text:
‘The State of Inequality’ report highlights the growing inequality in India
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 26, 2022
The recently released ‘The State of Inequality in India’ report highlights that while India has made remarkable strides in improving the overall conditions of households ensuring proper access to necessities, there are gaps that need to be addressed so that the goals of social progress and shared prosperity are realised. It also notes that the share held by the Top 1% is only increasing, thereby further marginalising the poor.
“The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.” – Franklin Roosevelt
This quote by Roosevelt sums up the importance of our fight against inequality. Inequality is a malaise that permeates through every level of the society. Inequality is relative. Anyone can feel unequal in any circumstances. Therefore, it is important to understand the dynamics behind defining inequality and the associated benchmarks.
Inequality exists in many forms. While the primary driver for inequality is income levels, factors like gender, race, caste, sexual orientation, and religion also play a significant role in deepening inequality. Sometimes, this inequality stems from a larger power structure with a defined hierarchy, that resists any kind of mobility and transformations. This power structure has variables operating at all levels that intensify the vulnerability of the existing inequalities. Despite all these, there is a global consensus on fighting inequality and striving for a more equal and just society.
The recent COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the existing inequalities. A report by Oxfam International, ‘Profiting from Pain’, mentions that a new billionaire is created every 30 hours, while there are million people falling into extreme poverty during the same period. This signals the increasing divide between the haves and have-nots. For a country with existing deepened inequalities like India, this increasing gap of inequality is not good.
Against this backdrop, the Economic Advisory Council (EAC) of the Prime Minister of India, asked the Institute for Competitiveness to study and prepare a comprehensive of the state of Inequality in India. Today’s story looks at the report published by them, ‘The state of Inequality in India’. The report looks at four key aspects that influence inequality – Income levels and labour profile, health, education and the household characteristics like sanitation, access to electricity and so on.
India’s income levels and labour profile
Extreme differential income levels are a clear sign of inequality. These differential income levels are often due to mismatches in the supply and demand of the labour, the skills and knowledge capabilities, and the access to the formal labour market. The report looks at the previous Periodic Labour Force Survey’s (PLFS) to gain insight into the Indian income profile and labour market characteristics. The report highlights that a monthly salary of Rs. 25,000 is among the top 10% of the total wages earned as per PLFS 2019-20. It also mentions that the top 1% earns more than thrice the bottom 10%. The report compares the PLFS survey reports from 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20 to analyse the income level differential in Indian society.
The above images from the report provide the level of inequality between the top 10% and the rest. Even among the top 10%, there is a variation between different levels indicating the pervasiveness of the inequality. It is observed that nearly 15% of the total workforce earns less than Rs. 50,000 per annum. To understand the income profiles, wage earners are categorized into three groups – regular salaried, self-employed, and casual workers. It is observed that around 45% of total employment is self-employed, followed by regular salaried, accounting for around 34%, and the rest as casual workers. Even among these categories, there is a huge variation in their annual income levels. An overwhelming majority of self-employed earn less than Rs. 20,000, while most casual workers earn from Rs. 20,000 to Rs.1,00,000. For regular salaried, the majority earn above 1 lakh per annum.
The report also highlights that there is a marginal improvement in the labour force participation rate for the past three years, with the female labour force participation rate increasing by nearly 7% from 2017-18 to 2019-20. Despite this increase, female participation is still minimal compared to males.
These statistics indicate a positive trend in earning wages, but this increase is concentrated only in a few segments. The report points out the difficulty in tracing mobility in the absence of income and class-based economic ceilings.
Health
The COVID-19 pandemic showcased the significance of a robust and quality health infrastructure. Any approach towards enhancing health care should focus on availability, accessibility, acceptability, and quality. Access to quality healthcare is a key metric that influences inequality. In the absence of adequate and quality health infrastructure, expenditure incurred on health could be a vital determining factor that drives poverty and inequality. It is often said that ‘our middle class is just one hospital bill away from poverty’.
India recorded an improvement in the health infrastructure in 2019-20 compared to 2005.
This improvement is despite some states like Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, and Jharkhand showing a decline in the number of PHCs. A shortfall in the health infrastructure could lead to an overburdened health care system, which could result in inadequate community interaction and medical attention. In addition to the infrastructure, expenditure determines the affordability of the health care provisioning. The average expenditure in the rural region for government hospitals is Rs. 4,290, while it is Rs. 27,000 for private hospitals excluding childbirth. Similarly, the average expenditure in the urban regions for government hospitals is Rs. 4,400 while it is Rs. 38,000 for a private hospital.  This expenditure is more than what the majority of the population earns annually. The vast difference between the private and government facility expenditure is a cause of concern since the government facilities are more focussed on general ailments for primary and secondary care, while the private focus is on specialized and tertiary care.
In terms of malnutrition and child-birth indicators, there is an improvement across the country. The Stunting under five reduced from 38.4% to 35.5% from NFHS-4 to NFHS-5, while wasting reduced from 21% to 19.3%.  Despite this improvement, India still accounts for the largest number of malnutrition affected children. It is vital to prioritize health and well-being and make sure that the existing socio-economic conditions do not translate into deepening this existing inequality.
The Education gap
Education is a vital component of building human capital and the overall development of the country. It provides an easy path for socio-economic mobility, thereby minimizing inequality. Unfortunately, India had not invested enough in education over the years. The literacy rate still hovers around 80%, but there is a considerable improvement in the physical infrastructure. More than 97% of the schools in India have access to safe drinking water on the premises, and around 95% of the schools have functional toilets, as per the latest government surveys. The share of schools with electricity facilities increased to 83.4% in 2019-20 from 54.6% in 2012-13. The enrolment in schools has also increased considerably.
Along with this improvement in physical infrastructure, there is an improvement in the representation of females in schools. The Gender Parity Index (GPI) was more than 1 across all levels of education at an all-India level. However, there is a considerable variation among the states. Ensuring access to education, across all socio-economic and religious categories will bridge the knowledge gap, and thereby inequality.
Household Characteristics
The household characteristics provide insight into the everyday experiences of poverty and living standards. The consumption capacity of a household determines whether they must make choices between the needs to run the household. Among the characteristics, wealth concentration and asset ownership are important. In urban areas, 44.4% wealth concentration is found in the highest quintile, while it is only 7.1% in rural areas. There is an inter-state variation in the concentration of wealth in the highest quintile.
In terms of households with mobile phones, 87% in rural areas, and 96% in urban areas own mobile phones. In land-owning, around 88% of non-agricultural land is held in urban areas and 47% in rural areas. The access to improved drinking water sources at an all-India level increased from 94.4% in 2015 to 95.9% in 2020. Households with clean cooking fuel also jumped from 43.8% in 2015-16 to 58.6% in 2019-21.
Targeted interventions like the Jal Jeevan Mission, and Swachh Bharath Mission seem to have brought significant improvements in household characteristics. It is important to undertake more such proactive targeted interventions.
What does the report recommend?
The report studies the above mentioned four parameters to understand the idea of inequality in India comprehensively. In addition to this, the report provides some key recommendations for the future:
Inequality in India – An overview of other reports:
The World Inequality Report 2022 by the world inequality Lab, presents a key overview of inequality across the globe. This inequality report considers a variety of factors like wealth inequality, gender inequality, carbon inequality and income equality. The report points out that India is a poor but a very unequal country. The reforms of economic liberalization have benefitted the upper and middle classes more than the lower classes. The report stresses that in the past three years, the quality of inequality data released by the government has become deteriorated, making it difficult to ascertain the level of inequality in India.
The world inequality report ranks India as one of the most unequal countries in the world. The ratio between the top 10% to the bottom 50% income gap stands at 22, making it among the most unequal countries. India also scores very less in the transparency index, with a score of 5.5 out of 20. In its carbon inequality, the report observes that India is a low carbon emitter, with an average per capita consumption of greenhouse gases of 2 Tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e). However, the top 1% emit more than the bottom 90%.
This report, along with the state of inequality in India, indicates a worrying level of inequality in India. In an already layered Indian society, this level of inequality and its increasing tendency can have dire consequences. Hence, it is imperative for governments to initiate measures to reverse the direction.
Featured Image: World Inequality Report 2022


