11 issues picked from 65 PIB releases · about 2 minutes each · written by UPSC Grade, each fact checked against its PIB release or by a second model
How to readRead “Why in news” and “What it is” for every issue. Open For Prelims or For Mains for the exam you’re preparing for, then Test yourself at the foot of each card. Half the news questions in Prelims are answered from background, not the news itself.
In 60 seconds
WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies.India ratified WTO Phase 1 fisheries subsidy curbs, while seeking differentiated treatment for developing countries in Phase 2.
GST Council.57th GST Council proposes process reforms: no arrests, higher prosecution limit, automated refunds, lower penalties.
GS3 Economy · International tradeGS2 International institutionsPrelims and Mains
Why in news
On 8 October 2026 a PIB article by two fisheries experts discussed India's ratification of Phase 1 of the WTO Fisheries Subsidies Agreement. India deposited its Instrument of Acceptance on 20 July 2026.
What it is
The WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies is a multilateral trade agreement that bans harmful subsidies to fishing. It was adopted at the WTO's 12th Ministerial Conference in Geneva in June 2022. It is the first WTO agreement with environmental sustainability at its core.
India's Phase 2 demands
India wants a 25-year transition period for developing countries within their EEZs, and a per-fisher benchmark for subsidy disciplines.
Subsidy per fisher
The article says Indian small-scale fishers get about US$15 support per fisher a year, against US$1000 or more in EU, US and China fleets.
Origin of the agreement
The agreement was adopted at the WTO's 12th Ministerial Conference in Geneva in June 2022.
Don’t confuse with Phase 1 vs Phase 2: Phase 1 bans subsidies for IUU fishing, overfished stocks and unregulated high-seas fishing. Phase 2 deals with overcapacity and overfishing subsidies and is still under negotiation.
Don’t confuse with IUU fishing: IUU means illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. It is a different thing from legal fishing aided by subsidies.
International bodies and relations: the largest group of news questions in Prelims (61 since 2013), often about background, members and location. In Mains, 27 news-triggered questions, mostly on India's interests.
Why it matters
Shows India backing global marine conservation and curbs on IUU fishing.
Keeps India's policy space for small-scale and artisanal fishers.
Problems
Livelihood and food security of millions of small fishers could be hit by rigid subsidy rules.
Developed fleets have far higher per-fisher subsidies, so equal rules look unfair to developing countries.
Way forward
Secure differentiated treatment and a long transition period for developing countries in Phase 2.
Use per-fisher benchmarks and coordinate with Bay of Bengal countries, including through BOBP-IGO.
Put in your answer
Per-fisher subsidy gap: Support per Indian small-scale fisher is about US$15, against US$1000 or more in EU, US and China fleets.
Sustainability with equity: Sustainability and livelihood security should be treated as complementary goals.
GS3 Economy · TaxationGS2 FederalismPrelims and Mains
Why in news
The 57th GST Council meeting was held in New Delhi on 8 October 2026 under Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman. It recommended process reforms, including removal of arrest powers, higher prosecution thresholds and faster refunds.
What it is
The GST Council is the joint Centre-State forum under Article 279A, inserted by the 101st Constitutional Amendment. It recommends GST rates, exemptions, law changes and procedures. Its recommendations take effect only through law amendments, circulars and notifications.
No small notices
No show cause notice will be issued where the tax amount involved is below ₹10,000.
Refund acknowledgement
The refund acknowledgement period would be cut from 15 to 10 days, with deemed acknowledgement if there is no response.
Constitutional basis
The Council is established under Article 279A of the Constitution, inserted by the 101st Amendment Act, 2016.
Late fee relief
Late fees for delayed returns would be waived for taxpayers with previous-year turnover up to ₹5 crore, if filed by the end of the due month.
Chair and meeting
The 57th meeting was chaired by the Union Finance Minister in New Delhi. Ministers from States and UTs with legislatures attended.
Arrest powers
The Council recommended removing arrest powers under GST by omitting section 69 of the CGST Act.
Prosecution threshold
The monetary threshold for prosecution would rise from ₹1 crore to ₹5 crore.
General penalty
The maximum general penalty under section 125 of the CGST Act would fall from Rs 25,000 to Rs 10,000.
Legal force
The release is only a summary. The recommendations gain legal force through circulars, notifications and law amendments.
Don’t confuse with Zero-rated vs exempt supply: Zero-rated supplies (exports, supplies to SEZs) allow ITC refund; exempt supplies do not.
Don’t confuse with Recommendation vs law: Council recommendations need amendments, circulars or notifications to take effect; they are not themselves law.
Don’t confuse with 56th vs 57th meeting: The 56th meeting (last year) focused on rate rationalisation and reduction. The 57th focused on process reforms: registration, returns, refunds and adjudication.
Laws, judgments and statutory bodies: 30 Prelims questions since 2013 (what the law says, who chairs, legal basis). In Mains, 44 news-triggered questions, most in GS2, asking for provisions and challenges.
Why it matters
Simpler registration, refunds and returns cut compliance cost, especially for small businesses.
Higher prosecution and notice thresholds build a trust-based regime and cut litigation.
Reflects cooperative federalism, as Centre and States decide jointly.
Removing arrest powers and raising the prosecution threshold shift GST toward a trust-based regime and ease compliance fears.
Automated refunds and wider ITC refunds improve working capital, especially for exporters and MSMEs.
Limits on interception and common notice standards reduce harassment and litigation.
Problems
Recommendations need law amendments by Parliament and State legislatures, which can delay rollout.
Automated refunds and registration could be misused for fraudulent ITC without strong risk checks.
States worry about revenue loss and weaker enforcement from relaxed prosecution and interception rules.
Weaker arrest powers may reduce deterrence against fraud such as fake-invoice ITC rackets.
Automated systems and risk-based sanctions need robust IT and data analytics to prevent wrongful refunds.
Revenue loss from relaxed ITC blocks and refund changes strains Centre and State finances.
Way forward
Use data analytics and risk-based scrutiny to balance automation with fraud control.
Notify rule and law changes quickly with clear circulars and FAQs.
Keep consensus-based decisions with transparent States' consultation.
Keep strong, data-driven enforcement against fake ITC while relaxing rules for honest taxpayers.
Test the new return and refund systems through public consultation and phased rollout.
Issue circulars and FAQs quickly to give uniform field interpretation.
Put in your answer
GST scale: Registered taxpayers grew from about 60 lakh in 2017 to about 1.70 crore by September 2026.
Revenue growth: Gross GST collections were about ₹12.46 lakh crore in April-September 2026, up 11.6% year on year.
Article 279A: The Council embodies cooperative federalism under Article 279A (101st Amendment).
Cooperative federalism: The Council brings Centre and States together to decide GST matters under Article 279A.
UPSC’s own questions that come close to this issue, from our Prelims and Mains banks.
Test yourself
Prelims practice · Statements
Ours, not from a UPSC paper
Consider the following statements:
1.The GST Council is a constitutional body established under Article 279A of the Constitution, inserted by the 101st Amendment Act.
2.The 57th GST Council recommended raising the prosecution threshold from ₹1 crore to ₹10 crore.
3.The Council recommended that no show cause notice be issued where the tax amount involved is less than ₹10,000.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
True or false?
1 of 8
Statements the way Prelims prints them. Say first, then see the fact.
1.The GST Council is a constitutional body established under Article 279A of the Constitution.
True. Article 279A, inserted by the 101st Amendment, establishes the Council.
2.The Council recommended that no show cause notice be issued where the tax amount involved is less than ₹10,000.
True. The minimum threshold for show cause notices would be ₹10,000.
