhancing laboratory systems and vaccine manufacturing capacity,

2) Strengthening surveillance and early warning mechanisms,

3) Building human resource capacity and competency,

4) Advancing data systems and risk communication, and

5) Addressing cross-cutting institutional capacity gaps at national and regional levels.

• Together, these outcomes aim to create a sustainable, resilient animal health infrastructure to safeguard human health by mitigating zoonotic disease risks.

Taking Stock of the International Solar Alliance

GS 3: Environment and Biodiversity: Promoting Solar Energy

Why is it in the news?

• Launched by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in 2015, the International Solar Alliance (ISA) was created to promote solar energy deployment in developing regions.
• Though solar energy has seen global growth, its uptake in the Global South remains slow, and the ISA, with over 110 member countries, has made limited progress in catalyzing solar deployment in these areas.

Formation and Objectives of ISA

• The ISA was established at the 2015 Paris Climate Conference as a joint initiative between India, France, and other nations to encourage solar adoption, especially in developing countries.
• India’s leadership in founding the ISA marked a unique commitment to creating a global organization focused on sustainability. ISA’s role as a facilitator was to help member countries overcome financial, technological, and regulatory barriers to solar energy.
• However, nearly a decade on, no ISA-supported solar project is operational, though Cuba’s 60 MW solar plant is in the preparatory phase, with other countries in Africa and Latin America poised to follow.

Challenges in Solar Expansion and ISA’s Constraints

• The ISA’s progress has been slow compared to rapid global solar expansion. With global solar capacity growing over 20% annually—and a 30% increase in 2023 alone, largely due to China—ISA’s efforts appear modest.
• China added 62% of the 345 GW of global solar capacity in 2023, with over 80% of solar investments directed toward developed nations, China, and large developing countries like India.
• Smaller developing countries, particularly in Africa, face steep entry barriers like regulatory uncertainty, lack of local expertise, and limited experience with large-scale projects, deterring foreign investment.

ISA’s Initiatives to Overcome Barriers

• To address these challenges, the ISA has collaborated with governments to create regulatory frameworks, draft power purchase agreements, and develop local expertise through initiatives like the STAR (Solar Technology and Applications Resource) centres. These centres work with local institutions to build capacity in solar technology.
• ISA has set ambitious goals of deploying 1,000 GW of solar energy and unlocking a trillion dollars in solar investments by 2030.
• According to ISA Director General Ajay Mathur, these foundational efforts are expected to pay off soon, with multiple countries preparing tenders for solar projects.

The Role of Solar Energy in Climate Action

• As a key driver in the shift to clean energy, solar power plays a critical role in combating climate change. It is currently the fastest-growing renewable energy source and, in areas with abundant sunlight, one of the cheapest.
• Meeting global net-zero goals by 2050 requires a significant increase in solar capacity, projected to grow three- to fifteen-fold.
• However, solar deployment remains concentrated, with China holding 43% of global solar PV capacity, while Africa, home to 80% of the 745 million people lacking electricity, accounts for less than 2% of new solar installations.
• The ISA was created to address these disparities and reduce reliance on China’s concentrated solar manufacturing.

India’s Strategic Role in the ISA

• For India, the ISA is more than an energy alliance; it is a key diplomatic tool for strengthening ties with the Global South, especially in Africa. Though a multilateral organization, the ISA is closely associated with India.
• Headquartered in New Delhi and primarily funded by India, it has been chaired by India since its founding and will remain so at least until 2026. The ISA’s success is thus a reflection of India’s leadership and commitment to the Global South, a priority for Prime Minister Modi.
• However, ISA has been limited by inadequate staffing, funding, and coordination with India’s Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, its main government liaison.
• Despite its aspirations, the ISA has yet to fully leverage its role to drive solar adoption in countries urgently in need of affordable and reliable energy sources.

Tracking CSR Contributions to Agriculture

GS 3: Economy: Making CSR in Agriculture Effective

Why is it in the news?

• India became the first country to legally mandate Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) with the introduction of Section 135 of the Companies Act 2013, a decade ago.
• Since then, CSR contributions have increased significantly, with ₹1.84 lakh crore disbursed between 2014 and 2023. As CSR funding grows, there is a growing interest in directing these resources towards agriculture, a crucial sector for India’s economy.

Agriculture’s Role in India’s Economy

• Agriculture is a significant sector in India, employing nearly 47% of the population, well above the global average of 25%. Despite this large workforce, agriculture contributes only 16.73% to India’s GDP.
• While food production in India is stable, issues such as resource degradation, stagnant farmer incomes, and climate change remain major challenges, highlighting the need for targeted interventions that CSR can help address.

CSR’s Role in Agricultural Development

• Recent years have seen corporate entities prioritizing agriculture in their CSR initiatives, particularly in areas of climate action and sustainability.
• According to a report by a CSR platform, 23% of companies surveyed have focused on “environment and sustainability” as key CSR priorities. CSR activities have historically supported agricultural development through initiatives like grain banks, farmer schools, water conservation projects, and energy-efficient irrigation systems.
• As the shift towards sustainable agriculture accelerates, CSR funding is expected to continue playing a pivotal role in meeting the capital and infrastructure needs of Indian agriculture.