text:
Supreme Court makes important observations on Hate Speech
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
December 12, 2020
In this edition of the roundup of important court judgments, we look at the case of Journalist Amish Devgan where the Supreme Court made important observations regarding hate speech. We also look at the order regarding mandatory CCTV installation in all police stations & places of investigation.
Let’s take a look at few of the significant court judgements and their larger implications.
Amish Devgan case and it’s implication for hate speech
The recent case of Amish Devgan vs. Union of India and others (2020) has generated discussion and controversy around the concept of hate speech. On 15 June 2020, while hosting a debate on his show ‘Aar Par’ (channel News18 India) regarding the Place of Worship Special Provision Act, the news anchor Amish Devgan called Khwaja Moinuddin Chisthi, better known as Khwaja Ghreeb Nawaz, an ‘attacker’ and ‘lootera’. Following this, several FIRs were registered against the anchor across the country.
The Supreme Court of India on 07 December 2020, refused to quash FIRs registered against Journalist Amish Devgan for his remarks against Sufi Saint Moinnuddin Chisthi. The several FIRs invoked sections 295A (Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs), 153A (Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc, and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony), 505 (Statements conducing to public mischief) and 34 (Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code. (IPC).
The apex court observed that the issue whether the offence was committed can be determined only on a factual evaluation in a trial. The judgment delivered by a bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar and Sanjay Khanna discusses the distinctions between ‘hate speech’ and ‘free speech’, the need to criminalize ‘hate speech’ and the tests to identify it.
“In this context, it is necessary to draw a distinction between ‘free speech’ which includes the right to comment, favour or criticise government policies and ‘hate speech’ creating or spreading hatred against a targeted community or group. The former is primarily concerned with political, social and economic issues and policy matters, the latter would not primarily focus on the subject matter but on the substance of the message which is to cause humiliation and alienation of the targeted group”, the judgment observed.
The following are the important points mentioned in the judgment.
The Court opined that the object of criminalising hate speech is to protect the dignity of an individual and to ensure political and social equality between different identities and groups regardless of caste, creed, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, linguistic preference etc. The judgement that “Loss of dignity and self-worth of the targeted group members contributes to disharmony amongst observes groups, erodes tolerance and open-mindedness which are a must for multi-cultural society committed to the idea of equality. It affects an individual as a member of a group”.
The court emphasised that the acts that promote divisiveness, alienation and schematism impinge on diversity and pluralism, and “when they are with the objective and intent to cause public disorder or to demean dignity of the targeted groups, they have to be dealt as per law”.
The judgement referred to article, essays, and jurisprudence from European Convention on Human Rights, USA, Germany, and Australia.
The judgement outlines that both context and content of the speech are important in determining whether it will amount to hate speech. ‘Content’ has more to do with the expression, language and message which should be to vilify, demean and incite psychosocial hatred or physical violence against the targeted group, the judgment observed. The ‘context’ has a certain key variable, namely, ‘who’ and ‘what’ is involved and ‘where’ and the ‘occasion, time and under what circumstances’ the case arises.
The judgment recognizes a distinction between the speech advocated by dominant groups and the groups which are victims of historical oppression. The judgement observed that, “Communities with a history of deprivation, oppression, and persecution may sometimes speak in relation to their lived experiences, resulting in the words and tone being harsher and more critical than usual. It is likely for persons from these communities to reject the tenet of civility, as polemical speech and symbols that capture the emotional loading can play a strong role in mobilising. Such speech should be viewed not from the position of a person of privilege or a community without such a historical experience, but rather, the courts should be more circumspect when penalising such speech. This is recognition of the denial of dignity in the past, and the effort should be reconciliatory”.
The judgment also observed that statements by persons holding power and influence have to be analysed in distinction from those made by an ordinary person on the streets. “Persons of influence, keeping in view their reach, impact and authority they yield on general public or the specific class to which they belong, owe a duty and have to be more responsible. They are expected to know and perceive the meaning conveyed by the words spoken or written, including the possible meaning that is likely to be conveyed. It is reasonable to hold that they would be careful in using the words that convey their intent”.
The judgement also mentions that the law of ‘hate speech’ recognises that all speakers are entitled to ‘good faith’ and ‘(no)-legitimate purpose’ protection. It reads, “The important requirement of ‘good faith’ is that the person must exercise prudence, caution and diligence. It requires due care to avoid or minimise consequence. ‘Good faith’ or ‘no-legitimate purpose’ exceptions would apply with greater rigour to protect any genuine academic, artistic, religious or scientific purpose, or for that matter any purpose that is in public interest, or publication of a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest.”
Hate speech has not been defined in any law in India. However, legal provisions in certain legislations prohibit select forms of speech as an exception to freedom of speech. The matter was referred to the Law Commission to examine if it deems proper to define hate speech and make recommendations to the Parliament.
In this regard, the 267th Report of the Law Commission titled ‘Hate Speech’ made several recommendation to curb the menace of hate speeches. It concluded that new provisions in IPC are required to be incorporated to address the issues elaborately.
There is no general legal definition of hate speech. For that matter, the observations made in the Amish Devgan case outline important aspects for recognising and pursuing action against hate speech.
Paramvir Singh case and its implications for human rights
The Supreme Court judgement in Paramvir Singh Saini vs. Baljit Singh & Others (2020) orders installation of CCTV cameras with reasonable resolution, audio and video recording features in all police stations and investigation agencies like Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), National Investigation Agency (NIA), Enforcement Directorate (ED), Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), Department of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO), etc.
A bench led by Justice R.F. Nariman, K.M. Joseph, and Aniruddha Bose emphasises that it is imperative to ensure CCTV cameras are installed in all working areas of the investigation agencies like entry and exit points, holding cells, areas outside the cells, corridors, inspection rooms, outside washrooms, in front and behind the police stations, etc.
The CCTV installed must be equipped with night vision and clear image resolution along with audio and video features. It will be the duty of States governments and Union Territories to ensure the installation and proper functioning of CCTVs in areas where there is a lack of internet or electricity. The responsibility of proper working, maintenance and recording of CCTVs will be with the Station House Officer (SHO) of police stations. The judgement also directs that the State Level Oversight Committee (SLOC) and the Central Oversight Body (COB) to give directions to all police stations and investigative agencies to prominently display information about the coverage of the concerned premises by CCTV with large posters written in English, Hindi and vernacular languages. It also seeks compliance reports from central and state/UT governments for the same within six months giving a firm action plan with exact timelines. The State and UT governments are to allocate adequate funds for this purpose at the earliest.
The bench also directs that the posters are also to mention a person’s right to complain about human rights violations to the State or National Human Rights Commission, courts or Superintendent of Police or any other empowered authority. The post is also to mention that a victim has a right to secure the CCTV footage in the event of any human rights violation and that the CCTV footage would be saved for a certain minimum period, which would not be less than six months.
In this 12-page order, the bench takes note of several past cases where it had ordered installation of CCTV cameras in all police stations in order to check human rights abuses. However, the judgement highlights that the Compliance Affidavits and Action Taken Reports were filed by only 14 states and majority of them failed to disclose the crucial details.
The affidavits are bereft of details with respect to the total number of Police Stations functioning in the respective State and Union Territory; total number of CCTV cameras installed in each and every Police Station; the positioning of the CCTV cameras already installed; working condition of the CCTV cameras; whether the CCTV cameras have a recording facility.
The judgement carries significant implications for human rights of persons in custody as it outlines important aspects that have been missing in implementation before.
A PIL challenging the practise of affixing posters outside COVID-19 patients
The apex court reserved judgement on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), filed by advocate Kush Kalra, seeking to challenge the practise of putting up posters outside the houses of COVID-19 patients who are in isolation as a mark of identification as per the executive orders of various state governments. The PIL challenges the practise, opining that such disclosures of identity of patients is a gross violation of their fundamental right to privacy.
The PIL asserts that the Constitution does not permit any form of discrimination on the grounds of illness and physical suffering. Putting up posters and circulating the names of COVID-19 patients to housing societies and resident welfare association makes them subject to public scrutiny, which goes against the ethos of living with dignity.
The bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan, BR Gavai and MR Shah asked the Solicitor General to whether an advisory can be issued in this regard by the centre so that a State is dissuaded from affixing posters outside the homes of COVID-19 positive patients.
On 01 December 2020, the Supreme Court observed that the practice of affixing posters outside the homes of COVID-19 positive patients creates stigma and can lead to a situation where these patients are treated as so called ‘untouchables’. However, on 03 December 2020, the apex court decided to reserve judgement on this public suit against the decisions of States and Union Territories and has now asked the Solicitor General to consider an advisory for the same. The court also noted that since a letter to this effect  (not to paste posters outside the homes of COVID-19 patients) has already been issued by the Government of India, there was no need for any fresh directions in this regard.
A criminal case of Tabligi Jamaat attendee
In the Mohd. Saad v. State of UP and ors case, the Allahabad High Court on 02 December 2020, issued a stay on further criminal proceedings under Sections 307 (attempt to murder) and 270 (malignant act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life) of the IPC against a Tablighi Jamaat congregation attendee.
The Bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot asserted that charging a person who had participated in the Tablighi Jamaat convention at New Delhi with the offence of attempt to murder under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) prima facie reflected an abuse of the power of law.
“From a perusal of the material, charge sheeting the applicant under Section 307 IPC prima facie reflects abuse of the power of law,” the court observed.
It was alleged that the accused had concealed their visit to Tabligi Jamaat congregation in Delhi and deliberately indulged in negligent and condemnable acts, fully aware that COVID-19 pandemic had been declared and returned without informing the administration about their arrival or going into voluntary quarantine or taking a medical examination.
The Counsel for the applicant Mohd. Saad contended that though the original charge sheet was drawn up under Section 269, 270 IPC and even presented to the court, however, the same was recalled and a fresh charge sheet was submitted under Section 307 IPC. In regard to this, Justice Ajay Bhanot directed the concerned Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) and Circle Officer (CO) to file a personal affidavit in the matter to explain how the offence of attempt to murder has been attracted in this case. The order reads, “C.O. shall also file his personal affidavit indicating as to how the ingredients of Section 307 IPC are made out from the facts in the record from the material collected during the investigation and justify the amendment directed by him to the charge sheet”.
Featured Image: Supreme Court on Hate Speech