3.The Council recommended that goods in transit would not be subject to confiscation under section 130 of the CGST Act.
True. Goods or conveyances in transit would not be subject to confiscation under section 130.
4.The Council recommended the maximum general penalty be reduced from ₹25,000 to ₹10,000.
True. The maximum general penalty falls from ₹25,000 to ₹10,000.
5.The Council recommended cutting the maximum general penalty under section 125 from Rs 25,000 to Rs 10,000.
True. Section 125 maximum general penalty falls to Rs 10,000.
6.The Council recommended a minimum threshold of Rs 10,000 of tax involved for issuing show cause notices.
True. No notice if the tax amount involved is under Rs 10,000.
7.Under the recommended interception rules, a conveyance can be intercepted in transit States on general suspicion.
False. Interception only on specific intelligence with authorisation of an officer not below Joint Commissioner; no interception in transit States.
8.The recommendations of the GST Council have binding legal force as soon as the Council announces them.
False. They take effect only through circulars, notifications and law amendments.
Written by us from the release, not by UPSC; checked by a second model.
Mains practice
15 marks · 250 words
The 57th GST Council meeting recommended process reforms on registration, returns, refunds, dispute resolution, prosecution and e-way bills. Examine the constitutional basis and role of the GST Council in India's cooperative federalism. Discuss how such reforms can ease compliance, and the challenges in implementing the Council's recommendations.
GS3 Environment · BiodiversityGS2 Statutory bodiesPrelims and Mains
Why in news
On 8 October 2026 the Environment Ministry said the National Biodiversity Authority received Rs 9.68 crore in Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) payments from 1 April to 30 September 2026.
What it is
The National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) is a statutory body under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, headquartered in Chennai. It regulates access to India's biological resources and associated knowledge by commercial users and foreign entities. Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) requires users to share benefits with the providers and local communities, in line with the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya Protocol.
Amount and recipients
Rs 1.19 crore went to 29 State Biodiversity Boards and one UT Biodiversity Council.
Basis of allocation
Because resources were bought through markets or traders, individual benefit claimers could not be identified. Shares were set in proportion to estimated cultivation areas.
Use of funds
Funds must be used only for activities under Section 32(2) of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
Legal basis and seat
NBA was set up under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, and is headquartered in Chennai.
COP 17
COP 17 of the CBD is scheduled for 19-30 October 2026 in Yerevan, Armenia.
Top sector
The agri-seed sector gave the largest share, Rs 7.16 crore, followed by food and beverages.
Cumulative since 2008
NBA has realised about Rs 278 crore through ABS and disbursed over Rs 200 crore for conservation and benefit claimers.
Disbursal route
Funds go through State Biodiversity Boards and UT Biodiversity Councils to support People's Biodiversity Registers and Biodiversity Management Committees.
Legal basis and HQ
NBA is a statutory body under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, headquartered in Chennai.
Amended framework
The Biological Diversity (Amendment) Act, 2023 and the Biological Diversity Rules, 2024 have strengthened the framework under the 2002 Act. States are urged to align their rules with it.
ABS funds shared
The NBA has shared over ₹200 crore of ABS funds with farmers, communities, BMCs, SBBs, UTBCs and research institutions.
Local bodies
The Minister called for making the more than 2.76 lakh Biodiversity Management Committees functional.
International reporting
India submitted its 7th National Report to the CBD and its 1st National Report on the Nagoya Protocol.
NBA basis and seat
The NBA is a statutory body under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, headquartered in Chennai.
Amount sanctioned
₹8.23 crore was sanctioned to 27 State Biodiversity Boards and 5 UT Biodiversity Councils, from bitter gourd, okra, chilli and onion.
Distribution basis
The resources came from the open market or traders, so no individual providers could be traced. Shares go to States by area under cultivation, as published by the Agriculture Ministry.
Legal basis
The NBA was established in 2003 under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, and is headquartered in Chennai. It is a statutory, autonomous body.
Three-tier structure
The Act sets up the NBA at the national level, State Biodiversity Boards in States, and Biodiversity Management Committees at local body level.
Okra component
The largest part is for okra: Rs. 3.51 crore released to 32 SBBs and UTBCs, from money paid by Nunhems India.
Distribution modality
Since the resources came from markets and traders, the share is split among States and UTs where the resource is cultivated, as recommended by an Expert Committee and approved by the Authority.
Cumulative total
Total ABS disbursed by the NBA has crossed Rs. 191 crore.
Amount and source
Rs. 15.52 crore came from Pioneer Overseas Corporation, which developed ten mustard hybrids using Indian biological resources.
Intermediary rule
Where the resource came through intermediaries, ABS is shared among the SBBs/UTBCs of the areas where it is cultivated.
Unidentified source of access
Where resources were accessed via markets, traders or intermediaries, the source could not be identified, so the NBA used benefit-sharing modalities prepared by an Expert Committee.
Basis of distribution
Money was shared among SBBs/UTBCs of States where the crops are grown, using cultivation-area data of the Agriculture Ministry.
Local structures
State Biodiversity Boards and Biodiversity Management Committees are set up under the Act; the NBA is at the national level.
Payer
The money came from Pioneer Overseas Corporation, an international seed company that used Indian rice varieties to develop hybrids.
State share basis
Rs 5.75 crore went to 33 State Biodiversity Boards and UT Councils, allocated by each State's rice-growing area. Uttar Pradesh got the most.
Global link
The initiative contributes to Target 13 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, on fair and equitable benefit sharing.
Headquarters
The NBA is headquartered in Chennai.
Where the money goes
If the geographical source of a resource can be established, the ABS amount goes to the State Biodiversity Boards. If not, it stays in the National Biodiversity Fund under Section 27 of the Act.
Basis of State shares
State allocation is proportional to each State's area under cotton, using AICRP (ICAR) data.
Total released
Total ABS funds released by the NBA have reached Rs 152.24 crore.
Effect of notification
Notification regulates or prohibits collection of the species and provides for its rehabilitation and conservation. The Centre may delegate the power to States.
Numbers notified
159 plant and 173 animal species notified as threatened, across 17 States and 3 UTs.
Who the SOP helps
It assists State Biodiversity Boards and UT Biodiversity Councils, which recommend species to the State Government for notification.
Link to ABS Regulations
The 2025 ABS Regulations treat benefit-sharing differently where the resource belongs to a species notified as threatened under Section 38.
Money realized
NBA has realized over Rs 266 crore through ABS since 2008, including Rs 21.26 crore in FY 2025-26.
Transfer rule
Under the Biological Diversity Rules, 2024, NBA transfers 85-90 per cent of the ABS amount to State Biodiversity Boards for disbursal.
Reach
Benefits reached over 10,500 Biodiversity Management Committees across 23 States and 4 Union Territories.
Leadership
Dr P. L. Gautam, a former head of the NBA and PPVFRA, chairs the committee. The PPVFRA Chairperson is Co-Chair.
Age of the committee
It has been an advisory body of the NBA since 2005 and is reconstituted periodically.
Scope of work
It examines seed sector issues, reviews guidelines for international collaborative research, and recommends measures to conserve threatened native crop varieties and livestock breeds.
International link
The committee gives inputs on India's engagement with the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA).
NBA headquarters
The NBA is headquartered in Chennai.
People's Biodiversity Register
A BMC prepares the PBR in consultation with local people. It records resources, habitats, landraces and traditional knowledge.
National Biodiversity Authority Fund
The NBAF is a statutory fund created under section 27 of the Act. It supports benefit sharing and conservation.
