Current Affairs – June 25, 2025

{GS2 – MoAFW – Schemes} Market Intervention Scheme

• Context (TH): The Centre has announced the Market Intervention Scheme to protect mango farmers from losses due to falling market prices.

About Market Intervention Scheme (MIS)

• Objective: Protects farmers from distress sales during sharp price drops of perishable & horticultural crops not covered under MSP.
• Component of: Pradhan Mantri Annadata Aay Sanrakshan Abhiyan (PM-AASHA).
• Trigger Condition: Activated when there is a ≥10% drop in prices or ≥10% increase in production over the previous normal year.
• Initiation: Implemented on request by State/UT governments.
  • Centre shares losses (50:50 or 75:25 for NE States).
• Scope: Covers crops like onions, tomatoes, apples, chillies, grapes, garlic, etc.
• Implementation: Time-bound procurement at a pre-decided intervention price, support limited to defined quantity, markets & period.
• Significance: Ensure remunerative prices, prevent rural distress and maintain market stability for perishables.

PM-AASHA

• Launched in: 2018 by the Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare.
• Aim: To ensure that farmers receive assured & fair prices for their produce, especially during market fluctuations.
• Includes 3 key schemes:
  1. PSS (Price Support Scheme): Government directly procures crops at MSP, mainly pulses & oilseeds.
  2. PDPS (Price Deficiency Payment Scheme): Farmers receive the difference between MSP & market price, without needing to sell their produce to government agencies.
  3. PPSS (Private Procurement & Stockist Scheme): Involves private players to procure crops at MSP when government agencies cannot.
• Focus: Perishable and Non-MSP Crops like pulses, oilseeds and others that are often vulnerable to price crashes.
• Income Assurance: Helps reduce post-harvest losses & ensures income stability.
• Rural Economy: The scheme contributes to rural economic growth, empowers farmers & promotes market confidence.
• Flexibility of Choice: Through PDPS & PPSS, farmers can choose between physical procurement or direct payments, making it adaptable & inclusive.

{GS2 – MoHUA – Schemes} 10 Years of Smart Cities Mission

• Context (PIB): The Smart Cities Mission (SCM) completed 10 years.

• Launched on June 25, 2015, the SCM aims to improve the quality of life in 100 cities by providing efficient services, robust infrastructure, and sustainable solutions.
• Focused on economic growth, inclusivity, & sustainability, it addresses diverse needs, such as housing, transportation, and education, to create adaptable urban spaces that serve as models for other cities.

Key Features of SCM

Funding & Financial Mechanism

• Centrally Sponsored Scheme: ₹48,000 crore over five years (₹100 crore per city annually). States and Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) must match central funding.
• Additional Financing Through Municipal Bonds, Finance Commission Grants, Government Programs & Borrowings, and Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs).

Mission Strategy

Selection Process

• Cities were selected via competitive federalism (2016–2018).
• Each city was given 5 years to implement its proposed projects.

Implementation

• City-level Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs): Formed with 50:50 equity between State/UT and ULBs for implementation.
• Initial duration: 2015-2020 (extended till 31^st March 2025).

Two-pronged Development Approach

• Area-Based Development (ABD): Focused transformation of selected city areas (retrofitting, redevelopment, or greenfield projects) chosen through citizen participation.
• Pan-City Initiatives: City-wide deployment of innovative solutions, especially ICT (Information & Communication Technology) tools.

Integrated Command and Control Centres (ICCCs)

• ICCCs are set up in all cities for real-time monitoring of urban services under the mission.

