Pre-cum-Mains GS Foundation Program for UPSC 2026 | Starting from 5th Dec. 2024 Click Here for more information
Source: This post on the Role of Political Decision-making in curbing Air Pollution has been created based on the article “To combat climate change, citizens and government must join hands” published in “Indian Express” on 15th January 2024.
UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 3 Environment – Conservation.
News: The article discusses how the problem of air pollution involves making choices based on multiple trade-offs.
Background:
The problem of air pollution in India, especially in NCR, has now become a perennial problem rather than a seasonal one. Addressing it requires making difficult choices and tough decisions, both at the societal and governmental levels.
What are the trade-offs required in the case of air pollution?
A trade-off is a decision that involves losing something in exchange for gaining something else. It can also be defined as a compromise between two things.
The problem of air pollution involves making choices based on multiple trade-offs between development and environmental preservation.
Who should make these decisions?
According to the author, it is not the scientists (academia), or environmental activists that should make these decisions, but the politicians (governments).
The job of academicians is to generate and present evidence so that these trade-offs are done in an informed manner. Whereas activists have already made the trade-offs (generally pro-environment) which derails further discussion.
The political class, given that they are the chosen representatives of the people, should be the ones to make decisions regarding trade-offs. Unfortunately, they have been unable to do so.
What are the previous examples of political decision-making to curb air pollution?
1) Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Corridor: It segregated traffic to expand road space for public transport at the cost of private four-wheelers. It resulted in increased speed of public transport, increased travel time of private cars and improved pedestrian safety.
However, it was deemed a failure and discontinued. This was because the car-using-middle-class rejected this trade-off between the inconvenience and the multi-fold benefits of using public transport.
2) Odd-Even: Despite a lack of clear evidence of its usefulness and the severity of public inconvenience, it is considered a politically acceptable alternative, perhaps due to its short period.
3) Smog Towers: The lack of effectiveness of smog towers has not prevented them from being installed and actively pursued even now. These promote a public perception of politicians being sensitive to the concerns of the people.
How can the crop-burning issue be addressed effectively?
Multifaceted package: Given the complexity of the problem, it will need a package of technical, regulatory, fiscal, and informational interventions to succeed.
Right Marketing: The solution needs to be marketed well so that all stakeholders feel that an effort is being made and all are contributing their share to the solution.
Right Political Narrative: This can only be done by setting up the right political narrative, which is being hampered due to the fear of the political fallout of such decisions.
What is the role of the public in this case?
Only the public’s support can make it politically acceptable for this issue to be effectively addressed.
However, the public is ready for short-term inconveniences like odd-even, but not for hard decisions like the Diwali firecracker ban. Incentivisation of people by appropriate public policies is required.
Question for practice:
Marketing and setting the right political narrative are a necessary pre-requisite to solve a governance issue through political decision-making. Discuss in the context of the air pollution issue.