Section 39 repositories
The Central Government can designate institutions as repositories for biological resources. Twenty institutions have been designated so far.
Nagoya Protocol
It is a legally binding supplementary agreement to the CBD, adopted in October 2010 at COP-10 in Nagoya, on fair sharing of benefits from genetic resources.
Prior registration for IPR
Applicants covered under Section 7 must get a Certificate of Registration from the NBA before seeking IPR, including patents, based on Indian biological resources.
2025-26 numbers
The NBA received 1,077 IPR applications and issued 885 CoRs between April 2025 and March 2026.
2024-25 numbers
Around 857 IPR applications were received and 792 CoRs issued from April 2024 to March 2025.
International basis
The Act implements the Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992; the Nagoya Protocol (2010) deals with access and benefit sharing.
Who got the money
Biodiversity Management Committees in 24 districts across nine States and one Union Territory received the current release. One Haryana dairy farmer was also paid for supplying Murrah buffalo.
Cumulative ABS
Total ABS disbursements at the national level have crossed ₹145 crore, about USD 16 million.
Resources behind the funds
The funds came from commercial use of microorganisms, marine microalgae and seaweed, among others, plus plants such as Tulsi, Moringa, neem and ashwagandha.
International commitments
The NBA implements India's obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya Protocol, and contributes to the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.
Who receives benefits
Benefits go to institutes, local communities, farmers and Biodiversity Management Committees that provided the parental lines of seeds.
Payout
NBA released Rs 45.05 lakh through State Biodiversity Boards and UT Biodiversity Councils to benefit claimers.
Resources used
Benefits came from insects, soil and water microorganisms and cultivated Red Sanders.
International links
NBA advances India's obligations under the CBD and the Nagoya Protocol on ABS.
Amount released
The NBA released Rs 17 lakh to the Mumbai civic body's Biodiversity Management Committee, routed through the Maharashtra State Biodiversity Board.
Source of benefit
The money comes from the commercial use of soil micro-organisms of the Bacillus genus in probiotic products.
National total
Cumulative ABS disbursements have crossed Rs 144.37 crore, about USD 16 million.
Maharashtra's position
Maharashtra is the second major beneficiary State, next to Andhra Pradesh, whose figure is driven by Red Sanders.
Global frameworks
The outcomes are linked to Targets 13 and 19 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.
Latest payout
The NBA released ₹45 lakh to Andhra Pradesh farmers through the State Biodiversity Board.
Statutory status and seat
The NBA is a statutory body under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, with headquarters in Chennai.
Red Sanders share
Over ₹104 crore of the total has gone to Andhra Pradesh for Red Sanders conservation, protection and benefit claimers.
Don’t confuse with NBA vs SBB vs BMC: NBA is the national body. State Biodiversity Boards work at State level. Biodiversity Management Committees are local bodies under the same Act.
Don’t confuse with CBD vs Nagoya Protocol: The CBD is the parent treaty. The Nagoya Protocol is its supplementary agreement on access and fair benefit sharing.
Don’t confuse with NBA vs State Biodiversity Board: NBA is the national regulator at Chennai. State Biodiversity Boards regulate use by Indians at the state level and channel benefits.
Don’t confuse with Nagoya Protocol vs Cartagena Protocol: Nagoya concerns access and benefit sharing of genetic resources. Cartagena concerns the biosafety of living modified organisms.
Don’t confuse with NBA vs National Green Tribunal: The NBA is a regulator under the Biological Diversity Act. The NGT is a judicial body under the NGT Act, 2010.
Don’t confuse with Nagoya Protocol vs Kunming-Montreal Framework: Nagoya is a legal protocol on ABS under the CBD; the Kunming-Montreal Framework is a 2022 global target set, with Target 13 on benefit sharing.
Don’t confuse with Section 38 vs IUCN Red List: Section 38 notification is a legal act under Indian law that restricts collection. The IUCN Red List is a global assessment with no legal force in India.
Don’t confuse with Section 38 vs Wild Life (Protection) Act Schedules: Section 38 of the Biological Diversity Act covers threatened species and regulates collection; the Wild Life (Protection) Act uses Schedules to protect wild animals and plants.
Don’t confuse with Rs 266 crore vs Rs 145 crore: Rs 266 crore is realized from users; Rs 145 crore is what has been disbursed to beneficiaries so far.
Don’t confuse with NBA vs PPVFRA: The NBA works under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 and regulates access and benefit sharing. The PPVFRA works under the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001 and registers plant varieties and protects farmers' rights.
Don’t confuse with NBA vs State Biodiversity Boards: The NBA is the national body. State Biodiversity Boards regulate certain uses within their states, and Biodiversity Management Committees work at the local level.
Don’t confuse with NBA vs State Biodiversity Boards vs BMCs: The NBA is national, the SBBs work at state level, and BMCs are local bodies that prepare PBRs.
Don’t confuse with Convention on Biological Diversity vs Nagoya Protocol: The CBD is the parent treaty of 1992. The Nagoya Protocol is its supplementary agreement dealing specifically with access and fair sharing of benefits from genetic resources.
Don’t confuse with NBA vs SBB: NBA is the national regulator. State Biodiversity Boards regulate at State level, and BMCs work at local body level.
Don’t confuse with NBA vs Biodiversity Management Committees: Biodiversity Management Committees are local-level bodies that document local biodiversity. The NBA and State Boards sit above them.
Laws, judgments and statutory bodies: 30 Prelims questions since 2013 (what the law says, who chairs, legal basis). In Mains, 44 news-triggered questions, most in GS2, asking for provisions and challenges.
Why it matters
Channels commercial gains from biological resources back to conservation and local communities.
Shows agriculture as a new source of ABS funds, supporting agricultural biodiversity.
ABS ties commercial use of biological resources to conservation and local community benefit.
It operationalises India's commitments under the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya Protocol.
ABS funds can give tangible benefits to communities and link livelihoods to conservation.
Aligned State rules help implement India's CBD and Nagoya Protocol commitments uniformly.
Turns the fair and equitable benefit-sharing principle into money reaching States for conservation and communities.
Supports India's commitments under the CBD, Nagoya Protocol and Kunming-Montreal Framework Target 13.
Channels commercial gains from biological resources back to conservation and communities.
Strengthens State-level institutions for biodiversity documentation and restoration.
Channels commercial gains from genetic resources to conservation and local communities.
Puts the Nagoya Protocol and Target 13 of the Kunming-Montreal Framework into practice.
Links commercial use of genetic resources to community welfare and conservation funding.
Supports India's commitments under the Nagoya Protocol and the Global Biodiversity Framework.
Turns commercial use of genetic resources into funds for conservation and for research institutions.
Shows India applying the Nagoya Protocol's benefit-sharing principle in practice.
Reinvests commercial gains from biological resources into conservation and local livelihoods.
Gives a workable model for benefit sharing when resources come through traders and no claimant can be identified.
Uniform scientific method for States can reduce arbitrary or delayed listing of threatened species.
Supports India's NBSAP 2024-2030 Target 4 and the Kunming-Montreal Framework.
Links conservation to community income, backing the idea that those who protect biodiversity should gain from its use.
Helps India meet Nagoya Protocol and Kunming-Montreal Target 13 commitments.
Links agricultural research and seed exports with biodiversity law and benefit sharing.
Supports conservation of native crop varieties and livestock breeds, which aids climate-resilient farming.
Gives a legal route for local communities to share in profits from their biological resources and knowledge.
Local registers and BMCs bring community participation into conservation.
Prior registration links patents to benefit sharing, checking biopiracy of India's biological resources and traditional knowledge.