Key Achievements

• Project Completion: 94% of the total 8,067 projects under SCM have been completed, with an investment of ₹1.64 lakh crore.
• ICCCs: All 100 Smart Cities have operational ICCCs, which utilizeutilize data to make informed decisions. These ICCCs also functioned as COVID war rooms during the pandemic.
• Public Safety and Security: Over 84,000 CCTV surveillance cameras have been installed in 100 Smart Cities, aiding in crime monitoring.
• Water Supply: 28 cities now have drinking water treatment capacity exceeding 2,900 million litres per day (MLD), with over 17,026 km of water supply monitored via Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, which reduce non-revenue water and leakages.
• Vibrant Public Spaces: >1,320 projects on public spaces have been developed across 84 smart cities.
• Sewerage: 27 cities have created a wastewater treatment capacity of 1,370 MLD, which is being reused for various purposes, including gardening and industrial usage.
• Solid Waste Management: Over 66 cities are managing solid waste with increased technology use, improving route management, collection efficiency, and daily management.
• Mobility: Over 1,740 km of smart roads have been constructed or improved. 177 Smart Mobility projects were completed in the FY 2024-25.
• Education: 9,433 smart classrooms have been developed across 2,300 government schools in 71 smart cities. Further, 41 digital libraries have also been developed.
• Health: 172 e-health centres and clinics have been established, and 152 health ATMs have also been installed. Fifteen cities have developed an e-health record-keeping system.
• Other initiatives include ‘Cycles4Change’ and ‘Streets4People‘, which aim to promote open spaces for active living.

Smart Cities Success Stories

• Visakhapatnam: The Solar Street Lights project generates a reduction of 242 tons in carbon emissions and saves ₹12 lakh in electricity costs every year.
  • Its “All-abilities” park offers an inclusive space with wheelchair-friendly paths, ramps, and sensory play zones for children with disabilities.
• Udaipur: Interventions in Solid waste management reclaimed 32,830 square meters of land and helped the city move towards self-sustainability in waste management.
• Kakinada: Kakinada’s ICCC enhances urban governance through real-time monitoring of traffic, air quality, and public services using 34 digital boards, adaptive signals, and smart poles.
• Solapur: To eradicate the practice of open defecation, Solapur Smart City has established E-Toilets throughout the city.
• Coimbatore replaced over 97,000 streetlights with LED lamps and installed solar plants and rooftop systems, resulting in annual energy savings of nearly 1.5 crore kWh and cost savings of ₹9.67 crore.

{GS2 – Polity – IC – Parliament} Estimates Committee

• Context (IE): The Estimates Committee marked its 75^th anniversary with a national conference inaugurated by the Lok Sabha Speaker in 2025.

• The Estimates Committee is a standing financial committee of Parliament.
• It is established under the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha (1952).
• It reviews budget estimates to suggest economies and ensure efficient use of public funds.
• It does not review PSUs, which are overseen by the Committee on Public Undertakings (COPU).

Historical Background

• The Estimates Committee has evolved from the Standing Finance Committee established in 1921 under the Government of India Act, 1919.
• It is formally established in 1950 based on the recommendation of then Finance Minister John Mathai.
• It expanded from 25 to 30 members in 1956 to improve scrutiny capacity.

Composition

• Lok Sabha Only: Consists of 30 members elected from Lok Sabha; Rajya Sabha has no representation.
  • A Minister cannot be a member of the Committee.
• Election: Members are elected annually by proportional representation (single transferable vote).
• Chairperson: Appointed by the Speaker of Lok Sabha, usually from the ruling party.
• Tenure: Members serve a one-year term and may be re-elected.

Core Functions

• Suggest Economies: Recommends savings and efficiency reforms.
• Policy Alternatives: Suggests alternate governance policies.
• Fund Evaluation: Checks if spending aligns with stated policy.
• Presentation Format: Suggests better format for budget estimates.

Other Functions

• Reviews estimates and expenditure practices of selected ministries and statutory bodies if referred.
• Takes up matters of special interest referred by the Speaker or Lok Sabha.
• Recommends process improvements (e.g. procurement, planning).

Working of the Committee

• Study Visits: Speaker-approved visits are informal and confidential; no evidence are recorded.
• Data Collection: Receives ministry memoranda and may request inputs from non-official stakeholders.
• Report Finalisation: Prepares findings using visits, documents, and testimonies.
• Submission and Replies: Submits reports; ministries reply within six months.
• Action Taken Reports (ATR): Reviews replies and presents ATRs in Lok Sabha.

