Skip to main content

Are Gujarat’s climate change actions ‘superficial’? (downtoearth)





Gujarat is touted as one of the most economically prolific states in India. The state is also known to prioritise good governance and transparency. Therefore, it is surprising to find conflicting views on the status of implementation of the state’s action plan on climate change, with state government officials touting their commitment for implementing climate action and a prominent civil society representative saying that the claims are false and most of the climate actions in the state are business-as-usual.

According to the Gujarat government, the state places high priority on actions to combat climate change, which is evident from the government’s recent announcement on allocation of Rs 25,000 crore for expenditure on climate change-related actions in the next 10 years. This positive rhetoric from the state government is not new, with Gujarat being the first state in Asia to start a department of climate change in 2010.

The effectiveness of the above actions, however, has been questioned. The climate change department is understaffed and just double-reports the work done by the Gujarat Energy Development Agency (GEDA) on renewable energy, claims Mahesh Pandya, director at Paryavaran Mitra—Ahmedabad-based NGO working on socio-environmental issues. He said that the actions taken by the state government on the issue are insincere and superficial and are aimed at increasing the visibility of the government.

This, he says, is evident from the lack of focus from the state government on initiatives that reduce climate change vulnerability of sectors like agriculture and water resources in the state. According to him, the activities listed on the climate change department website are mostly awareness-raising actions and business-as-usual development activities that were planned much before the publication of the state’s climate change plan.

With regard to Rs 25,000-crore allocation for expenditure on climate change-related activities, Pandya says that the allocation is mostly for solar energy projects in the state and ignores adaptation action in the forest, agriculture and water sectors. The state’s budget document for 2016-17 seems to confirm this claim, with more than 90 per cent of the budget being allocated to renewable energy initiatives.

The state government representative mentioned a number of actions being undertaken by the various state-level line departments on climate change. The nature, scale and alignment of these actions with the SAPCC, however, could not be ascertained as the reporting document for the SAPCC has not yet been published. This, civil society representative said, is surprising with the state projecting an image of efficient governance and transparency. The representative from Paryavaran Mitra says that Gujarat should lead the nation in reporting progress towards their state action plan on climate change.

Despite being the first state in India to have its own climate change department, Gujarat only submitted its SAPCC in late 2014. According to Pandya, this shows the superficial nature of the commitment from the Gujarat government on climate change action. He believes that climate change action in the state has been used to raise the state’s media profile, while ignoring needs of rural population in the state, including access to electricity.

Therefore, the Gujarat government should clarify the status of implementation of the SAPCC and dispel the speculation and apprehension plaguing climate action in the state.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

NGT terminates chairmen of pollution control boards in 10 states (downtoearth,)

Cracking the whip on 10 State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) for ad-hoc appointments, the National Green Tribunal has ordered the termination of Chairpersons of these regulatory authorities. The concerned states are Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttarakhand, Kerala, Rajasthan, Telangana, Haryana, Maharashtra and Manipur. The order was given last week by the principal bench of the NGT, chaired by Justice Swatanter Kumar. The recent order of June 8, 2017, comes as a follow-up to an NGT judgment given in August 2016. In that judgment, the NGT had issued directions on appointments of Chairmen and Member Secretaries of the SPCBs, emphasising on crucial roles they have in pollution control and abatement. It then specified required qualifications as well as tenure of the authorities. States were required to act on the orders within three months and frame Rules for appointment [See Box: Highlights of the NGT judgment of 2016 on criteria for SPCB chairperson appointment]. Having

High dose of Vitamin C and B3 can kill colon cancer cells: study (downtoearth)

In a first, a team of researchers has found that high doses of Vitamin C and niacin or Vitamin B3 can kill cancer stem cells. A study published in Cell Biology International showed the opposing effects of low and high dose of vitamin C and vitamin B3 on colon cancer stem cells. Led by Bipasha Bose and Sudheer Shenoy, the team found that while low doses (5-25 micromolar) of Vitamin C and B3 proliferate colon cancer stem cells, high doses (100 to 1,000 micromolar) killed cancer stem cells. Such high doses of vitamins can only be achieved through intravenous injections in colon cancer patients. The third leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide, colon cancer can be prevented by an intake of dietary fibre and lifestyle changes. While the next step of the researchers is to delineate the mechanisms involved in such opposing effects, they also hope to establish a therapeutic dose of Vitamin C and B3 for colon cancer stem cell therapy. “If the therapeutic dose gets validated under in vivo

SC asks Centre to strike a balance on Rohingya issue (.hindu)

Supreme Court orally indicates that the government should not deport Rohingya “now” as the Centre prevails over it to not record any such views in its formal order, citing “international ramifications”. The Supreme Court on Friday came close to ordering the government not to deport the Rohingya. It finally settled on merely observing that a balance should be struck between humanitarian concern for the community and the country's national security and economic interests. The court was hearing a bunch of petitions, one filed by persons within the Rohingya community, against a proposed move to deport over 40,000 Rohingya refugees. A three-judge Bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, began by orally indicating that the government should not deport Rohingya “now”, but the government prevailed on the court to not pass any formal order, citing “international ramifications”. With this, the status quo continues even though the court gave the community liberty to approach i