Clear approval pathways ease research and industry access while keeping conservation aims.
ABS gives local communities a direct economic reason to conserve biodiversity.
It helps India meet its CBD, Nagoya Protocol and Kunming–Montreal commitments.
ABS payments give money to local communities and farmers who hold biological resources and knowledge, linking livelihoods to conservation.
It shows India implementing its Nagoya Protocol obligations through domestic law.
ABS payments give communities a share of commercial gains, which links livelihoods to conservation.
It supports India's commitments under the CBD, Nagoya Protocol and Kunming-Montreal Framework.
Links conservation with local livelihoods by returning a share of commercial gains to communities.
Shows microbial resources have commercial value, and strengthens India's case under the CBD and Nagoya Protocol.
Links conservation of an endangered, endemic species with direct income for farmers.
Puts into practice the fair and equitable sharing of benefits from biological resources.
Problems
When resources are bought through traders, actual providers cannot be identified, so area-based proxies are used.
Amounts are small relative to the commercial value of biological resources.
Receipts are small and concentrated in a few sectors and firms, mainly agri-seed.
Local communities and BMCs may have weak capacity to document knowledge and claim benefits.
Many Biodiversity Management Committees exist on paper but are not functional.
States and UTs need to align rules and build capacity, and People’s Biodiversity Registers need better quality.
When resources are bought on the open market, source communities cannot be identified, so area-based sharing may miss real knowledge holders.
State boards and local committees have uneven capacity to use funds and keep People's Biodiversity Registers updated.
Market-sourced resources cannot be traced to specific farmers or communities, so benefits reach States rather than holders of knowledge.
Capacity of SBBs and local committees to document and use funds well is uneven.
Where sources are traders and intermediaries, individual providers cannot be traced, so benefits reach States, not communities.
Funds may be poorly used by Boards and local committees if registers and Biodiversity Management Committees are weak.
Resources accessed through markets and traders make the original source hard to trace, forcing area-based sharing.
Small local bodies may lack capacity to use funds well or reach the actual custodian communities.
Few users come forward, so compliance depends on detecting unreported use of resources.
Funds may not reach local farmers and knowledge holders who conserved the varieties.
Tracing the source of resources that pass through traders and intermediaries is hard.
Individual conservers and communities may not receive direct benefit when funds go to State boards.
Many States lack taxonomic expertise and data to assess species; only 17 States and 3 UTs have notified species so far.
Notification may restrict local communities' collection of resources, risking livelihood conflicts.
Collections are concentrated: Red Sanders, seeds and pharma/AYUSH give about 91 per cent, so the base is narrow.
Rs 266 crore realized against Rs 145 crore disbursed shows a gap, and funds pass through several layers before reaching communities.
Balancing ABS compliance with the freedom of agricultural research and plant breeding.
The committee is advisory only, and its term is short at one year.
Many BMCs and PBRs may exist on paper only, with uneven quality and updating.
Balancing research and industry access against fair benefit sharing is difficult.
Balancing ease of doing business with strict benefit sharing to local communities.
Weak capacity of Biodiversity Management Committees and uneven documentation of traditional knowledge.
Not all applications get CoRs, so processing time and compliance burden remain concerns.
The amount paid so far is small compared with the scale of commercial use and the number of BMCs.
Many BMCs have weak capacity, thin documentation and poor People's Biodiversity Registers, which delays benefit claims.
Compliance depends on companies applying; the NBA itself urges all sectors to comply.
Benefits must actually reach grassroot providers through BMCs, and procedures must stay simple without weakening safeguards.
Many benefit claimers and BMCs are yet to document resources or receive payments.
Simplified rules for ease of doing business must not dilute community interests.
Payouts are uneven across States and depend on a few high-value resources such as Red Sanders.
Many Biodiversity Management Committees have limited capacity to document resources and use funds well.
Benefit claimers must be identified and reached, and delays in payouts can weaken trust.
Illegal trade in Red Sanders continues to threaten the species.
Way forward
Strengthen Biodiversity Management Committees and People's Biodiversity Registers to identify benefit claimers.
Improve compliance monitoring and transparent tracking of fund use by State Boards.
Strengthen BMCs and People's Biodiversity Registers so communities can claim benefits.
Widen compliance monitoring and tracking of users across sectors, including AYUSH and biotechnology.
Train and fund BMCs, and make People’s Biodiversity Registers dynamic inputs for local planning.
Ensure transparent ABS distribution so benefits reach local communities.
Strengthen Biodiversity Management Committees and PBRs so providers can be traced and paid directly.
Publish State-wise utilisation data and audit how funds are spent.
Ensure funds reach Biodiversity Management Committees and local communities, with public reporting of use.
Complete People's Biodiversity Registers and strengthen monitoring of ABS agreements.
Build capacity of State Boards and Biodiversity Management Committees and track fund use under Section 32.
Strengthen documentation through People's Biodiversity Registers so sources can be traced.
Strengthen People's Biodiversity Registers and BMCs so benefits reach local custodians directly.
Improve traceability and monitoring of how States use ABS funds.
Strengthen Biodiversity Management Committees and People's Biodiversity Registers so local holders can claim benefits.
Track fund use by State Boards and report it publicly.
Strengthen People's Biodiversity Registers and Biodiversity Management Committees so that sources can be documented.
Track how State Biodiversity Boards use the funds.
Build capacity of State Biodiversity Boards with BSI, ZSI and academic institutions, and involve Biodiversity Management Committees.
Follow notification with funded recovery plans, regular monitoring and periodic review.
Widen compliance across more sectors and users, and track unreported use of biological resources.
Speed up and publish disbursal to BMCs, and strengthen their capacity and People's Biodiversity Registers.
Give clear and consistent guidance on seed exports and collaborative research approvals.
Align ABS rules with the ITPGRFA and farmers' rights.
Update, verify and digitise PBRs and link them to the ABS portal.
Build capacity of BMCs so benefits reach communities.
Strengthen BMCs and People's Biodiversity Registers so benefits reach local communities.
Ensure timely, transparent disposal of applications and track benefit-sharing outcomes publicly.
Strengthen BMCs with training, funding and updated People's Biodiversity Registers.
Improve tracking of commercial users so that benefit-sharing is paid on time and transparently.
Strengthen BMCs and people's biodiversity registers so providers can be identified and paid.
Widen compliance across sectors while keeping procedures simple and transparent.
Strengthen BMCs and complete People's Biodiversity Registers with traditional knowledge.
Build awareness and capacity among communities and industry for timely ABS compliance.
Strengthen Biodiversity Management Committees and People's Biodiversity Registers to track resource use.
Improve monitoring of commercial users so that benefit-sharing agreements are enforced, and spread payouts more widely.
Widen benefit sharing to more States and communities, and make payouts timely.
Strengthen documentation of local biodiversity and traceability of lawful Red Sanders trade.
Put in your answer
Section 32(2) activities: Funds go to documentation, conservation, local governance, research, capacity building and livelihoods.
Cumulative ABS: About Rs 278 crore realised since 2008, with over Rs 200 crore disbursed to benefit claimers.
ABS distribution: The NBA has shared over ₹200 crore of ABS funds with communities, local bodies and institutions.
ABS milestone: Cumulative NBA ABS disbursement now exceeds ₹200 crore.
Example of area-based sharing: Maharashtra gets a large share because it holds over 49 per cent of India's onion area.
Global target: Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework Target 13 calls for fair and equitable sharing of benefits from genetic resources.
ABS total: NBA has disbursed over Rs. 191 crore of ABS funds so far.
Okra example: Okra: Rs. 3.51 crore released to 32 SBBs and UTBCs, showing the market-sourced distribution modality.