Significance of Estimates Committee

• Oversight Role: Enhances Parliament’s oversight of spending.
• Efficient Allocation: Encourages the use of funds based on need.
• Debate Enabler: Enhances budget discussions with data-driven insights.
• Reform Catalyst: Drives systemic administrative changes.
• Transparency Mechanism: Ensures traceable public expenditure.
• Democratic Balance: Acts as a check on executive misuse of funds.

Limitations

• Advisory Nature: Recommendations are not binding.
• Post-Budget Role: Cannot review estimates before approval.
• Limited Coverage: Reviews few ministries per year.
• No Policy Evaluation: Cannot question policy rationale.
• Lacks Expert Input: No CAG or technical support.
• Short Tenure: One-year term limits continuity.

{GS2 – Polity – IC} 50 years of Emergency

• Context (IE): 50 years since the Emergency was imposed on June 25, 1975, it remains one of the darkest chapters in India’s democratic history.

Historical and Political Background

• Indira Gandhi, who rode to power in 1971 with a landslide victory, was facing mounting economic and political challenges:
  • Economic Distress: Fallout from 1971 Indo-Pak war, consecutive droughts, and the 1973 oil crisis.
  • Popular Discontent: Corruption, inflation, and misgovernance fuelled widespread dissatisfaction.
  • Student Movements: The 1974 Navnirman Andolan in Gujarat and subsequent protests in Bihar galvanized youth, with Jayaprakash Narayan (JP) leading a mass movement for Sampoorna Kranti (Total Revolution).
  • Judicial Blow: On June 12, 1975, the Allahabad High Court declared Indira Gandhi’s election void due to electoral malpractice.

• Fearing loss of power, Gandhi declared Emergency on the midnight of June 25, 1975. Power supply to newspaper offices was cut, and the announcement came via All India Radio the next morning

Key Features of the Emergency

• Centralization of Power: India’s federal structure was undermined as the Centre seized control over states, encroached on State List areas, and manipulated finances. The 42nd Amendment (1976) further centralized power, curtailed judicial review, and weakened institutional checks.
• Suppression of Civil Liberties: Fundamental rights were suspended, with media under pre-censorship and over 250 journalists jailed. Newspapers like The Indian Express resisted by publishing blank editorials.
• Draconian Laws: Over 1.12 lakh people were detained under laws like MISA and COFEPOSA. Opposition leaders, activists, students, and even common citizens faced imprisonment without trial.
• Forced Sterilisations: Sanjay Gandhi’s five-point programme, particularly the coercive family planning drive, led to forced sterilisations, especially in North India.
• Postponement of Elections: The 1976 Lok Sabha elections were deferred. In early 1977, Indira Gandhi lifted the Emergency and called elections, leading to Congress’s historic defeat and the Janata Party’s rise.

Constitutional Safeguards Post-Emergency

The 44^th Constitutional Amendment (1978), enacted by the Janata government, brought critical reforms:

• “Internal disturbance” as grounds for Emergency was replaced by “armed rebellion.”
• Emergency proclamation now required parliamentary approval by special majority within one month.
• Judicial review of Emergency proclamations was reinstated.
• Fundamental rights, especially Article 21 (Right to Life and Liberty), were made non-suspendable during Emergency.

Legacy and Long-Term Impact

• Political Realignments: The Emergency catalysed the rise of new political forces, the socialists, the RSS-BJP camp, and OBC leaders like Lalu Prasad, George Fernandes, and Ram Vilas Paswan.
• Rise of the OBC Movement: The Mandal Commission, appointed by the Janata government, laid the groundwork for OBC reservations and political empowerment in the 1990s.
• Decline of One-Party Dominance: The Congress’s 1977 defeat marked the beginning of the end of single-party rule. While the Janata experiment collapsed in 1979, the political churning eventually led to the Congress’s decimation in 2014.
• Democratic Vigilance: The Emergency has remained a symbolic caution for institutions and citizens alike, reinforcing the need for press freedom, judicial independence, and institutional checks on executive power.

Lessons for Today

• Vigilant citizenry and active civil society are crucial to defend democracy.
• Strong institutions must act as a bulwark against authoritarian tendencies.
• Democracy cannot rely solely on elections; it must rest on constitutional morality and public accountability.
• The media must function independently, especially during political crises.