source: news-factly

created: December 12, 2020

license: Creative Commons - Attribution - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

author: Sai Krishna Muthyanolla


text:
Review: This is how the UAPA works
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
October 4, 2022
The recent ban on Popular Front of India (PFI) has once again put spotlight on the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), 1967. The UAPA has provisions for declaring associations as ‘unlawful’ and prescribes measures for activities linked with such ‘unlawful association’. Here is a review.
Terrorism has significant human, economic and social consequences. Though there is no universally agreeable definition for terrorism, a definitive feature of any act of terrorism involves using force or coercion to create violence thereby spreading fear, which in turn is utilized to attain ideological or political goals. Terrorism leads to loss of individual human rights, in addition to the threats to social and economic development. Terrorism often targets innocent individuals, thereby putting pressure on the governments. Accordingly, governments come up with counter-terrorism strategies that aim to prevent acts of terrorism and prosecute those involved in such activities. One such law enacted in India is the ‘Unlawful Activities Prevention Act’ (UAPA), 1967.
The recent ban on Popular Front of India (PFI) has once again put spotlight on the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), 1967. In today’s story, we look at the UAPA, and its provisions.
Anti-terror laws in India
Originally conceived to combat ‘unlawful activities’, the UAPA, 1967 was the first step in the journey of the counter-terrorism laws in India. The first anti-terror law began as the Terrorist Affected areas act (TAAA), which was remodelled as the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, (TADA) 1987. After it’s lapse in 1997, it was repealed due to widespread criticism on its draconian provisions. It paved the way for Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), 2002. It was repealed in 2004, but its provisions were included in the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, (UAPA) 1967.
Currently, UAPA remains as the primary anti-terror law for Indian agencies. It was amended in 2004, 2008, 2013, and 2019. These amendments were aimed at giving powers to the state and the agencies dealing with counterterrorism.
Key provisions of UAPA
UAPA 1967, has provisions for declaring associations as ‘unlawful’ and prescribes measures for activities linked with such ‘unlawful association.’ The Section 3 of the act provides for declaring associations as ‘unlawful’.
While the order of the Tribunal constituted under this act confirming the declaration of any such association as ‘unlawful’ is necessary to make such declaration effective, the Central Government has powers to declare any organization ‘unlawful’ with immediate effect, if such circumstances exist and the reasons are stated in writing. The latest notification on the ban of PFI is issued using this exception.
In normal course, the Union Government shall refer such notification to the Tribunal within thirty days of any such issuance of notification and publication. The tribunal issues show-cause notice to the association with a deadline of thirty days. Upon receiving, the tribunal shall conduct inquiry and decide on the validity of such declaration within a period of six months from the date of issuance of notification.
This tribunal is appointed by the Central Government and consists of only one person. The appointed person shall be a former judge of a High Court, as mentioned in the Section 5 of the act. Any support in terms of expenses and staff are borne by the Central Government itself.
The Central Government has powers to prohibit the use of funds of an unlawful association under Section 7, and the power to notify places used for the purpose of an unlawful association under section 8 of this act. The Section 10 of this act prescribes penalty for being member of such unlawful association. All offences under this act shall be deemed to be cognizable offences under section 14 of the act.
The act also has provisions for punishment for terrorist activities under Chapter IV. This includes punishments for committing terrorist act, raising funds for such acts, membership of such organization, recruiting and harbouring people for terrorist acts. This chapter also includes offences by companies, societies or trusts, and punishments for them.
The Chapter VI of this act deals with terrorist associations and individuals. Under Section 35 of this act, the Central Government can add or remove an organization to the First Schedule of the act, or individual under Fourth Schedule of the Act, to designate as terrorist associations or terrorists. Any such order shall be laid before the house of the Parliament. These can be de-notified under section 36 of the act.
Statistics on UAPA
As on 16 March 2022, thirteen (13) associations have been declared as ‘unlawful associations’ under section 3 of the UAPA 1967, and around 40 organizations have been added to the First Schedule of the act, deeming them to be terrorist organizations. The recent PFI ban is under the Section 3 of the act.  So far, 38 individuals have been designated as terrorists under UAPA.
Factly’s data story on UAPA reveals the growing average number of cases registered under UAPA since 2014, with huge pendency and low disposal rates. The conviction rate has also been significantly lower for UAPA.
What lies ahead if banned under UAPA?
The designation of an organisation as an unlawful organisation, as it has been in the case of the PFI currently, has severe legal repercussions, including the criminalization of its members and the confiscation of the organization’s assets under various provisions of the UAPA.
After the declaration of the Organization or association as ‘unlawful’, such notification must be provided to the adjudicating tribunal within 30 days under Section 4 of the act. This must be complemented with the details of all the cases registered against such association by different agencies like the NIA/ED/police forces etc. Upon considering the same, the tribunal issues show-cause notice for the organization to explain why it should not be banned or deemed ‘unlawful’ within 30 days. The tribunal, based on the reply received, conducts inquiry. It has the powers of civil court such as the power to call upon witnesses, requesting any public record from a court or government agency, producing any document or other item that can be used as evidence among other things. Based on such information, the tribunal shall accept or reject the declaration issued by the Central Government. Incidentally, in majority cases, the tribunal had confirmed the notifications issued by the Government.
The tribunal’s proceedings have come under spotlight in recent times for being vague and opaque, and for indirectly supporting the use of ‘sealed cover’ by the government, leaving the affected with little or no information required to defend themselves.
Featured Image: Unlawful Activities Prevention Act(UAPA)