Challenges in Tracking CSR Contributions to Agriculture

• A major hurdle in maximizing CSR’s potential for agriculture is the lack of a proper system to track and categorize funds directed specifically towards agricultural sustainability.
• CSR activities are often spread across 11 out of the 29 sectors listed in Schedule VII of the Companies Act, such as gender equality, agroforestry, and rural development.
• However, these broad categories make it difficult to isolate and monitor funds allocated to agriculture, which hinders accurate impact assessments and effective resource allocation.

Recommendations for Improvement

• To enhance CSR’s contribution to agriculture, it is essential to recognize agriculture as a distinct sector in CSR activities. A reporting framework that clearly identifies sectors receiving CSR funds would improve transparency, streamline contributions, and help better target resources.
• Additionally, directing CSR funds towards specific sustainability challenges in agroecosystems will lead to more measurable changes and ensure that CSR plays a more significant role in the development of sustainable agriculture.

UP: New Rules for Appointing Police Chief

GS 2: Polity and Governance: Police Reforms

Why is it in the news?

• The Uttar Pradesh government has introduced new rules for appointing the state’s Director General of Police (DGP) following a Supreme Court (SC) notice to eight states, including UP, regarding the appointment of temporary DGPs.
• Petitions raised concerns over UP’s appointment of four temporary DGPs in the past two years, with the current acting DGP, Prashant Kumar, holding the position since January 2024.
• The petitions argue this violates the SC’s 2006 ruling in the Prakash Singh case, which set guidelines for police reforms.

Overview of the New Rules

• The ‘Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh Selection and Appointment Rules, 2024,’ approved by the state Cabinet, introduce a new selection framework.
• The DGP will be chosen by a committee considering the officer’s service record, experience, and remaining tenure, with eligibility restricted to those having at least six months of service left before retirement.
• The appointed DGP will serve a minimum tenure of two years. The selection committee will be headed by a retired High Court judge and include members such as the UP Chief Secretary, a nominee from the UPSC, and retired DGPs.

Current Appointment Process

• Under the new rules, UP reduces the Centre’s role in DGP appointments by eliminating the need to send a list of officers to the UPSC, as required under the SC’s 2006 guidelines.
• Previously, the state government would send a list of senior officers to the UPSC three months before the incumbent DGP’s retirement. The UPSC would vet the list and provide a shortlist of three officers for the state to select from.
• The SC also mandated that the DGP should have a two-year tenure and at least six months of service remaining.

Reasons Behind UP’s New Rules

• The new rules respond to the SC’s contempt notice over the appointment of temporary DGPs, with petitions arguing that this violated the SC’s directions to prevent political interference in police leadership.
• While the SC’s directives were to remain in force until states enact their own laws, UP had not done so, unlike 17 other states. These new rules aim to bring UP in line with the SC’s guidelines, though there are concerns about their adequacy.

Compliance with SC’s Directions

• The new rules partially align with the SC’s guidelines, particularly regarding the two-year tenure and the six-month service requirement. However, the SC had advised states to pass their own Police Acts, which UP has not done, instead framing rules under the 1861 Indian Police Act.
• Critics argue that this approach may not fully fulfil the SC’s spirit of police reforms. Former UP DGP Prakash Singh has expressed concerns that while the rules reflect some SC guidelines, they may still violate the court’s previous rulings.

SC Judgements on DGP Appointment

• In 2018, the SC ruled that states should not appoint temporary DGPs and that the appointee should have at least two years of service left. This was later modified in 2019 to require at least six months of service.
• The 2018 ruling also stated that any state laws or rules contradicting the SC’s directives would be suspended until reviewed. These rulings were prompted by concerns over states enacting laws or rules that circumvented the SC’s directions.

Comparison with Other States

• Other states that have passed their own Police Acts follow UPSC guidelines or form selection committees to appoint DGPs from a list of the five senior-most eligible officers.
• In comparison, UP’s current DGP, Prashant Kumar, is ranked 13th in seniority, raising concerns about using seniority alone as the determining factor for the DGP role.
• Some state officials argue that an officer’s service record alone should not be the sole criterion, and suggest that broader evaluation methods, such as 360-degree reviews, should be considered.

Airships: A Resurgence Driven by Climate Change Concerns

GS 3: Science and Technology: Making Airships Viable

Why is it in the news?

• Airships, once envisioned as the future of travel, are seeing a revival in the context of growing climate change concerns.
• Though airships were the first aircraft capable of controlled powered flight and were initially seen as a breakthrough in aviation in the early 20th century, they were eventually overshadowed by the rapid development of airplanes.
• Today, airships are primarily used for advertising, scientific and military observations, and tourism. However, a few companies are now working to overcome historical challenges, particularly in controlling buoyancy, to make airships more viable for cargo transportation.

How Airships Operate

• Airships are lighter-than-air aircraft that generate lift through gases less dense than the surrounding atmosphere, similar to how helium balloons work. In the early days, hydrogen was used as the lifting gas because it was cheap and light.
• However, hydrogen’s flammability, most notably highlighted by the Hindenburg disaster in 1937, led to a decline in airship use. Today, helium, which is non-combustible, is the standard lifting gas for airships.
• Despite its safety advantages, helium is expensive and scarce, with the cost of one cubic meter required to lift one kilogram of weight around $35.