{GS3 – Agri – Issues} India-US Trade Talks: Ethanol, Soyabean Concerns

• Context (IE): As India and the U.S. near a bilateral trade deal, concerns are rising in India’s sugar and oilseed sectors. With the U.S. pushing for greater market access for its corn, ethanol, and soyabean exports, domestic producers fear disruptions to local agro-industries.

Reasons for Concern

Ethanol Imports Threaten Sugar Industry

• Industry Concerns: India’s ethanol blending rose from 1.5% in 2013-14 to 14.6% in 2023-24, but the sugar industry fears losing its dominant role as ethanol supplier.
• Strategic Concern: Allowing imports of maize or even ethanol itself largely sourced from the US could marginalise Indian sugar mills further, threatening their diversification plans.

Soyabean Industry Fears Marginalisation

• Logistical Impracticality: Processing plants in interior Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra face high transport costs, making imported soyabean and meal exports economically unviable.
• Farmer Impact: With soyabean already trading below the MSP, further import liberalisation could disincentivise its cultivation. About 7 million farmers currently rely on this crop.
• Industry Viability: India crushes ~12 million tonnes of soyabean annually. However, unlike China, it lacks a large domestic feed market, making it hard to absorb imports especially with concerns over GM meal.

• Tariff Concerns: The recent reduction in import duties on crude soyabean, palm, and sunflower oils from 27.5% to 16.5% has squeezed the margins. Any new competition may force domestic units to shut down.

US Push for Agro Exports to India

• Diversification Strategy: The US is seeking new export markets for corn, ethanol, and soyabean amid trade tensions with China.
• India’s Appeal: India’s large consumer base makes it an attractive alternative for American agro exports.
• Policy Push: NITI Aayog has suggested importing GM maize for ethanol, citing cost benefits and minimal impact on the food supply.

Way Forward

• Balanced Trade: India must weigh strategic trade concessions against the health of its domestic agro-industries. Safeguards and phased implementation should be considered to avoid sectoral shocks.
• Protect Farmer Interests: Ensuring MSP adherence and crop diversification incentives will be critical to prevent widespread farmer distress.
• Rethink GM Crop Policy: A broader, consultative debate on the import and usage of GM crops, especially for industrial purposes, is needed before policy commitments are made.
• Invest in Infrastructure Near Ports: If imports are inevitable, facilitating new processing hubs closer to ports could attract investment and reduce logistical bottlenecks.

{GS3 – Agri – Issues} Monsoon & Wildlife Induced Losses in Agriculture

• Context (IE): Monsoon failures & wildlife raids are causing major farm losses. A fair, timely & integrated policy is needed to protect farmer incomes.

Wildlife & Monsoon-Induced Losses

• Crop Damage: Erratic monsoons disrupt sowing (e.g., 2018 Kharif down by 9.7%) while wild animals like blackbucks, boars & elephants destroy standing crops.
• Financial Loss: Farmers spend heavily on irrigation during dry spells & on protection from wildlife (e.g., fencing, guarding), increasing input costs without proportional returns.
  • Maharashtra alone faces ₹10,000-40,000 Cr in annual wildlife-related losses but compensation disbursed (₹210 Cr in 2020–24) remains insufficient & delayed.
• Decline in Crops Diversity: Over 50% of affected farmers have stopped growing at least one crop due to rain unpredictability or repeated wildlife raids, reducing agricultural diversity & self-sufficiency.
• Livelihood Risks: Crop failures & repeated losses force farmers to abandon agriculture or migrate weakening rural economies & job stability.

Government Initiatives

• Wildlife Compensation Schemes: Under the Maharashtra Compensation Act (2023), farmers can claim compensation for crop damage by wild animals.
• Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY): Provides insurance coverage against crop loss due to erratic monsoons, floods & droughts across India.
• National Mission on Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA): Promotes climate-resilient practices such as water-use efficiency, soil health management & rain-fed farming.
• Multi-Department Panchnama Protocol: Involves forest, agriculture & revenue officials to assess & approve compensation claims for wildlife-related damage.
• IMD & Agromet Services: IMD provides monsoon forecasts and Agro-advisories to help farmers plan cropping cycles.
  • States like Maharashtra are exploring tech-based platforms to monitor wildlife movement & assess damage quickly.