created: October 4, 2022


text:
UN Human Rights Office highlights risks posed by increased use of AI systems
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
September 25, 2021
The UN Human Rights Office recently published the ‘Right to Privacy in Digital Age’ report that analyses how AI affects peoples’ right to privacy and other rights. It notes the risks posed by the increased use of such systems both by government & private agencies. The report also makes some important recommendations for agencies using AI.
The operation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems has the potential to facilitate and deepen privacy intrusions and other interference with rights in a variety of ways. These include new applications as well as features of AI systems that expand, intensify, or incentivize interference with the right to privacy, most notably through the increased collection and use of personal data. In this article, we look at the reports by the United Nations Human Rights Office that give an overview of the international legal framework, highlights aspects of AI that facilitate interference in privacy, and provide a set of recommendations for States and businesses to address these challenges.
On 15 September 2021, the UN Human Rights Office has published a Report titled ‘Right to Privacy in Digital Age’ that analyses how AI – including profiling, automated decision-making and other machine-learning technologies – affects peoples’ right to privacy and other rights, including the rights to health, education, freedom of movement, freedom of peaceful assembly and association, and freedom of expression.
The 2021 report looks at how states and businesses alike have often rushed to incorporate AI applications, failing to carry out due diligence. The report details how AI systems rely on large data sets, with information about individuals collected, shared, merged, and analysed in multiple and often opaque ways. The data used to inform and guide AI systems can be faulty, discriminatory, out of date, or irrelevant. Long-term storage of data also poses particular risks, as data could in the future be exploited in yet unknown ways. There have already been numerous cases of people being treated unjustly because of AI, such as being denied social security benefits because of faulty AI tools or arrested because of flawed facial recognition.
In a nutshell, the Report pushes for data privacy frameworks that account for the new threats linked to the use of AI. Considering the diversity of AI applications, systems and uses, regulation should be specific enough to address sector-specific issues and to tailor responses to the risks involved.
Legal framework for the right to privacy rooted in International Human Rights Conventions
Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and several other international and regional human rights instruments recognize the right to privacy as a fundamental human right. As the UN Human Rights Office highlights, the right to privacy plays a pivotal role in the balance of power between the State and the individual and is a foundational right for a democratic society. The right to privacy applies to everyone. Differences in its protection on the basis of race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinions, national or social origin, property, birth, or other status are inconsistent with the principle of non-discrimination laid down in articles 2 (1) and 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The report emphasises that any interference with the right to privacy must not be arbitrary or unlawful. The term “unlawful” means that States may interfere with the right to privacy only on the basis of law and in accordance with that law. The law itself must comply with the provisions, aims and objectives of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and must specify in detail the precise circumstances in which such interference is permissible. It has been emphasised that these protections should meet the minimum standards identified in the earlier Reports of the UN High Commissioner on the ‘Right to Privacy’.
The Reports on Right to Privacy provides a clear and universal framework for the promotion and protection of the right to privacy, including in the context of domestic and extraterritorial surveillance, the interception of digital communications and the collection of personal data.
Reported violations by advanced surveillance technologies continue due to lack of adequate national legislations
The Right to Privacy Report also highlights that practices in many States have revealed a lack of adequate national legislation and/or enforcement, weak procedural safeguards, and ineffective oversight, all of which have contributed to a lack of accountability for arbitrary or unlawful interference in the right to privacy.
This can be exemplified by the recent Pegasus data leak allegations. According to recent reports, the Pegasus data leak allegations surfaced through a consortium of media organizations around the globe suggesting a widespread and continuing abuse of the software in order to hack the phones and computers of people conducting legitimate journalistic activities, monitoring human rights or expressing dissent or political opposition, although the manufacturers insist that the software is only intended for use against criminals and terrorists. The Pegasus malware infects electronic devices, enabling operators of the tool to obtain messages, photos and emails, record calls, and even activate microphones, according to the consortium’s reporting. The leak allegedly contains a list of more than 50,000 phone numbers which reportedly belong to those identified as people of interest, by clients of the company behind Pegasus, including some governments.
The Report notes that courts at the national and regional levels are engaged in examining the legality of electronic surveillance policies and measures.
In this context, India offers a case in point – the Supreme Court of India is likely to set up a technical committee to probe the allegations of snooping of journalists, activists, etc., using the Pegasus spyware. The Pegasus controversy erupted in India on 18 July after 40 Indian journalists, political leaders like Rahul Gandhi, election strategist Prashant Kishore, former commissioner of the Election Commission of India (ECI) Ashok Lavasa, etc. were reported to be on the list of targets.
Opacity and challenges of artificial intelligence systems
The reports state that AI systems typically rely on large data sets, often including personal data. This incentivizes widespread data collection, storage, and processing. Many businesses optimize services to collect as much data as possible. Data collection happens in intimate, private, and public spaces. Data brokers acquire, merge, analyse and share personal data with countless recipients. The Report highlighted that these data transactions are largely shielded from public scrutiny and only marginally inhibited by existing legal frameworks.
Apart from exposing people’s private lives to companies and States, these data sets make individuals vulnerable in several other ways. Data breaches have repeatedly exposed the sensitive information of millions of people. The Report argues that arrangements enabling government agencies to have direct access to such data sets held by businesses, for example, increase the likelihood of arbitrary or unlawful interference in the right to privacy of the individuals concerned. The decision-making processes of many AI systems are opaque. The complexity of the data environment, algorithms and models underlying the development and operation of AI systems, as well as the intentional secrecy of government and private actors are factors that undermine meaningful ways for the public to understand the effects of AI systems on human rights and society. This is often referred to as the “black box” problem. The opacity makes it challenging to meaningfully scrutinize an AI system and can be an obstacle for effective accountability in cases where AI systems cause harm.
In the Indian context, similar arguments regarding accountability have come up when the Delhi police, with the help of an automated facial recognition system (AFRS), tracked down the suspects involved in the 2020 Delhi riots. Earlier, the Delhi police had also used this technology to compare the details of people involved in violence during the anti-Citizenship Act protests with a data bank of more than two lakh ‘anti-social elements’, according to news reports. According to the news report, there are currently 16 different facial recognition tracking (FRT) systems in active utilisation by various Central and State governments across India for surveillance, security, or authentication of identity. Another 17 are in the process of being installed by different government departments.
While the FRT system has seen rapid deployment by multiple government departments in recent times, there are no specific laws or guidelines to regulate the use of this potentially invasive technology.
Recommendations on comprehensive due diligence, transparency, and effective remedies
States are increasingly integrating AI systems into law enforcement, national security, criminal justice, and border management systems. The Report argues that effective protection of the right to privacy and interlinked rights depends on the legal, regulatory, and institutional frameworks established by States.
Broadly, the Reports suggest that States and businesses should ensure that comprehensive human rights due diligence is conducted when AI systems are acquired, developed, deployed, and operated, as well as before big data held about individuals are shared or used as well as resourcing and leading such processes. States may also require or otherwise incentivize companies to conduct comprehensive human rights due diligence.
The aim of human rights due diligence processes is to identify, assess, prevent, and mitigate adverse impacts on human rights that an entity may cause or to which it may contribute or be directly linked. Meaningful consultations should be carried out with potentially affected rights holders and civil society, while experts with interdisciplinary skills should be involved in impact assessments, including in the development and evaluation of mitigations. The results of human rights impact assessments, action is taken to address human rights risks and public consultations should themselves be made public. Moreover, the report noted that in situations where there is a close nexus between a State and a technology company requires dedicated attention.
In essence, the report makes the following recommendations to the State:
It recommends the following to State and Business Enterprises:
Featured Image: Right to Privacy in Digital Age

created: September 25, 2021


text:
UN World Water Development Report 2022 highlights the over-exploitation of groundwater
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 19, 2022
In March 2022, the UN released the 2022 edition of the UN World Water Development Report (WWDR), which focuses on groundwater, aiming to make “the invisible visible.” According to the report, 99% of the Earth’s running freshwater is groundwater. Among other things, the report highlights the overexploitation of this precious resource and why proper management is the need of the hour.
Recently, the National Human Rights Commission of India took suo moto cognizance of a media report on the hazardous contamination of groundwater near four landfill sites in Delhi. The media report stated that the Delhi Pollution Control Committee had collected samples from several sites near each landfill site in 2021, which were found to be highly contaminated, and far beyond the desirable limit. It also noted that the primary source of contamination in the groundwater was un-segregated waste being dumped at the landfill sites where the waste is leaching into the soil. Acknowledging the threat this poses to health and the environment, the Commission issued notices to the Secretary, Union Jal Shakti Ministry, Chief Secretary, Delhi Government and Chairman, Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), seeking a detailed report on the matter from them within six weeks, including the steps being taken to deal with the issue. It is in this context, that a recent UN report on groundwater assumes significance.
UN World Water Development Report 2020 focuses on groundwater
In March 2022, the UN released the 2022 edition of the UN World Water Development Report (WWDR). This year’s report focuses on groundwater, aiming to make “the invisible visible.” According to the report, 99% of the Earth’s running freshwater is groundwater. However, since it is invisible, groundwater tends to be poorly understood and mismanaged. Freshwater constitutes only 1% of the total water available globally.
About 50% of the volume of water withdrawn for domestic use by the global population is met through groundwater. Further, 25% of all water withdrawn for irrigation covering 38% of the world’s irrigated land is also met through groundwater. Though it has the potential to provide social, economic, and environmental benefits to societies, pollution and overuse of groundwater pose a significant threat to valuable resource. Once polluted, aquifer zones or groundwater, remains polluted and reversing this is practically impossible. The challenges and opportunities in developing, managing, and governing groundwater across the world have also been outlined in the UN report. The report has also put forth recommendations aimed to utilize groundwater’s potential for sustainable development and climate action.
Groundwater withdrawal globally has gone up 6 times since the 1950s
The share of groundwater in total freshwater withdrawal has gone up from 12% in 1950 to 25% in 2017 while the total global groundwater withdrawal has increased from 158 km³/year in 1950 to 959 km³ in 2017. Asia accounts for two-thirds of the total quantity withdrawn with prominent shares in South Asia and East Asia. North America withdrew the second-largest share of 16% of the global groundwater withdrawal. Although Africa accounts for about 17% of the global population, its groundwater withdrawal is only around 5% of the global total while Australia & Oceania, where population size is low, also has a very low share.
9 countries alone accounted for nearly two-thirds of the estimated withdrawal in 2017
Nine countries alone accounted for nearly two-thirds of the estimated withdrawal in 2017 as per the report. These nine countries are India, the USA, China, Pakistan, Iran, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and France. While groundwater withdrawal rates have stabilized in the USA, most of the European countries, and China, the same has increased in India. In fact, 8 of the ten countries accounting for 75% of the total global groundwater withdrawal are in Asia (India, China, Pakistan, Iran, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey), and two in North America (USA and Mexico).
Groundwater is primarily used for agriculture
Globally, about 69% of the total volume of groundwater withdrawn is used in the agriculture sector, 22% for domestic purposes, and 9% for industrial purposes. Across continents, the groundwater used in Asia, the most populous continent is over 100 km more than the total groundwater withdrawn in the remaining five continents. Except in Europe, the primary use of groundwater is for agriculture purposes in the rest of the continents. In Europe, groundwater is mainly used for domestic purposes.
India is the largest groundwater user globally with 26% of global groundwater extraction
The report also notes that India is the largest groundwater user globally with an estimated withdrawal of 251 km³ per year through an estimated 20 million wells and tube wells. This accounts for almost 26% of the groundwater extracted globally. About 89% of this groundwater is used in India for irrigation. Countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan use more than 90% of the groundwater for irrigation. While groundwater irrigation contributed to the improved agricultural production post-green revolution, the same has been the cause of India’s water crisis. The free electricity/low tariff for pumping groundwater to support agriculture and the plantation of water-intensive crops even in semi-arid regions has contributed to the depletion of groundwater levels in the country, especially in northwestern and peninsular southern India. In India, 60% of the electricity used in the water sector is for groundwater abstraction.
Highlighting the case of Chennai from 2017 to 2019, the report stressed on how groundwater helped the city at the time of severe water supply crises. The main reservoirs in the city had almost dried up due to persistent drought. The total demand was 830 Ml/day while only 520 Ml/day could be supplied by the local groundwater. Poor recharge of groundwater and overexploitation of aquifers over the years had resulted in saltwater intrusion making the fresh aquifers saline. The city had to deploy thousands of tankers with multiple trips daily for meeting the demand by taking groundwater from neighbouring rural areas. This can also be considered an example of poor governance of available groundwater resources adding to water crises.
The report emphasized on the need for groundwater governance aimed at enabling groundwater management, planning and policy implementation. One of the challenges to this is the unavailability of data, information and knowledge on groundwater and aquifers. Regular monitoring of groundwater levels and quality should be the first step towards groundwater management.
Countries must adopt groundwater policies
Groundwater is an often-neglected topic. The report also called for the adoption of a groundwater policy that primarily focuses on the utilization of groundwater after abstraction. The policy should involve actors ranging from local groundwater users and technicians to scientists, policymakers and investors and provide for integrated decision making. India’s National Water Policy of 2012 which states that groundwater “needs to be managed as a community resource held, by the state, under public trust doctrine to achieve food security, livelihood, and equitable and sustainable development for all” has been cited in the report as a policy intervention in this matter. However, it also notes that the extraction of groundwater continues without strict regulation.
MJS Abhiyan in Rajasthan has been cited in the report as a successful policy intervention to improve the water table
Additionally, the report also highlighted the groundwater recharge in Rajasthan where the state government launched Mukhyamantri Jal Swawalamban Abhiyan (MJSA) to help rural communities become self-reliant in meeting water needs in 2016. Irrigation tanks, dams, trenches, etc. for water harvesting by capturing runoff were constructed, micro-irrigation was promoted, and more trees were planted in barren wastelands to improve the watershed. Interim results after two monsoons showed that there was an increase in groundwater levels by an average of 1.4 m in 16 out of 21 non-desert districts in the state. Participatory planning through the creation of ownership and behavioural change around groundwater overuse by involving villagers, and empowering people to monitor rainwater, operating automatic weather stations, etc. have been cited as an example of the participatory groundwater planning process for management, in the report.
Groundwater in 19% of the assessment units was categorized as ‘overexploited’ or ‘critical’
According to the latest assessment of ‘Dynamic Ground Water Resources’ of 2020 conducted by the Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) and State Governments,  out of the total 6,965 assessment units in the country, 1114 units (16%) have been categorized as ‘Overexploited’. These are spread across 205 districts in 15 States/UTs with 39% being reported from Tamil Nadu alone. In these areas, the ‘Annual Ground Water Extraction’ is more than the ‘Annual Extractable Ground Water Resource’. Likewise, 270 units have been categorized as ‘Critical’ spreading over 155 districts in 18 States/UTs, where the ‘Annual Ground Water Extraction’ is between 90% and 100% of the ‘Annual Extractable Ground Water Resource’. 63 of them are in Tamil Nadu.
An expert committee has also emphasized on the need for groundwater management
Some of the steps taken by the Indian Government to tackle the issue of water depletion and promotion of rainwater harvesting include the implementation of Jal Shakti Abhiyan (JSA) since 2019, circulation of a Model Bill to all the States/UTs to enact groundwater legislation for the regulation of its development, preparation of Master Plan for Artificial Recharge to Groundwater- 2020 by CGWB, etc.
In 2016, an expert committee headed by Dr. Mihir Shah submitted a report in which it recommended the restructuring of the Central Water Commission (CWC) and the Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) to form a new autonomous National Water Commission (NWC). The Ministry recently stated to have constituted various Committees, including that of the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad and a high-level group comprising Chairman, Central Water Commission (CWC) and Chairman, Central Ground Water Board (CGWB), based on the report.
Featured Image: UN World Water Development Report 2022


