Priyanka
Share
When it comes to fiscal arrangements, the Union Budget 2025 does not seem to yield any advances. The nod towards climate change action is nothing but tokenistic. Through the MoEFCC, there seem to be advancements as well with the allocation of funds rising by 2.47% but spending on critical areas including industrial decarbonization, climate adaptation, and ecosystem preservation continues to remain alarmingly low. Solitude on spending in neglected areas and increased spending on solar energy and electric vehicles suggest that the country is moving towards clean energy but the budget fails to address India’s multilateral climate objectives.
It is Indian policy that sets the goal on net zero emissions by 2070 while also setting ambitious plans to reduce intensity of emission by 50% by the year 2030. The journey to fulfilling these goals while also targeting Viksit Bharat is a developed India is complex and need focused development. Without sufficient action, India stands at the risk of losing approximately 24.7% of its GDP by the year 2070. For the rest of the world, who are losing faith in America after pulling out from the Paris Agreement, need a leader of the new climate that India can represent effectively. Unfortunately, the nation’s indecisive stance in treating climate as an emergency is dire in nature and requires immediate policy responses to perceived action vs. ambitious action.
Union Budget 2025: Action in the area of climate change lacks seriousness
Cooling off under the sun (AP)
Considering that there is the bare minimum budget allocation for essential climate sectors, how is India to perform meaningful climate action? More importantly, what strategies or structural changes need to happen to ensure that India’s climate commitments are met?
To begin with, India requires a thoughtful realignment of policymaking that fundamentally changes the manner in which development is viewed. One of the most immediate obstacles that India deals with is the dualism or schism between climate policies and disciplinary economic policies. The budget shows the persistent tension between economic growth – which results from furthering infrastructure or investing in industries – and environmental preservation. The measures the government announces to mitigate climate change are still completely different from the measures related to economic activity, fostering a false division. There is need for a change of attitude in which incorporating sustainable practices into development does not have to be an economic cost burden but can serve as a catalyst for fostering balanced and sustainable development.
The world’s second most populated nation should step away its usual dependency on GDP and focus on other indices that could relay economic progress. Including sustainability factors such as carbon emissions, resource usage, and resilience to climate change would give a better picture of growth. It is imperative that India works towards incorporating these parameters in their economic policies to ensure that growth does not lead to a deterioration of social and environmental factors.
Union Budget 2025 - Prudent At Best With Regards To Climate Change
Farmers busy planting samples in their fields (ANI)
Thirdly, the infrastructure spending clearly underlies further misallocation of opportunity. The capital outlay of ₹11.5 lakh crore indicates the government’s intention towards the infrastructure development of India. And yet, there is no skeletal framework to guide spending towards achieving climate resilience. What will be India's development in the next twenty years completely rests on the infrastructure initiatives started today, many of which are expected to still be operationally relevant beyond the year mark of 2050 while the risks associated with climate change are expected to sharply increase. The neglect of climate resiliency in infrastructure planning means that these initiatives will do more harm than good over decades.
Like the vast majority of nations, India's infrastructure spending needs to take into account the social and economic concerns raised by climate change affects. Developmental schemes often result in the rural poor being displaced from their homes, losing their land, and struggling to maintain a livelihood. Nevertheless, there are no clear plans suggested in the budget as to how these adverse effects will be addressed. The failure to incorporate climate risk in the planning of public investment is one of the most shocking features neglects. As India designs its future urban centers, thoroughfares, and power transmission networks, the projects necessitate a top-down shift in prescriptive climate sustainability approaches. It is important that the policy tools of the country enable infrastructure to be developed in a socially inclusive, environmentally appropriate, and economically efficient manner.
To prevent the worst effects of climate change, cutting emissions is essential. This means moving away from burning fossil fuels, and instead using renewable sources. But what we are seeing here is a delayed approach to what is an inevitable change. Climate Change Union 2025 should, and must, mark the beginning of a systemic change in this regard and transform how we allocate spending to truly tackle the overarching issues we all face.
The most concerning issue is the mitigation focus, neglecting adaptation altogether. Conservation funding remains stagnated and precisely timed coastal resilience spending is not being allocated. Markers of progress such as the National Adaptation Fund for Climate change are wholly inaccessible as the funding allocated to them is unreasonably low.
One of the nations that is likely to suffer the most due to climate change is India. Its agriculture, urban resilience, and water security policies are all under threat. The increasing temperatures and weather anomalies are reducing crop productivity, resulting in the food security and water shortage crises. The studies show that small scale farmers, migrant labourers, and people residing in ecologically sensitive areas have been suffering the most from these climatic impacts. To achieve sustainable livelihoods, there needs to be long term investment made on adaptation strategies that are as good as the investment on mitigation strategies.
Fifth, the system of climate finance is defective because of its overreliance on private investments, which tend to be unstable and volatile. The current budget does nothing to solve this problem either. India needs to create a complete climate friendly regulatory environment in order to raise climate funding. This will require innovative approaches, such as the creation of a sustainable finance taxonomy and higher disclosure requirements, which will enable investors better understand the risks while ensuring their investments are put to good use environmentally.
In addition, an evaluation mechanism is necessary for measuring the effectiveness of climate investments made. There are gaps on the socio-economic and ecological impacts of the funded projects within current climate finance tracking systems. Therefore, the impact assessment framework ought to be more robust since that will instill accountability and help in the refinement of policies to ensure that climate financing moves in a certain direction for meaningful outcomes.
India’s climate commitments cannot stem solely from budgetary expenditure; they need something more. Better economic policy structuring in combination with well designed financial planning, active investment within the country, and ensuring climate resilient future growth all need to be put within the action plan. Without these measures, turning the desire into reality is bound to remain a challenge.