Expert Committee modality: For resources accessed via intermediaries, benefit is shared among States where the resource is cultivated.
Global framework: The release links ABS to Targets 13 and 4 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.
Rice ABS payment: Rs 8.22 crore was shared from one seed company's use of Indian rice varieties, split between research institutions and State Boards.
Total ABS disbursed: Total NBA ABS disbursements across all sectors have crossed Rs 162 crore.
Global Biodiversity Framework: The initiative contributes to Kunming-Montreal Target 13 on fair sharing of benefits and Target 4 on conserving genetic diversity.
Species notified so far: 159 plant and 173 animal species notified as threatened across 17 States and 3 UTs.
NBSAP 2024-2030 Target 4: Target 4 aims to halt human-induced extinction, promote species recovery and maintain genetic diversity.
Local use of funds: Funds support medicinal plant parks, community gene banks and updating People's Biodiversity Registers.
Expert committees under Section 13: The NBA uses Section 13(1) to set up expert committees for specialised advice, as with agrobiodiversity.
ABS benefits released: Nearly Rs 145 crore has been released to beneficiaries, reaching about 11,000 BMCs.
ABS disbursement: Cumulative ABS payouts have passed ₹145 crore, showing the mechanism works at a modest scale.
Biological Diversity Act, 2002: The Act is India's law implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity and creates the three-tier institutional structure.
ABS payments to date: Cumulative ABS payments have crossed Rs 145 crore, about USD 16 million.
ABS disbursement total: Cumulative ABS disbursements have crossed Rs 144.37 crore, which can be cited as evidence of the Act's working.
Biotechnology contribution: The biotechnology sector has contributed about Rs 10 crore to the accrued ABS fund.
ABS releases to date: India's cumulative ABS releases exceed ₹143.5 crore, with most going to Andhra Pradesh for Red Sanders.
Recent payouts: In three months, ₹5.35 crore went to over 220 Red Sanders farmers in Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Telangana.
UPSC’s own questions that come close to this issue, from our Prelims and Mains banks.
Test yourself
Prelims practice · Single answer
Ours, not from a UPSC paper
With reference to the National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) and the Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) mechanism in India, consider the following statements:
1. The NBA is a statutory body established under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
2. The headquarters of the NBA is in New Delhi.
3. In the latest disbursal, allocations to States were made in proportion to the estimated cultivation areas of the biological resources.
4. The funds disbursed to State Biodiversity Boards must be used exclusively for activities specified under Section 32(2) of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
How many of the above statements are correct?
How many of the above statements are correct?
True or false?
1 of 53
Statements the way Prelims prints them. Say first, then see the fact.
1.The National Biodiversity Authority is a statutory body established under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
True. NBA is created by the Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
2.The headquarters of the National Biodiversity Authority is in New Delhi.
False. NBA is headquartered in Chennai.
3.In the latest disbursal, allocations to States were made in proportion to the estimated cultivation areas of the biological resources.
True. Allocation followed estimated cultivation area, using official agricultural statistics.
4.The funds disbursed to State Biodiversity Boards must be used exclusively for activities specified under Section 32(2) of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
True. Use of funds is restricted to Section 32(2) activities.
5.The Access and Benefit Sharing mechanism of the NBA gives effect to the Nagoya Protocol under the Convention on Biological Diversity.
True. The Nagoya Protocol on ABS is a protocol to the CBD; India's ABS regime implements it.
6.The seventeenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the CBD is scheduled to be held in India.
False. COP 17 is scheduled in Yerevan, Armenia, 19-30 October 2026.
7.The National Biodiversity Authority is headquartered in New Delhi.
False. NBA is headquartered in Chennai.
8.ABS funds are disbursed through State Biodiversity Boards and Union Territory Biodiversity Councils.
True. Disbursal goes through State Biodiversity Boards and UT Biodiversity Councils.
9.Biodiversity Management Committees are constituted at the local body level under the Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
True. The Act provides for BMCs at local body level to promote conservation and document biodiversity through People's Biodiversity Registers.
10.The ABS mechanism in India is meant to give effect to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing.
True. The Nagoya Protocol, under the CBD, deals with access and fair sharing of benefits from genetic resources.
11.The headquarters of the National Biodiversity Authority is in Bengaluru.
False. The NBA is headquartered in Chennai.
12.In the latest disbursement, the benefit share was distributed among States according to the area under cultivation of the crops.
True. Distribution was based on area under cultivation published by the Agriculture Ministry.
13.The funds received by State Biodiversity Boards must be used for activities listed under Section 32(2) of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
True. Section 32(2) lists permitted uses such as PBRs, conservation and livelihoods.
14.The latest ABS proceeds were realised from farmers who had supplied the crops directly to seed companies.
False. The resources were accessed through the open market or traders, so individual farmers could not be traced.
15.The ABS framework under the Biological Diversity Act gives effect to the Nagoya Protocol under the Convention on Biological Diversity.
True. The Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing is a CBD protocol that India implements through the Act and ABS regulations.
16.Biodiversity Management Committees are constituted by the National Biodiversity Authority at the State level.
False. BMCs are set up by local bodies at village, panchayat or municipal level; State Biodiversity Boards operate at State level.
17.The funds disbursed to State Biodiversity Boards are to be utilised as per Section 32 of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002.
True. Section 32 governs use of the benefit-sharing funds by SBBs and UTBCs.
18.The Access and Benefit-Sharing regime in India gives effect to the Nagoya Protocol under the Convention on Biological Diversity.
True. ABS rules implement the CBD's Nagoya Protocol.
19.The largest ABS component in this disbursement relates to watermelon.
False. The largest component relates to okra (Rs. 3.51 crore).
20.Among the major recipients in this disbursement, Gujarat received the highest amount, followed by West Bengal.
True. Gujarat got Rs. 88.79 lakh and West Bengal Rs. 78.09 lakh.
21.In the mustard case, the ABS share of each State was calculated on the basis of the area under mustard cultivation in it.
True. Shares were based on each State's mustard cultivation area.
22.In the mustard case, the ABS amount was paid directly to the farmers who supplied the parental lines.
False. The parental lines came from the open market and traders, so no farmer or community could be identified; money went to State Boards and UT Councils.
23.Utilisation of ABS money by State Biodiversity Boards is governed by Section 32 of the Biological Diversity Act.
True. Section 32 governs use of the funds.
24.The Nagoya Protocol deals with fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources.
True. The Nagoya Protocol is the CBD's ABS protocol.
25.The cultivation-area data used to calculate the State shares was sourced from the National Biodiversity Authority's own survey.
False. The figures came from ICAR-Indian Institute of Rapeseed-Mustard Research, Bharatpur.
26.The National Biodiversity Authority is headquartered in Chennai.
True. NBA headquarters is in Chennai.
27.India's Access and Benefit Sharing framework is aligned with the Nagoya Protocol.
True. The ABS framework follows the Nagoya Protocol.
28.Where the original source of access cannot be identified, the benefit-sharing amount is retained by the NBA and not passed to State Biodiversity Boards.
False. The NBA adopted Expert Committee modalities and disbursed the amount among SBBs/UTBCs of crop-growing States.
29.In the latest release, the amount was shared among States in proportion to cultivation-area data published by the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare.
True. Distribution used cultivation-area data of the Agriculture Ministry.
30.The Biological Diversity Act, 2002 gives effect to the Convention on Biological Diversity, which was adopted at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit.
True. The CBD was opened for signature at Rio in 1992 and the Act implements it in India.
31.The recipient boards may use the funds only for cash payments to individual farmers and not for conservation work.
