The Shocking Truth Behind Development Rankings

Topic: GS3 – Economy, GS3 – Environment

Context

The development models of affluent nations, despite their high HDI rankings, are ecologically unsustainable. This raises concerns about redefining progress to balance human well-being with environmental limits.

The Cost of Development and Environmental Degradation

• Recent wildfires in California caused massive destruction, with estimated economic losses of around $250 billion, comparable to Greece’s GDP in 2023.
• These disasters highlight the hidden costs of the development models pursued by the richest nations.

Unsustainable Resource Consumption

• If every country consumed resources like the United States or the European Union, multiple Earths would be needed to sustain such lifestyles.
• Despite this, global benchmarks like the United Nations’ Human Development Index (HDI) portray these nations as ideal models of development.
• This contradiction between celebrated development metrics and ecological realities is both misleading and dangerous.

Flaws in the HDI Model

• The HDI ranks countries based on life expectancy, education, and income but ignores environmental impact.
• Nations with high HDI rankings are also among the world’s largest resource consumers and carbon emitters.
• If the entire world followed their development model, the planet would suffer severe ecological collapse.
• Wealthy nations have already exceeded multiple planetary boundaries, including excessive greenhouse gas emissions and ecological destruction.
• The HDI, by not considering these factors, promotes an unsustainable model of progress that benefits a few while harming the planet.

Planetary Pressures-adjusted HDI (PHDI) and Its Limitations

• In response to criticism, the UN introduced the Planetary Pressures-adjusted HDI (PHDI) in 2020, which lowers HDI scores for countries with high environmental impacts.
• However, the PHDI still ranks countries relative to each other rather than against absolute ecological limits.
• High-income nations continue to score well, not because they are sustainable, but because other nations have even worse environmental records.
• This approach creates an illusion of progress while maintaining the status quo of environmental degradation.

The Need to Focus on Middle-Income Countries

• Some middle-income countries have achieved decent living standards while maintaining a lower ecological footprint.
• Costa Rica has managed high life expectancy, universal health care, and widespread literacy through investments in renewable energy and forest conservation.
• Sri Lanka has achieved an HDI of 0.78, with high literacy and life expectancy due to early investments in health care and education.
• However, Sri Lanka has also faced challenges, including an economic crisis in 2022, inflation, political instability, and ethnic tensions.
• These examples show that sustainability requires balancing economic development with environmental responsibility and social justice.

India’s Path Forward

• The development models of affluent nations cannot be applied to a country with 1.4 billion people without severe ecological consequences.
• Instead, India should explore alternative models that ensure both human well-being and environmental sustainability.
• While no country offers a perfect solution, some middle-income nations provide valuable lessons in aligning development with ecological limits.
• Progress should not be defined solely by GDP growth or HDI rankings but by ensuring that all citizens live with dignity within the planet’s ecological boundaries.
• This is not just a moral responsibility but a necessary strategy for long-term survival in the 21st century.

Practice Question:  Critically analyze the limitations of the Human Development Index (HDI) in assessing sustainable development. Suggest alternative approaches to measure progress while considering ecological constraints. (150 Words /10 marks)

2. Resolving the vexatious fishing dispute

Topic: GS2 – International Relations

Context

A key leader in the Sri Lankan government recently urged India and Tamil Nadu to take decisive action against illegal fishing in Sri Lankan waters.

Long-standing Fisheries Dispute in Palk Bay

• The Palk Bay fisheries dispute has been unresolved for years despite strong statements from Sri Lanka’s leaders.
• In 2015, a former Sri Lankan leader justified actions taken by the Sri Lankan Navy against Indian fishermen trespassing into their waters.

Concerns Over Bottom Trawling

• Many Indian fishermen from Tamil Nadu and Puducherry cross the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) in search of better fishing grounds.
• The primary concern of Sri Lankan fishermen is bottom trawling, which destroys marine ecosystems and disrupts fish breeding cycles.
• Bottom trawling is responsible for nearly half of all discarded fish and marine life globally.
• The economic imbalance between Indian fishermen, who have more resources, and Sri Lankan fishermen, who are still recovering from the civil war, adds to the tension.

Challenges Faced by Indian Fishermen

• Indian fishermen have limited fishing areas due to rocky seabeds and coral reefs in their waters.
• The Tamil Nadu Marine Fishing Regulation Act, 1983, further restricts fishing activities.
• Deep-sea fishing, an alternative to fishing in Palk Bay, requires longer voyages of around three weeks and involves high operational costs.
• The joint scheme introduced in 2017 by the Indian and Tamil Nadu governments to promote deep-sea fishing has not been successful due to the difficulties in transitioning from traditional fishing practices.

Suggested Solutions

• Governments should promote alternative livelihoods like seaweed cultivation, open sea cage farming, and sea/ocean ranching.
• The Indian government could merge the ₹1,600-crore Palk Bay deep-sea fishing scheme with the ₹20,050-crore Pradhan Mantri Matsya Sampada Yojana to provide higher financial support for deep-sea fishing vessels.

Need for Talks Between Fishermen

• Given the complexities involved, a sudden transition away from bottom trawling is difficult.
• The Sri Lankan government has not addressed the need for discussions between fishermen from both countries.
• India and Tamil Nadu have supported the resumption of these talks, with the last meeting held in 2016.
• During a meeting in Colombo last year, India requested the resumption of talks, but there has been no progress.
• Sri Lankan fishermen from the Northern Province have also shown interest in dialogue.

Conclusion

• The annual two-month fishing ban in eastern India, starting in mid-April, provides a suitable period for holding talks.
• A high-level visit from India in April presents an opportunity for Sri Lanka to push for a resolution to the dispute through direct discussions.

PYQ: India is an age-old friend of Sri Lanka. Discuss India’s role in the recent crisis in Sri Lanka in light of the preceding statement. (150 Words /10 marks)  (UPSC CSE (M) GS-2 2022)

Practice Question:  Discuss the Palk Bay fisheries dispute between India and Sri Lanka, highlighting the impact of bottom trawling on marine ecosystems and the livelihood concerns of Sri Lankan fishermen. Suggest sustainable solutions to address the issue.  (250 Words /15 marks)

If you like this Editorial don’t forget to check this – Compliance shake-up ahead Brace for big changes