Way Forward

• Fast-Track Compensation: Replace bureaucratic panchnama delays with app-based real-time reporting & direct benefit transfers (DBT) to farmers.
• “Support-Cum-Reward” Model: Implement incentive based schemes near forest areas to compensate farmers proactively.
• Farmer Awareness: Launch targeted education campaigns to inform farmers about compensation rights, filing processes & monsoon-resilient practices.
• Adaptive Farming: Encourage farmers to adopt resilient cropping systems (e.g., short-duration crops, floating farms).
• Localised Climate Action Plans: Develop district level strategies using granular climate & wildlife data for better planning & resource allocation.
• Predictive Tools: Use AI & satellite data to forecast wildlife activity & monsoon patterns for enabling pre-emptive action & targeted support.

{GS3 – Agri – Subsidies} Revisiting the Food & Fertilizer Subsidies

• Context (IE): With poverty levels at historic lows and India emerging as one of the fastest-growing major economies, experts argue that it is time to revisit and rationalize food and fertilizer subsidies.

India’s Expenditure on Food and Fertilizer Subsidies

• Food and fertilizer subsidies together accounted for over 50% of the Union Budget’s rural and agriculture spending in FY25 (Report by the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations).
• Food Subsidy: The food subsidy budget for FY26 is slated to be Rs 2.03 lakh crore. India is providing free food (rice or wheat, 5 kg per person per month) to more than 800 million people.
  • Nearly 73% of India’s agriculture budget is allocated towards welfare schemes and subsidies, leaving limited space for investment and innovation.
• Fertiliser Subsidy: The fertilizer subsidy is estimated to be ₹1.56 lakh crore in FY26.

Challenges in the Current Subsidy Framework

• Food Subsidy Leakages: Issues in the identification of beneficiaries, leakages in PDS, and low dietary diversity.
• Nutrient Imbalance: The government continues to regulate fertilizer prices, particularly for urea, leading to an imbalanced use of nutrients and inefficient resource allocation.
  • Heavy subsidy on urea leads to overuse of nitrogen and underuse of phosphorus and potassium, damaging soil health.
• Innovation Stagnation: Price controls and blanket subsidies hinder research and development (R&D) in the fertilizer and agricultural sectors.
• High Fiscal Burden: Rising subsidy bills constrain capital investment in agriculture, particularly in irrigation, infrastructure, and research and development (R&D).

Way Forward

• Food Coupons: Giving beneficiaries food coupons (digital wallet) to buy nutritious food like pulses, milk, and eggs from designated stores. It will help plug leakages, diversify diets, promote nutrition, and diversify the production basket.
• Fertiliser Coupons: Farmers can use these coupons to purchase chemical fertilizers and bio-fertilizers or engage in natural farming.
• Deregulating Fertiliser Prices: Correcting the imbalance in the use of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K), reducing leakages, and encouraging innovation in the fertilizer sector will be possible if the government moves towards price deregulation in the fertilizer sector.
• Invest in Agricultural Research and Development: Every rupee spent on agricultural research and development yields much better returns than fertilizer subsidies, power subsidies, education, or roads.
  • Investment in research and development may also lead to the adoption of climate-smart practices, further improving crop yields and resilience.

{GS3 – Envi – Conservation} Sustainable Development Report 2025

• Context (TH): India ranked 99^th out of 193 countries in the Sustainable Development Index 2025, marking its first-ever entry into the top 100.

• Sustainable Development Report is released by UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network.
• Country Coverage: Ranks 193 UN member states based on progress across 17 SDGs.
• Edition Info: This is the 10^th report, first published in 2016.
• Scoring System: Overall scores range from 0 (no progress made) to 100 (achieved all 17 goals), based on 126 global indicators.
• Trend Tracking: Annual progress is tracked using a simplified 17-indicator SDGi score.
• Objective: To measure, compare, and accelerate national progress toward the 2030 SDG targets.