False. Funds go to People's Biodiversity Registers, in-situ and ex-situ conservation, Biodiversity Heritage Sites, BMC capacity building and community development.
32.The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework's Target 13 deals with fair and equitable sharing of benefits from genetic resources.
True. Target 13 covers benefit sharing from genetic resources.
33.The National Biodiversity Authority is headquartered in Hyderabad.
False. The NBA is headquartered in Chennai.
34.Where the geographical source of a biological resource cannot be established, the ABS funds are retained in the National Biodiversity Fund.
True. Such funds stay in the National Biodiversity Fund and are used under Section 27 of the Act.
35.The Nagoya Protocol deals with the fair and equitable sharing of benefits from the utilisation of genetic resources.
True. The Nagoya Protocol, under the Convention on Biological Diversity, covers access and benefit sharing.
36.The National Biodiversity Authority functions under the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare.
False. The NBA functions under the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change.
37.Section 38 of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 deals with the notification of threatened species.
True. Section 38 covers notification of threatened species.
38.The Central Government may delegate its power to notify threatened species to State Governments.
True. The Act allows delegation of this power to States.
39.Notification of a species as threatened can regulate or prohibit its collection.
True. Notification regulates or prohibits collection and provides for rehabilitation.
40.The Biological Diversity Act, 2002 provides for State Biodiversity Boards and local Biodiversity Management Committees besides the NBA.
True. The Act has a three-tier structure: NBA, State Biodiversity Boards, Biodiversity Management Committees.
41.The 2025 ABS Regulations apply identical benefit-sharing obligations to all biological resources, including threatened species.
False. They provide differential treatment where resources belong to species notified as threatened under Section 38.
42.The Nagoya Protocol is a supplementary agreement to the Convention on Biological Diversity dealing with access and benefit sharing.
True. Nagoya Protocol supplements the CBD on ABS.
43.Under the Biological Diversity Rules, 2024, NBA transfers 85-90 per cent of the ABS amount to State Biodiversity Boards for onward disbursal.
True. 85-90 per cent goes to State Biodiversity Boards.
44.Seeds accounted for the largest share of ABS realization, ahead of Red Sanders.
False. Red Sanders was largest at Rs 120 crore (45 per cent); seeds were second at 32.3 per cent.
45.The ABS framework contributes to Target 13 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework on fair and equitable benefit sharing.
True. Target 13 of the KMGBF concerns benefit sharing.
46.Benefits under the ABS framework have so far reached Biodiversity Management Committees in all States and Union Territories.
False. They reached over 10,500 BMCs across 23 States and 4 Union Territories.
47.The Biological Diversity Act, 2002 provides for Biodiversity Management Committees at the level of local bodies.
True. BMCs are the local-level tier under the Act.
48.The Nagoya Protocol, which the Biological Diversity Act helps implement, deals with the conservation of wetlands.
False. The Nagoya Protocol deals with access to genetic resources and fair and equitable sharing of benefits; wetlands fall under the Ramsar Convention.
49.Benefit-sharing payments reach Biodiversity Management Committees through State Biodiversity Boards and UT Biodiversity Councils.
True. NBA disbursed the amount through State Biodiversity Boards and UT Biodiversity Councils.
50.The Access and Benefit Sharing mechanism in India gives effect to the Nagoya Protocol under the Convention on Biological Diversity.
True. NBA advances India's obligations under the CBD and the Nagoya Protocol on ABS.
51.Cumulative ABS payments made through the NBA have crossed Rs 145 crore.
52.Biodiversity Management Committees are constituted by the Central Government at the national level.
False. BMCs are constituted by local bodies under the Act.
53.The latest payout was generated only from wild-collected Red Sanders and did not involve microorganisms.
False. It also came from insects and microorganisms in soil and water, and Red Sanders was cultivated.
Written by us from the release, not by UPSC; checked by a second model.
Mains practice
15 marks · 250 words
The National Biodiversity Authority received Rs 9.68 crore in Access and Benefit Sharing payments in April-September 2026, mostly from the agri-seed sector. Examine the provisions of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 on access and benefit sharing and discuss the challenges in ensuring that local communities benefit from the use of India's biological resources.
On 8 October 2026, PIB published a feature on the National SC-ST Hub (NSSH), citing 1,90,414 beneficiaries and procurement from SC/ST-owned MSEs rising to ₹4,013.42 crore in 2025-26.
What it is
The National SC-ST Hub is a scheme of the Ministry of MSME, launched in 2016 to help SC/ST entrepreneurs. It is implemented through the National Small Industries Corporation (NSIC). It combines capacity building, market access and financial support, and promotes procurement from SC/ST-owned MSEs.
Launch and agency
NSSH was launched on 18 October 2016 and is implemented through NSIC.
Procurement target
Central Ministries, Departments and CPSEs must buy 25% of annual purchases from MSEs, with 4% of total procurement earmarked for SC/ST-owned MSEs.
SCLCSS subsidy
The Special Credit Linked Capital Subsidy Scheme gives a 25% capital subsidy, capped at ₹25 lakh, on purchases financed by institutional credit.
SPRS benefits
MSEs registered with NSIC under the Single Point Registration Scheme get free tender sets and exemption from Earnest Money Deposit.
Procurement growth
Procurement from SC/ST-owned MSEs rose from ₹99.37 crore in 2015-16 to ₹4,013.42 crore in 2025-26.
Don’t confuse with NSSH vs Stand-Up India: NSSH supports SC/ST-owned MSEs through NSIC. Stand-Up India gives bank loans to SC/ST and women greenfield enterprises.
Don’t confuse with Procurement targets: 25% is the MSE procurement target for Central bodies. 4% of total procurement is the sub-target for SC/ST-owned MSEs.
Schemes: 52 Prelims questions since 2013, 10 in Prelims 2026 alone. They test features, the period and who funds it. In Mains, 33 news-triggered questions, mostly GS3.
Why it matters
Improves SC/ST entrepreneurs' access to finance, skills and public markets.
Procurement linkage turns support into actual business.
Problems
Beneficiary numbers are small compared with the SC/ST population.
Awareness and credit access remain uneven.
Way forward
Widen outreach in lagging states and districts.
Link training to GeM and track enterprise survival.
Put in your answer
Procurement growth: Procurement from SC/ST-owned MSEs rose about 39-fold from 2015-16 to 2025-26.
UPSC’s own questions that come close to this issue, from our Prelims and Mains banks.
Test yourself
Prelims practice · Statements
Ours, not from a UPSC paper
Consider the following statements:
1.The National SC-ST Hub scheme is implemented through the National Small Industries Corporation.
2.Under the Public Procurement Policy, Central Ministries, Departments and CPSEs must procure 4% of their total procurement from SC/ST-owned MSEs, within the 25% target for MSEs.
3.Under the Special Credit Linked Capital Subsidy Scheme, the capital subsidy is 15% of the institutional credit-financed purchase, capped at ₹25 lakh.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
True or false?
1 of 6
Statements the way Prelims prints them. Say first, then see the fact.
1.The National SC-ST Hub scheme is implemented through the National Small Industries Corporation.
True. NSIC is the implementing agency.
2.Under the Public Procurement Policy, 4% of total procurement by Central Ministries and CPSEs is earmarked for SC/ST-owned MSEs.
True. 4% sub-target within the 25% MSE procurement target.
3.MSEs registered under the Single Point Registration Scheme are exempt from paying Earnest Money Deposit.
True. SPRS gives free tender sets and EMD exemption.
4.Under the Special Marketing Assistance Scheme, enterprises can take part in up to four domestic and two international events each financial year.