text:
Review: Understanding RBI’s 2021-22 report on Currency & Finance
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 10, 2022
The RBI recently released the 2021-22 report on Currency & Finance. The report was obviously focused on the post-pandemic growth and details the structural issues ailing various sectors. It presents a road map while analysing India’s response to COVID. The report also warns of the dangers of indicators going beyond controllable levels.
The recent rate hikes by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) had come as a surprise to many. This would not necessarily be the case if the central bank’s action plan through various reports were deciphered earlier. It was bound to happen, especially with the inflationary pressures. The signs were always there, and the only missing details were what and when of this rate hike. And of course, no amount of deciphering could be enough to find out what prompted the central bank to hold an emergency Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) meet when it was originally scheduled for June 6-8, 2022.
But what were the signals though? The RBI’s recent report on Currency and Finance released on 29 April 2022 had insights about what is coming next. Even in the previous MPC meet between 06-08 April 2022, the committee had subtly indicated the future course, ‘while the MPC voted to be accommodative by keeping rates unchanged, it is also focussing on withdrawal of this accommodation to ensure inflation is within the specified target while supporting the growth.’
This was made clear in the RBI’s report on Currency and Finance 2021-22, where the RBI talks about the timely rebalancing of fiscal and monetary policy as the first step towards a post-pandemic growth strategy. It went on further to suggest that the primary thing is to withdraw the surplus liquidity overhang in a calibrated manner, as for every percentage increase in the surplus liquidity above 1.5% of the Net Demand and Time Liabilities, average inflation raises by sixty basis points.
The RBI report also talks about India’s strategy for post-pandemic growth. This story looks at the report’s critical insights on India’s economic scenario.
Six out of Eight sectors are fragile and need repair
Economies, both global and regional, were severely impacted by the pandemic. The outcome of this disruption was the spillover of the ill effects to various sectors of the economy. But not all sectors were affected equally. There is a huge variation in the resilience shown by different sectors. Agriculture and allied services displayed a greater resilience to the pandemic. This is followed by the heterogenous resilience displayed by the service sector. The real estate and professional services recovered to a substantial extent; the financial services displayed improved resilience. The manufacturing and construction industry is on the recovery path, while the hospitality industry is still suffering from the pandemic.
Post-Pandemic response by India
‘It’s not what happens to you, but it’s how you respond to it that defines you.’ This is something that is relevant even to the pandemic response by the countries. No country was spared from the pandemic and it’s how each country chooses to fight this pandemic that defines them. India’s pandemic response had a mix of both fiscal and monetary stimulus. The fiscal activism is justified by the huge uncertainty and the economic slack that the market was going through. But to what extent does this fiscal activism be sustainable? What effect does the fiscal stimulus have on growth under different macroeconomic scenarios?
The RBI report states that for the Indian case, public expenditure was found to be more appropriate and supportive than the tax cuts. Similarly, tax hikes seemed more effective than expenditure cutbacks. All types of public expenditure do not generate the same impact. Using a three-variable structural vector autoregression (SVAR) model, it was found that capital expenditure had more impact than the rest.
This also shows how any expenditure other than capital expenditure is limited in its impact, thereby putting a threshold on the success of fiscal activism. Additionally, this fiscal activism also plays out differently based on economic conditions. During an economic slowdown, fiscal activism has a positive impact, while it is the reverse during the period of economic growth.
It is in this context of the detrimental effect of the prolonged expansionary fiscal policy, the RBI had envisaged rebalancing fiscal and monetary policies. But what is this threshold limit, upon which the surplus liquidity turns into a liability? To identify and measure this threshold, the RBI has used the structural threshold vector autoregression model (TVAR). It is found that a net Liquidity adjustment facility (LAF) of a surplus of more than 1.52% could become inflationary. This also varies with time and evolves over time. The impact of liquidity on inflation over the years seemed to have only risen. Up until December 2017, a one percent rise in surplus liquidity increased peak inflation from 5 to 11 basis points, while subsequently, the impact grew to twenty (20) basis points. Even if the liquidity is initially effective for economic recovery, the persistence on surplus liquidity can create ideal conditions for growing inflation.
Coming to the Monetary policy, the FRBM act mandates the debt to GDP ratio to be 60%. In 2020-21, this was 89.4% for the Government (Centre & States). Even the best consolidation effects in the future will keep this above 75% over the next five years, as per the report. Having such elevated levels of debt is not sustainable and calls for the reorientation of the strategy. Like the fiscal threshold, the monetary threshold upon which the debt to GDP ratio becomes unsustainable comes to 61%. Growth in GDP can be seen till the debt accumulation reaches 66%, above which one percentage point in an increase in debt to GDP ratio could reduce the GDP growth by 0.01 percentage points. Hence, adequate measures, both on fiscal as well as monetary policy, are the need of the hour.
Structural issues retarding Indian growth
Having seen the limited effectiveness of fiscal and monetary policies in India’s growth, it is imperative to look beyond them. As stated earlier, except for two sectors, all sectors have proved to be fragile, with hospitality being the weakest among all. The report identifies the structural issues that are dampening the growth prospects for the Indian economy. It lists out the factors that determine the structural transformation:
It also looks at individual sectors and the structural issues that impede their growth. For the agricultural sector, the following are the issues listed:
For the Industry sector, the report identified the following.
These are some of the major challenges these sectors face, which if resolved could transform the Indian economy.
Role of Finance in accelerating growth
Last but not the least, finance is an important overarching aspect that is crucial in determining the success of the pandemic response. The financial sector is also one of the heavily impacted sectors due to the pandemic. The impacts can be seen if we look at the key banking indicators.
The pandemic hit on the pre-existing vulnerabilities in the Indian banking space. India’s credit to GDP gap has been negative since 2014, and the declining savings rate, and the growth in unresolved NPAs are major pre-existing weaknesses in the financial sector. For an effective pandemic response, it is crucial that the banking sector is de-stressed as early as possible. A few policy options like debt restructuring, capital infusion in banks, establishing the development of financial institutions, leveraging digital fintech start-ups and green financing should be explored to reinvigorate credit growth.
In conclusion, this report highlights three key lessons for the future.
Featured Image: RBI Report on Currency & Finance 2021-22