Key Findings

• Top Rankings: Finland, Sweden, and Denmark hold the top three positions.
  • 19 of the top 20 countries are from Europe. Brazil (25^th) is top in the G20; Chile (7th) leads the OECD.
• Fastest Improvers: Benin (+14.5), Uzbekistan (+12.1), Nepal (+11.1), UAE (+9.9). East and South Asia lead in progress due to socioeconomic growth.
• Slow Global Progress: Only 17% of SDG targets are on track to be met by 2030.
• Key Barriers in SDG Progress: Conflicts, limited fiscal capacity, and weak governance.
• Capital Imbalance: The report calls for reforms to global finance, which favours wealthy nations.

India’s Performance

• India ranked 99^th with a score of ~67 (109^th in 2024). This is India’s first inclusion in the top 100.
• Regional Rank: Behind Bhutan (74), Nepal (85), China (49); ahead of Bangladesh (114) and Pakistan (140).
• Key Progress: Gains seen in electricity access (SDG 7) and child health (SDG 3).

Read more > Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

{GS3 – Envi – Degradation} Environmental Fallout of Global Wars

• Context (DTE): Beyond the visible human toll in conflict zones, war is driving a silent environmental crisis. Widespread destruction and use of heavy weaponry are releasing massive greenhouse gases and pollutants, posing lasting threats to global climate and ecosystems.

Environmental Consequences of Active Conflicts

• Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Global militaries contribute about 5.5% of total GHG emissions, more than civil aviation and shipping combined, which are driven by activities like troop movement, fuel combustion, and airstrikes.
  • Russia-Ukraine War: Emissions since 2022 have reached 230 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent, comparable to the combined annual emissions of some small European counties.
  • Gaza Conflict: Direct military operations in Gaza have released an estimated 1.9 million tonnes of CO₂ more than the annual emissions of 36 countries.
• Nuclear and Radioactive Risks: Attacks on nuclear infrastructure risk radioactive contamination across borders.
  • Iran–Israel Conflict: Strikes on Natanz and Fordow uranium sites damaged critical nuclear facilities.
• Toxic Air, Soil & Water Pollution: Bombings on oil refineries and fuel depots release harmful pollutants such as sulphur dioxide, hydrocarbons, and particulate matter.
  • Iran–Israel Conflict: Tehran Oil Refinery, Haifa Bazan Refinery, toxic fallout worsened urban air quality. Herzliya Wastewater Plant was damaged in a strike, raising local contamination risks.
• Environmental Degradation: Wars cause deforestation, soil erosion, and water scarcity.
  • Africa and Asia: Prolonged unrest in Burkina Faso, Mali, Sudan, DRC depletes forests and water sources. Myanmar, Afghanistan, and the India-Pakistan border face increased environmental stress due to unresolved tensions.
• Post-Conflict Carbon Footprint: Post-war rebuilding is resource intensive, often generating more emissions than combat itself.

Policy and Accountability Gaps

• No Mandatory Reporting: Military emissions are not mandatorily reported under international climate treaties. The Kyoto Protocol (1997) excluded them due to national security concerns. Although the Paris Agreement (2015) lifted this exemption, reporting remains voluntary.
• Accountability Blind Spot: Military-related emissions and damage are often excluded from international climate accountability frameworks, creating a blind spot in global climate policy.
• Lack of Transparency: The U.S. and other powers have resisted full transparency on military emissions citing national security, though their emissions rival some of the largest countries.
• Nuclear Sites in Conflict Zones: Absence of protected status and emergency response protocols.

Way Forward

• Warfare and Climate: Modern war is a major yet overlooked contributor to climate change and ecological damage, needing integration into global climate and security frameworks.
• Need for Accountability: Mandatory reporting of military emissions and accountability for environmental harm must be integrated into global governance frameworks, with growing support for the idea of “climate reparations” linked to war-related damage.
• Enduring Threats: War-related infrastructure damage, toxic contamination, and nuclear risks pose lasting threats to human security and sustainable development.
• Strengthening Institutions: Empower bodies like the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and IAEA to monitor and intervene in high-risk conflict zones.