True. Limit is four domestic and two international events a year.
5.Capacity-building support under NSSH covers short courses at the top 50 management institutes identified under NIRF.
True. Courses last 1-30 days at the top 50 NIRF-ranked management institutes.
6.NSSH was launched in 2016 under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment.
False. It is a Ministry of MSME scheme.
Written by us from the release, not by UPSC; checked by a second model.
GS3 Science and Technology · AIGS3 EconomyPrelims and Mains
Why in news
On 8 October 2026, Union IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw launched the World Bank Group's World Development Report 2026, 'The Promise of Artificial Intelligence', at its India launch in New Delhi.
What it is
The World Development Report is the World Bank's flagship annual publication. Each edition studies one major development theme and advises developing countries on policy. The 2026 edition looks at how AI can serve development.
Report framework
The report asks developing economies to harness AI through adoption, adaptation and advancement.
Core messages
Countries should be optimistic, strategic and pragmatic, and adapt AI tools to local contexts instead of building advanced systems from scratch.
Preparedness gap
Only one of the 25 low-income countries has published a national AI strategy.
Foundations
The report says AI gains depend on electricity, connectivity, computing, data, skills, education and institutions.
Publisher
The World Development Report is published annually by the World Bank.
India launch
The India launch was organised by the IndiaAI Mission, MeitY, with the World Bank Group.
Don’t confuse with World Development Report vs World Economic Outlook: WDR is a World Bank report on one development theme each year. World Economic Outlook is an IMF publication on global economic prospects.
Reports and indices: 14 Prelims questions since 2013; they test who publishes a report and what it measures.
Why it matters
Gives developing countries a practical framework to use AI for services such as health, farming and education.
Problems
Weak electricity, connectivity, data, skills and institutions limit AI use in low-income countries.
Way forward
Adapt existing AI tools locally, move from pilots to evidence-based scale-up, and revisit regulation as the technology evolves.
Put in your answer
Low-income AI readiness: Only one of the 25 low-income countries has a published national AI strategy.
IndiaAI Mission pillars: Seven pillars include compute, datasets (AIKosh), skills, startup financing and Safe & Trusted AI.
UPSC’s own questions that come close to this issue, from our Prelims and Mains banks.
Test yourself
Prelims practice · Single answer
Ours, not from a UPSC paper
Consider the following statements about the World Development Report 2026, 'The Promise of Artificial Intelligence':
1. It is a flagship annual publication of the World Bank.
2. Its framework asks developing countries to harness AI through adoption, adaptation and advancement.
3. It advises developing countries to build advanced AI systems from scratch rather than adapt existing tools.
4. It states that all low-income countries have published a national AI strategy.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
Which of the statements given above are correct?
True or false?
1 of 7
Statements the way Prelims prints them. Say first, then see the fact.
1.The World Development Report 2026 was launched in India by the Union Minister for Electronics and Information Technology.
True. Ashwini Vaishnaw launched it in New Delhi.
2.The World Development Report is published annually by the International Monetary Fund.
False. It is published by the World Bank.
3.The report's framework for developing economies is built on adoption, adaptation and advancement of AI.
True. The framework is adoption, adaptation and advancement.
4.The report advises developing countries to spend heavily on building advanced AI systems from scratch.
False. It advises adapting AI tools to local contexts rather than spending billions building advanced systems from scratch.
5.According to the report, all low-income countries have published a national AI strategy.
False. Only one of the 25 low-income countries has done so.
6.The report says the risk of AI job disruption is less imminent in developing countries.
True. Job disruption risk is less imminent in developing countries.
7.The IndiaAI Mission is built on seven pillars, which include a Datasets Platform called AIKosh.
True. AIKosh is the IndiaAI Datasets Platform, one of seven pillars.
Written by us from the release, not by UPSC; checked by a second model.
GS2 Welfare schemes · SkillingGS3 Rural livelihoodsPrelims and Mains
Why in news
On 8 October 2026 the Rural Development Ministry held a two-day national review meeting of RSETI stakeholders at Shillong, Meghalaya. The Secretary set five priorities, including better credit linkage, modern courses and digital transformation.
What it is
Rural Self Employment Training Institutes (RSETIs) are district-level institutes that give short skill training to rural youth, mainly from poor families, for self-employment and wage employment. They run on a partnership of the Ministry of Rural Development, State governments and sponsoring banks. The National Academy of RSETI (NAR) supports them.
Three-way partnership
RSETI is run jointly by the Ministry of Rural Development, State/UT Governments and sponsoring banks, with a mandate for one institute in every district.
Footprint and outcomes
There are 647 RSETIs in 634 districts since January 2009, with about 64 lakh persons trained.
Funding
The Joint Secretary described RSETI as a 100% centrally sponsored programme.
Digital integration
The Secretary wants the full RSETI lifecycle on the Kaushal Rural portal, with an AI layer to match candidates to courses and livelihoods.
Course concentration
About 65% of trainees are concentrated in a small set of courses, so the course basket is to be reviewed.
Don’t confuse with RSETI vs DDU-GKY: RSETIs are district institutes for short self-employment training backed by bank credit. DDU-GKY is a separate MoRD placement-linked skilling scheme for rural youth.
Schemes: 52 Prelims questions since 2013, 10 in Prelims 2026 alone. They test features, the period and who funds it. In Mains, 33 news-triggered questions, mostly GS3.
Why it matters
Combines training, handholding and bank credit, so rural youth can move to self-employment.
Women form most of the trained beneficiaries, supporting inclusive livelihoods.
Problems
Credit-linkage gap among trained beneficiaries, whether from low demand or weak credit delivery.
Trainees concentrated in a few courses, some not updated recently.
Way forward
Analyse the credit-linkage gap and simplify processes; improve trainer quality.
Update the course basket with emerging and overseas-demand skills, and set up a model RSETI in each State.
Put in your answer
RSETI reach: 647 RSETIs in 634 districts have trained about 64 lakh persons since January 2009.
Course concentration: About 65% of trainees sit in a limited set of courses, showing a need to diversify.
UPSC’s own questions that come close to this issue, from our Prelims and Mains banks.
Test yourself
Prelims practice · Statements
Ours, not from a UPSC paper
Consider the following statements:
1.Rural Self Employment Training Institutes (RSETIs) are implemented through a partnership of the Union Ministry of Rural Development, State/UT Governments and sponsoring banks.
2.RSETI is described as a 100% centrally sponsored programme.
3.RSETIs were launched under the Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
True or false?
1 of 8
Statements the way Prelims prints them. Say first, then see the fact.
1.RSETIs are implemented through a partnership of the Union Ministry of Rural Development, State/UT Governments and sponsoring banks.
True. It is a three-way partnership of MoRD, States/UTs and sponsoring banks.
2.The scheme mandates establishing one RSETI in every district.
True. The mandate is an RSETI in every district.
3.RSETI is a 100% centrally sponsored programme.
True. The Joint Secretary described it as 100% centrally sponsored.
4.RSETIs have been operating since January 2009.
True. The programme began in January 2009.
5.RSETIs were launched under the Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship.
False. RSETIs are under the Ministry of Rural Development.
6.RSETIs are funded by the State governments alone, with banks only providing credit to trainees.
False. RSETI is described as 100% centrally sponsored, with banks as sponsoring partners.
7.The Ministry has asked that the RSETI lifecycle be integrated on the Kaushal Rural portal.
True. Mobilisation to outcome monitoring is to be integrated on the Kaushal Rural portal.
8.Most RSETI trainees are spread evenly across a wide range of courses.