text:
Review: Understanding the ‘National Logistics Policy 2022’
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
September 29, 2022
Successive governments have made efforts in easing the bottlenecks of the logistics industry. These efforts were multi-sectoral, focusing on various aspects of the logistics industry. However, they weren’t as successful as were expected to be, leading to the underperformance of the industry. To make the industry more efficient and resilient, the Government of India has come up with the ‘National Logistics Policy 2022’.
The term ‘Logistics’ has various connotations. But, in simple language, logistics is all about RRR- Delivering the ‘Right Product’ to the ‘Right Place’ at the ‘Right Time’. Like the nerves that connect different organs performing crucial and specific functions in the human body, Logistics as an industry replicates the same functionality. Humans cripple when their nervous system fails, so does the nation when the logistics industry underperforms.
Successive governments have made efforts in easing the bottlenecks of the logistics industry. These efforts were multi-sectoral, focusing on various aspects of the logistics industry. However, they weren’t as successful as were expected to be, leading to the underperformance of the industry. In order to make the industry more efficient and resilient, the Government of India has come up with the ‘National Logistics Policy 2022’. Today’s story looks at the policy and what it entails.
Logistics at a glance
With more than 14% contribution to GDP, the Indian logistics industry is estimated to be valued at USD 200 billion. The Indian logistics industry is highly fragmented with more than 20 specialised entities and 37 export promotion organisations. Very often, this caused serious lapses in ensuring co-operation & coordination between them. Additionally, logistics is a highly labour-intensive industry. This industry provides employment to more than 12 million people and is expected to grow at the rate of 10.5% over the next 5 years. More than 80% of employment in this industry is also unorganized. With advancements in technologies, this industry is gradually shifting to embracing and adopting newer technologies. All these place the Indian logistics sector at a crucial juncture to remodel itself to suit the needs of the globalized world.
The National Logistics Policy 2022, hereby referred to as NLP 2022, focuses on these two key areas:
By focussing on these two themes, the Government expects positive changes in the performance of the logistics industry. Accordingly, it had set the below targets for itself.
Changes from the Draft National Logistics Policy
The Government released the Draft National Logistics Policy in 2018, seeking responses from the stakeholders as well as the public. The draft envisions creating seamless, reliable, and cost-effective logistics network, leveraging the skilled workforce and the evolving technologies. It had two key objectives.
The draft contained four critical aspects, which do not find a mention in the new policy.
Key changes are summed up below:
What’s in the National Logistics Policy
The new National Logistics Policy has three major components:
Among these three, CLAP acts as a foundation and all measures are implemented through it. It has eight core action areas as given below:
Unified Logistics Interface Platform (ULIP) is a promising effort that was developed to give an integrated platform that can be used by the stakeholders to improve efficiency, use technology, and lower the cost of logistics in India. Various government and business entities, service providers, shippers, consignees, etc. shall use this platform to facilitate confidential real-time information exchange among all parties. It was also named as one of the seven projects included in the “Technology Commons” initiative, which uses technology in several critical areas by creating top-notch goods and services that take important user and stakeholder needs into account.
Three levels make up the ULIP platform as a whole: the Integration layer, the Governance layer, and the Presentation layer. 30 logistics systems from 07 Ministries/Departments encompassing more than 1600 fields have been connected with ULIP through 102 APIs under the Integration layer and the Governance layer. The goal is to develop a UPI-like framework that will allow the logistic department’s transactions to be authenticated.
The industry department is creating a digital dashboard called Ease of Logistics (E-LogS) for recording, organising, and keeping track of time-bound issue resolution. Timelines and the progress of the resolution will be included. According to government representatives, strong oversight would guarantee that problems are not delayed. It attempts to create a logistical ecosystem that is supported by technology. There is also the formation of a Services Improvement Group (SIG) which comprises nominated officers from ministries for monitoring and coordination mechanisms for any unresolved issues.
NLP as a Pivot
While the initiatives toward developing the logistics sector had been segregated to date, the NLP aims to integrate all such efforts. Earlier initiatives such as FASTag, paperless EXIM trade process through e-sanchit, provisions for e-way bills, faceless assessment for customs etc., were aimed toward easing the logistics sector. On the infrastructural note, Bharatmala for road, Sagarmala for shipping, UDAN for aviation and PM Gati Shakti National Master Plan for multi-modal connectivity, aims to build the foundation for improving the turnaround times and efficiency of the logistics industry. NLP acts as a pivot to smoothen the movement of goods and services, ease regulatory compliances, and enable technology adoption for cost-effective and seamless coordination among different entities.
Through the implementation of NLP, the government aspires to be a frontrunner in the Logistics Performance Index (LPI) by the World Bank. The Logistics Ease Across Different States (LEADS) survey by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry also encourages states and UTs to engage in cooperative competitive federalism by learning about successful initiatives from other states. So far, 13 states have their own state logistics policy.
High on ambition, yet concerns remain
The National Logistics Policy is highly aspirational. Its vision and objectives, if implemented successfully, could bring in a sweeping transformation in the landscape of the logistics industry. Yet, there are a few crucial concerns that require adequate attention.
The first concern is regarding the execution. All these goals will not serve the purpose if implementational challenges are not overcome. These challenges could be in terms of on-time completion of infrastructural projects, enabling a secured database of data when the entire process chain is made digital, absence of adequate complementing services such as storage facilities, warehouses, and so on.
The second concern is regarding the Sustainability and Greening of the Logistics industry. The Indian logistics industry is heavily dependent on roads, and the transportation sector is one of the leading contributors to global carbon emissions. NITI Aayog’s report ‘Transforming Trucking in India’ projects that the adoption of zero-emission trucks can avoid 838 billion litres of diesel consumption cumulatively by 2050, resulting in upward of $1.5 trillion of reduced oil expenditures. It, therefore, becomes inevitable to undertake reforms that promote green or eco-friendly logistics. It is necessary to examine the existing supply chain networks and undertake sustainable actions such as consolidation of freight, balancing different modes of transportation, warehouse space optimisation, and data-enabled decision-making.
The final concern is the working model of the logistics industry. There are no uniform acceptable standards of pricing in the industry, with different operators charging different prices. There is a need to explore benchmark pricing policies while giving enough flexibility. Further, the fleet of most logistics transportation is old and caters only to certain specific types of goods. It is adopting newer fleet models that are greener, cost-efficient and can carry any type of goods. Government subsidies & incentives to adopt such a fleet can go a long way.
Featured Image: National Logistics Policy 2022