The Challenge of Buoyancy Adjustment

• While airplanes outperform airships in speed, airships have a key advantage in freight transport due to their high “lift-to-drag ratio,” meaning they consume less fuel to carry the same weight.
• However, a major challenge for airships is varying their buoyancy to accommodate changes in weight as cargo is loaded or unloaded.
• While it seems logical to release or refill the lifting gas to adjust buoyancy, helium’s high cost and limited supply make this approach impractical. Solving the buoyancy challenge remains a crucial hurdle for airships to be used in large-scale cargo transport.

Innovative Solutions for Buoyancy Control

• To address the buoyancy issue, some companies are exploring the use of ballast, a method similar to what is used in hot air balloons and submarines.
• The French company Flying Whales has developed the LCA60T, a 200-meter-long helium airship designed as a “flying crane.” This airship can pick up water ballast mid-flight, making it suitable for transporting heavy items such as rocket sections, powerline towers, logs, and prefabricated hospitals to remote areas, all without needing specialized ground infrastructure.
• Another company, Aeros, based in Los Angeles, has developed a system that could allow airships to serve as floating warehouses for drones, facilitating e-commerce deliveries.
• However, critics argue that the compression system for buoyancy control might be too heavy to be practical for commercial use. While these technologies are still in the experimental phase, they offer promising solutions to long-standing challenges in airship transport.

Environmental Benefits and Future Prospects

• The aviation industry faces growing pressure due to its significant carbon footprint, making airships an appealing alternative. Unlike airplanes, airships do not require fossil fuels to generate lift, making them far less polluting.
• Additionally, airships can access locations that are difficult for trucks or ships to reach, offering potential benefits for remote or heavy cargo transport.
• While these airship technologies are still years away from widespread commercial use, they represent a potential solution to reduce emissions in the transport sector, especially for industries requiring heavy lifting or deliveries to hard-to-reach areas.

Supreme Court Limits State Control Over Private Property

GS 2: Polity and Governance: Regulating Private Resources

Why is it in the news?

• In a landmark ruling, a nine-judge Supreme Court Bench, with an 8:1 majority, determined that not all private resources can be classified as “material resources of the community” for state use in serving the “common good.”
• This decision overturns a longstanding 1977 interpretation that had enabled broad government acquisition of private property, significantly shifting the limits of state control.

Constitutional Framework and Article 39(b)

• The Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) in Part IV of the Constitution set out principles for achieving social and economic justice. Among them, Article 39(b) directs that community resources should be controlled and distributed to serve the common good.
• Initially, the Constitution protected property rights as a Fundamental Right under Articles 19(1)(f) and 31, guaranteeing compensation for acquisitions. However, the 25th Amendment in 1971 introduced Article 31C, allowing laws enacted under Articles 39(b) and (c) to override Fundamental Rights.
• The Supreme Court upheld Article 31C’s validity in the Kesavananda Bharati case in 1973 but reclassified property rights as constitutional, not fundamental, in 1978 under Article 300A, limiting acquisitions to cases with a public purpose and fair compensation.

Expanding State Control in Early Judgments

• In the 1977 State of Karnataka vs. Ranganatha Reddy case, the Supreme Court upheld a Karnataka law nationalizing private bus services. Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer’s separate opinion broadened Article 39(b) to include all public and private wealth essential for meeting material needs, a view that influenced later cases.
• This interpretation supported rulings in Sanjeev Coke Manufacturing Company vs. Bharat Coking Coal Limited (1982) and Mafatlal Industries Limited vs. Union of India (1996), which upheld nationalization by applying Iyer’s broad reading.

Current Ruling: Narrowing the Definition of Material Resources

• In Property Owners’ Association vs. State of Maharashtra, the Supreme Court re-evaluated Article 39(b), rejecting Justice Iyer’s interpretation as too aligned with a socialist model that promoted extensive government control.
• The new ruling, led by the Chief Justice, defines “material resources of the community” more narrowly, applying the “public trust doctrine” and factoring in resource characteristics, importance to community well-being, scarcity, and impacts of private ownership.
• While resources like forests, minerals, and other natural assets may still fall under state control, not all private properties qualify solely based on their utility.

Divergent Views on Private Property and Legislative Authority

• Justice Nagarathna partially concurred with the majority, adding that while all private resources, except personal items like clothing and jewellery, could potentially be state-controlled, this should be through selective government intervention.
• Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, in dissent, supported Iyer’s view from Ranganatha Reddy, arguing that legislative, rather than judicial, bodies should decide the distribution and control of resources.

Implications and Future Considerations

• This ruling aligns with India’s shift from a socialist model to a market-driven economy, which has alleviated poverty but also increased inequality.
• The judgment could protect small landholders and marginalized communities from government land acquisition, while promoting sustainable management of natural resources for future generations, reinforcing the principle that these resources are borrowed from future generations rather than inherited from the past.