created: September 29, 2022


text:
Review: Understanding ‘The Performance Grading Index’ for 2020-21 of School Education
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
November 10, 2022
The Ministry of Education recently released the PGI for states and Union Territories for 2020-21. Today’s story looks at the details of this latest report including the movement of states across different levels.
The Performance Grading Index (PGI) is a tool to provide insights into the Indian school education system. One of the goals of the PGI is to offer information on the state of school education in States & UTs, including key levels that influence performance and important performance categories. It identifies the gaps and aids States/UTs in prioritising the intervention areas to make sure the school education system is strong at every level. It also intends to encourage States and UTs to implement multifaceted interventions that will result in the highly sought optimal educational results, while also encouraging them to adopt best practises.
One key feature of this index is the horizontal spread of this index, covering multiple areas of interventions that directly/indirectly influence the education system. The Ministry of Education recently released the PGI for states and Union Territories for 2020-21. Today’s story looks at the details of this latest report. Factly’s story on earlier editions of PGI can be accessed here.
The methodology behind PGI:
Before looking at the methodology, a few key aspects are to be noted. PGI is done at two levels- States & UTs, and Districts. This index does not use any primary data for its grading. It uses the existing secondary data from Unified District Information System for Education (UDISE), the National Achievement Survey (NAS) of NCERT, the Mid-Day Meal website, the Public Financial Management System (PFMS), and the Shagun portal.
For state-level index, PGI is structured in two categories- Outcomes and Governance & Management. The outcomes category is further divided into domains such as learning outcomes and quality, access, infrastructure and facilities, and equity. The PGI follows a grading method, instead of ranking. It allows the states with the same performance to be at similar levels, without causing any stigma attached.
The latest released report also follows the same methodology as its previous editions. Since most of the data is self-reported by the states, any improvements may also be potentially due to improved data collecting and reporting systems.
Key Highlights- PGI state
States vs. PGI Grades
As stated earlier, the primary objective of the PGI is to bring transformational change by providing inputs on all the influencing factors of the school education system. It is a new index, that was launched in the year 2017-18. If we look at the performance of the states over these four years, incremental progress is observed.
The highest score in 2017–18 was Level IV (score range: 801–850), which improved to Level II in 2020–21 (score range: 901–950), indicating a steady improvement in the performance of States/UTs over the previous four years. In the years 2017–18 and 2018–19, no state achieved the top two levels (Level I and Level II), while in 2019-20, five states and in 2020–21, seven states achieved Level II. In contrast, 12 States/UTs fared below level VII in 2017–18, while no state has performed below Level VII in 2020–21, demonstrating a notable improvement in States/UTs over the past four years. No State figured in the bottom three levels in 2020-21 as against 2 States in the bottom three levels in 2019-20. The most notable performance in 2020–21 is Ladakh, which increased from Level 10 in 2019–20 to Level 4 in 2020–21. Despite this significant improvement, no state in these four years achieved the top-most grade, i.e., Level-1.
States’ performance over the years
It has to be noted that this improvement is not identical across the states. Some states saw a huge jump, while some remained at the same level. In comparison to none in 2017–18, a total of 7 States and UTs—Kerala, Punjab, Chandigarh, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Andhra Pradesh—have achieved Level II (scoring 901–950) in 2020–21. In PGI 2020–21, 12 States were graded as Level III (scoring 851–900), 6 States as Level IV (score 801–850), 6 States as Level V (score 751–800), 4 States as Level VI, and one State, Arunachal Pradesh, remained in Level VII (score 651–700). In total, 27 States and UTs have raised their overall PGI score from 2019–20 to 2020–21.
Inter-state differential
One of the main goals of PGI is to inform the States and UTs of the areas of improvement so that they can work to earn the greatest grade and score. Wherever they are graded, all States and UTs should try to advance to higher grades the next year. The inter-state disparity is calculated as the difference between the highest and the lowest-ranked states. The inter-state disparity in 2017-18 was almost three hundred, which rose above 300 points in 2018-19. For 2019-20, this difference jumped to 384, and for 2020-21, the difference dropped to 259, demonstrating a considerable improvement in the performance of the states at the bottom.
What caused these improvements?
While there has been considerable progress in the states’ rankings in PGI grades, it is also important to look at the areas of such improvement. As noted earlier, the grading is done for five domains – learning outcomes and quality, access, infrastructure and facilities, equity, and Governance Process.
Improvement in the Governance process is one of the significant factors contributing to a rise in PGI ratings, according to the domain-specific analysis. There has been a modest improvement in access for major states. Given that the data source is the same—the National Achievement Survey, 2017—the scores in the domains of learning outcomes and quality remained constant. All major states except Tamil Nadu did better at enhancing facilities and infrastructure with Chhattisgarh standing out as the top performer. Very few states improved equity, whiles states like Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Gujarat, Bihar, and Rajasthan showed a decline in equity provisioning.
Key Caveat
In a welcoming move, the PGI Report for 2021–22 will be redesigned by adding new indicators to broaden the coverage without changing the total points to be consistent with NEP 2020 plans. Thus, the Index will give greater weight to domains like teachers, digital education, learning outcomes, etc., The updated PGI 2021–2022, would remove the obsolete and saturated indicators while the grading and marking procedure is expected to be more precise for future editions.

created: November 10, 2022


text:
Review: UNEP report highlights the impact of ‘Plastic Pollution’ on migratory species
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
September 13, 2021
Recently, the United Nations Environment Program’s Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) released a report that talks about the impact of plastic pollution on terrestrial and aquatic animals in the Asia-Pacific region. The report highlighted the severe impact of plastic pollution on various migratory species.
Recently, the United Nations Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) released a report which for the first time focusses on the impact of plastic pollution on terrestrial and aquatic animals in the Asia-Pacific region. According to the report, migratory species are likely to be the most vulnerable to mounting plastic pollution as they have more chances of interacting with plastic during migration. Impact on those animals which are protected under CMS has been emphasized in the report.
📢BREAKING: New UN Report Finds Migratory Species Are Likely Among the Most Vulnerable to Plastic Pollution
It confirms #PlasticPollution impacts land & freshwater CMS-protected species in Asia-Pacifichttps://t.co/25KeoGRpLR
Report is part of @UNEP CounterMeasure II Project pic.twitter.com/fKTITj1yxQ
Only 9% of the billions of tonnes of plastic waste generated has been recycled
The wide range of applications of plastic, and its usefulness has made plastic inevitable in human lives. It has been estimated that over 8.3 billion tonnes of plastics have been produced since the beginning of industrial production, around the 1950s. However, over 79% has ended up in landfills, dumps, or natural environments, and about 12% has been incinerated. Only about 9% of the plastic waste ever produced has been recycled. Even if humans resort to ambitious plastic waste reduction measures, over 53 million tonnes of plastics will be released to the environment every year, and the figure can go up to 90 million tonnes per year in the absence of such measures. The devastating impact of plastic on human health in not unknown. Likewise, plastic pollution has a significant impact on wildlife as well. Animals may purposefully or unknowingly interact with plastics resulting in entanglement or ingestion.
Microplastics are more dangerous than macroplastics
In recent years, studies have emphasized on macro and microplastics. Macroplastics are large (> 20 mm) plastic debris such as plastic bottles, and packaging material while microplastics are small plastic fragments typically less than 5 mm derived from the breakdown of microplastics. The problem with microplastics is that they are ubiquitous and small in size. In addition to these, nanoplastics, and microbeads, which are smaller than microplastics and mesoplastics (5 to 20 mm) are also present in the environment.
Macroplastics such as fishing gear, or ‘ghost nets’ discarded in water bodies lead to fatal injury or drowning of animals. Further, incidents of animals suffering gut blockage upon ingestion of plastic waste, resulting in starvation are also being witnessed. Another problem is that Macroplastics provide a large surface area for the colonization of organisms, leading to the transport of non-native and potentially invasive or pathogenic species to new regions. Meanwhile, microplastics which are now present everywhere including deep-sea and Antarctic freshwaters can be ingested by all organisms. Particle toxicity, abrasion, inflammation, translocation into tissues, are some of the consequences of ingesting microplastics, as per the recent UN report.
Migratory species are exposed to plastic pollution throughout the migration
Various species migrate owing to reasons such as season, food, and reproductive reasons. This is a natural process. Already, anthropogenic disturbances, habitat loss, and climate change are inducing changes or loss in the migratory behaviour of animals. Unlike non-migratory species which are exposed to only local levels of plastic contamination, migratory species may be exposed to pollutants at any stage throughout their migration. As a result, the concentration of pollutants accumulated in migratory species is much more than in non-migrant species.
Case studies on Mekong and Ganges Rivers have been included in the report
In the report, two case studies from the Asia Pacific region have been highlighted. One is about the Mekong River flowing through China, Cambodia, Vietnam, Thailand, Laos, and Myanmar before entering the South China Sea. Second is the Ganges which originates from the Himalayas in India and ends at the Ganges-Brahmaputra Meghna (GBM) delta in Bangladesh and ultimately joins the Bay of Bengal. The two river basins alone contribute about 2 lakh tonnes of plastic to the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean, every year.
Mammals are the most vulnerable to plastic pollution in marine and terrestrial life
According to the study, species protected under the CMS are impacted by plastic pollution in river ecosystems and on land. This includes freshwater species, land animals, and birds.
Among freshwater species, it was observed that air-breathing aquatic mammals are badly affected by entanglement as compared to other aquatic organisms as entanglement in plastic waste would prevent the animals from reaching the surface for air resulting in drowning. The Ganges River Dolphin, classified as endangered in the IUCN red list with only about 3,500 left in the world, was identified to be the second most vulnerable species with respect to risk of entanglement due to the discarded fishing gear in the river. Likewise, the Irrawaddy Dolphins in Mekong with less than 100 left (also classified as endangered in IUCN list), Porpoises and Dugongs are victims of plastic pollution in the region.
Among terrestrial species as well, mammals are the most vulnerable. Ruminants such as cows, goats, and sheep have been observed to be scavenging in waste sites. The Indian Elephant which is endemic to the region has been observed to be scavenging on rubbish dumps in Sri Lanka and ingesting plastic in Thailand. However, more research is required with respect to terrestrial mammals. Only anecdotal evidence has been presented in the report.
Birds interact more with plastic waste than other species
Birds constitute over 80% of the species listed by CMS in the Asia-Pacific region. They also account for the most observed plastic interactions. Migratory birds such as the Black-faced Spoonbill, Long-Legged Buzzard, and the Osprey have been observed making nests out of plastics such as ropes, fishing lines and shipping debris which often result in the entanglement of their chicks. Migratory seabirds such as Black-footed Albatrosses and Laysan Albatrosses were more vulnerable to plastic ingestion as they select items from the ocean surface to feed. Plastic from degraded post-consumer products has been observed in the digestive contents of albatross chicks in the North Pacific.
Need for immediate measures to avert further damage to species
Major challenges in the Asia-Pacific region include the lack of understanding of plastic leakage to land and rivers, building up of unrecyclable waste, and lack of financial support for recycling, among others. Most of the countries in the region are either Least or Lower-Middle Income Countries, according to OECD and thereby face financial constraints.
Discarded fishing gear is dangerous with entanglement which is a widely reported problem. Aquatic, terrestrial, and avian species are all affected by it. Thus, providing greater incentives for retaining and repairing fishing gear while also trying to recover discarded fishing gear from the environment has been recommended in the report. Further, reducing plastic waste, preventing plastic from reaching the environment, education campaigns to spread awareness, and coordinated action between local communities, academics, industry, governments, and NGOs are some of the measures recommended.
10 states accounted for 81% of plastic waste generated in India in 2018-19
Data as per the MoSPI’s Envistats, which is estimated based on CPCB’s data, indicated that India generated close to 3.14 million tonnes of plastic waste or 31.4 lakh tonnes in 2018-19. Maharashtra was estimated to have generated over 4.10 lakh tonnes of plastic waste in 2018-19, followed by Tamil Nadu with 4.01 lakh tonnes. Gujarat was third in line with over 3.57 lakh tonnes of plastic waste generated followed by West Bengal with 3 lakh tonnes. 10 states were estimated to have generated more than one lakh tonnes each and together generated 25.4 lakh tonnes of plastic waste, accounting for close to 81% of the total plastic waste generation estimated in the country.
MoEF made amendments to Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016
The Ministry of Environment notified the Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016 to deal with the plastic waste menace in the country. The rules mandate the responsibilities of the generator of waste, local bodies, gram panchayats, waste generators, retailers, etc. to manage such waste. On 13 August 2021, the government notified the Plastic Waste Management Amendment Rules, 2021 which prohibits certain single-use plastic items by 2022, such as plastic earbuds, plastic plates, cutlery, cigarette packets, packing films, ice cream sticks, etc. The thickness of plastic carry bags has been increased from 50 microns to 75 microns and to 120 microns with effect from 31 December 2022. Furthermore, state governments have been requested to develop a comprehensive action plan for the elimination of single-use plastics and effective implementation of Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016, and its implementation in a time-bound manner.
In addition to this, plastic waste has been used in India for laying roads. 703 km length of National Highways have been constructed using plastic waste in wearing a coat of flexible pavement. A demonstration plant of one tonne capacity for the daily processing of plastic waste to produce diesel has been set up at Council of Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR)-Indian Institute of Petroleum (IIP).

created: September 13, 2021


text:
UNESCO Science Report highlights need for increased R&D spending in India
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
June 25, 2021
UNESCO released the 7th edition of its ‘Science Report’ recently. The report tracks spending of various countries on R&D between 2014 & 2018. Among other things, the report highlights the need for increased R&D spending in India as the current spending is less than 15% of what the USA or China spends on R&D.
The latest edition of the UNESCO Science Report (USR) was released on 11 June 2021. USR is one of the flagship publications of UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) and is published every 5 years.
The USR-2021 is the seventh in the series of UNESCO Science Reports, which was first launched in 1993. The sub-theme for this edition of USR is ‘The race against time for Smarter Development’ and it lays emphasis on the performance and efforts of the countries towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) targets set for 2030. The report assumes prominence as a third of the timespan (five years) have passed on the way to the 2030 deadline.
Accordingly, many of the countries are aligning their national policies with ‘The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’ and are engaged in the transition towards becoming ‘Green’ economies. Apart from this Green transition, digitalization of public services is also being undertaken to improve service delivery, support business, combat corruption, reduce tax evasion, etc. Scientific developments play a key role in aiding countries achieve this dual green & digital transition.
The latest USR observes that the governments need to increase their commitment towards Research & Development (R&D) to aid this transition.
The trends in R&D spending in various countries is one of the major themes of USR-21. In this story, we look at these trends with special emphasis on India.
Global Research Spending between 2014-18 increased by 19.2% while GDP grew by 14.8%
During the period 2014-18, the Global Investment on Research has outpaced the Economic growth. The global research spending increased by 19.2% while the global economy during this period grew by 14.8%. The value is measured in terms of Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) $ billions, with 2005 constant prices.
Globally, the Gross Domestic Expenditure on R&D (GERD) increased from 1482.68 PPP $ billion in 2014 to 1767.27 PPP $ billion. This translates to an increase of spending on research as a portion of GDP from 1.73% to 1.79%. While the investment in research at a global level looks promising, it is not uniform across the regions & countries with considerable disparities.
Among the various regions, East & Southeast Asia, North America & European Union account for the higher spending on Research.
China contributes the highest towards the global increase in R&D spending. Nearly 44% of the global increase in Research spending during 2014-18 is by China. The investment in research by China increased from 313.94 PPP $ billion in 2014 to 439 PPP $ billion in 2018.
Despite the increase, the R&D spending by India is still less than 15% of what the USA & China spend individually.
Israel & South Korea have the highest GERD as share of GDP
The total GERD of Israel in 2018 was 13.81 PPP $ billions, which is around 1/4 of India’s GERD. However, in terms of Research Intensity (RI) i.e., GERD as a share of GDP, it is the highest in the world. The RI of Israel is 4.95% in 2018, which is a further increase from 4.17% in 2014. During this period, it has overtaken South Korea as the most Research-Intensive country.
As was the case in GERD, North America, East & Southeast Asia & European Union are the regions that have a higher Research Intensity.
The difference becomes starker when ‘Per capita GERD’ is taken into consideration. India’s Per Capita GERD is 39.95 PPP $ compared to 1647.67 PPP $ in Israel. In the case of China, which has a larger population than India, it is 307.51 PPP $, more than 7 times that of India.  The Per Capita GERD in Mexico & South Africa is 44.27 PPP $ & 90.55 PPP $ respectively.
Despite increase in absolute spending on Research, RI has declined
India’s  GERD (at Current prices) increased five-fold during the period 2004-2018. From spending of US $ 3.4 billion in 2004, it has increased to the US $ 17.82 billion for the year 2018.
While there is a considerable increase in the absolute value of research spending over the years, Research Intensity i.e., GERD as a share of GDP has seen a decline since 2014.
In 2008, RI was 0.84 which after a decline in the following two years, increased to 0.91% in 2012 & 2013.  However, in 2014, RI reached 0.71% after a sharp decline. It further fell to 0.69% in 2014. Between the 2016 to 2019 period, the Research Intensity remained constant at 0.7%.
It must be noted that the GERD here is calculated as percentage of GDP, and not adjusted to PPP as in case of the earlier figures.
Defence Research constitutes the major share of India’s GERD. In 2017, GERD for the Defence Research & Development Organization (DRDO) was Rs. 15.19 thousand crores, a nearly two-fold increase compared to 2009. The Research spending on Department of Space has also more than doubled during this period from Rs. 4.16 thousand crores to Rs. 9.13 thousand crores.
Comparatively, ICMR’s (Indian Council of Medical Research) GERD is Rs. 1.46 thousand crores in 2017 and that of the Department of Biotechnology (DBT) was Rs. 1.7 thousand crores. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for greater spending on research in general & medical research in particular.
As part of Mission Surakasha – The Indian COVID-19 development mission, Rs. 900 crores over a period of 12 months were announced as part of Aatmanirbhar Package 3.0.
Investment on R&D continues to be a challenge for many of the Developing & Underdeveloped countries
Around 93% of the global GERD in 2018 was by G-20 countries. The least developed countries contributed to only around 0.11% of the global share. This vast difference between the developed & under-developed countries highlights the reality of the difference in spending though there has been an overall increase in global GERD.
While it is natural that disparities exist between the stronger economies that are more scientifically inclined and the others, the less than considerable change in the 2014-18 period is a cause for concern.
The disparity can be observed across the regions, as highlighted earlier. While the Research spending has increased in most of the countries, the RI does remain lower, highlighting that the expenditure on research is not commensurate to the economic growth. The situation is worse-off in countries suffering from an economic slowdown.
The symbiotic relationship between Development & Scientific Research presents multiple challenges for the developing & underdeveloped countries as it affects their progress in reaching the SDG targets. While sharing of know-how and scientific knowledge by the developed countries is an option, home-grown local solutions are possible only with investment in R&D.
Data indicates that the level of international collaboration for low-income countries remains high at around 70% while this remains at a lower level in the case of upper-middle-income & lower-middle-income countries.
It is high time that countries like India increase their spending on R&D and also diversify the spending to reach the development targets.
Featured Image: UNESCO Science Report