False. Around 65% of trainees are concentrated in a set of courses.
Written by us from the release, not by UPSC; checked by a second model.
GS3 Science and TechnologyGS2 GovernancePrelims and Mains
Why in news
On 8 October 2026 the Ministry of Communications said India's satcom framework is fair and non-discriminatory. It was replying to a social media post alleging unequal treatment of licensees.
What it is
GMPCS is a telecom licence under which satellite-based mobile communication services are offered in India. The Department of Telecommunications grants it, and it covers constellations in non-geosynchronous orbits such as low Earth orbit. A licensee must meet security conditions and then seek spectrum assignment before starting service.
Licences granted
Three entities hold GMPCS licences for services based on non-geosynchronous satellite orbit (NGSO) systems.
Security compliance
Each licensee must show compliance with security conditions under its licence terms, to protect users and their data.
Current stage
Security assessment is under way for all three licensees.
Next step
After the security process is completed, a licensed entity can apply for assignment of spectrum.
Same regulatory stage
The government says all three entities are at broadly the same stage, so it calls the discrimination claim baseless.
Don’t confuse with Licence vs spectrum assignment: The GMPCS licence is the authorisation to provide service. Spectrum assignment is a separate later step that follows security compliance.
Don’t confuse with NGSO vs GSO: NGSO satellites orbit at lower altitudes and move relative to the Earth. Geostationary satellites stay fixed over one point at about 36,000 km.
Economy terms and data: 42 Prelims questions since 2013, rising in recent years; they test what a term or instrument means. In Mains, 12 news-triggered questions.
Why it matters
Satcom can extend connectivity to remote and hard-to-reach areas.
A clear, even-handed process gives investors confidence in a new sector.
Problems
Security vetting of foreign-linked constellations and data handling takes time.
Allegations of unequal treatment can erode regulatory credibility.
Way forward
Publish clear timelines and criteria for security clearance and spectrum assignment.
Keep security safeguards while processing all applicants uniformly.
Put in your answer
GMPCS licensing status: Three NGSO-based GMPCS licences are granted, and all licensees are in security assessment before spectrum assignment.
UPSC’s own questions that come close to this issue, from our Prelims and Mains banks.
No practice question for this one; the card may still help an answer. Why: Lasting regulatory topic: licences, security compliance, then spectrum assignment. Few firm facts or figures, so a Prelims question is unlikely.
GS3 Economy · Services sectorGS2 HealthPrelims and Mains
Why in news
On 8 October 2026 the Ayush Ministry highlighted findings of the RIS Ayush Service Sector Report, released on Ayurveda Day 2026: women are 43% of the Ayush services workforce.
What it is
The Ayush Service Sector Report is a study by RIS (Research and Information System for Developing Countries) on the Ayush services economy. It covers Ayurveda, Yoga & Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha, Sowa-Rigpa and Homoeopathy. It measures size, revenue segments, jobs and medical value travel.
Publisher
The report is a study by RIS, released on Ayurveda Day 2026.
Sector size
Ayush services were worth US$36.92 billion in FY2024-25, growing at 16.91% CAGR since FY2022-23.
Women in workforce
Women are 43% of the workforce, and above 50% in hospitals, day-care centres, educational institutes and wellness establishments.
2047 projection
The sector is projected to reach US$216-318 billion by 2047.
Don’t confuse with RIS vs NITI Aayog: RIS is an autonomous think tank on international economic issues backed by the Ministry of External Affairs. It is not a government planning body like NITI Aayog.
Reports and indices: 14 Prelims questions since 2013; they test who publishes a report and what it measures.
Why it matters
Ayush services create jobs, with 1.76 million livelihoods and high women's participation, supporting inclusive growth.
Medical value travel brings foreign exchange and supports India's health-tourism and soft-power goals.
Problems
More than one million livelihoods are in local standalone clinics, which are small and often unorganised, so quality and standards vary.
Growth depends on skilling, digital infrastructure and quality standards, which the Secretary himself flagged as needs.
Way forward
Expand organised establishments backed by quality standards, skilling and digital infrastructure.
Promote Ayush medical value travel and wellness while raising standards to build trust.
Put in your answer
Women's workforce share: Women are 43% of the Ayush services workforce. This can be cited as an example of women's economic participation in services.
Employment data: The sector directly supports about 1.76 million livelihoods.
UPSC’s own questions that come close to this issue, from our Prelims and Mains banks.
No practice question for this one; the card may still help an answer. Why: Report with figures on women's share and sector size. Routine sector data; reports are only 14 of 327 Prelims questions and few are on such sector studies.
GS3 Environment · River rejuvenationGS2 GovernancePrelims and Mains
Why in news
On 8 October 2026, Jal Shakti Minister C.R. Paatil chaired the 20th Empowered Task Force meeting on Ganga rejuvenation in New Delhi. It reviewed Namami Gange progress: 527 projects sanctioned, 368 completed as of August 2026.
What it is
Namami Gange is the Union government's flagship programme to clean and rejuvenate the Ganga and its tributaries. It is run by the National Mission for Clean Ganga (NMCG) under the Ministry of Jal Shakti. Industrial pollution abatement is one of its pillars, alongside sewage treatment and river-front work.
Annual GPI inspection
Annual inspection of Grossly Polluting Industries began in 2017 with support from CPCB, which the release calls the National Regulatory Authority.
2025 coverage
3,703 GPIs were assessed in 2025: 1,296 in the Ganga basin and 2,407 in the Yamuna basin.
Sector-specific Charters
Charters exist for Pulp & Paper, Sugar, Distillery, Textile and Tannery sectors. They aim at water recycling and pollution prevention at source.
Project status
As of August 2026, 527 projects were sanctioned at a cost of ₹43,266 crore, and 368 were completed.
Implementing agency
NMCG implements the programme. Its Director General attended the meeting, and its Executive Committee approves project DPRs.
Programme components
The programme covers bioremediation, solid waste management, industrial effluent treatment, biodiversity and afforestation, livelihoods, and public outreach, besides sewage treatment.
New frameworks
The Sustainable Urban River Management (SURM) Framework and the Protocol for Riverine Microplastics Monitoring were released during the 9th India International Water Week 2026.
Launch
Namami Gange was launched in 2014 as a Central Sector scheme with 100% central funding.
Don’t confuse with CPCB vs SPCB: CPCB is the central body that supports the inspection framework. State Pollution Control Boards issue the 'Consent to Operate' and take closure action on non-compliant units.
Don’t confuse with ETP vs CETP: An ETP treats effluent of a single industrial unit. A CETP is a shared plant that treats effluent from many units in a cluster.
Don’t confuse with NMCG vs National Ganga Council: NMCG is the implementing body. The National Ganga Council, chaired by the Prime Minister, is the apex authority set up in 2016 under the Environment (Protection) Act.
Don’t confuse with Empowered Task Force vs Executive Committee: The Empowered Task Force is a review body chaired by the Jal Shakti Minister. The NMCG Executive Committee sanctions projects and approves DPRs.
Schemes: 52 Prelims questions since 2013, 10 in Prelims 2026 alone. They test features, the period and who funds it. In Mains, 33 news-triggered questions, mostly GS3.
Why it matters
Moving from periodic enforcement to continuous compliance makes industrial regulation more transparent, using third-party inspection and geo-tagged online reports.
Charters and water recycling cut freshwater use and pollution at source, and treat wastewater as a resource.
Treating sewage is central to cleaning the Ganga, and the programme's capacity creation addresses this directly.
The shift towards a basin-wide approach covering groundwater, ecology and small rivers makes rejuvenation more lasting.
Problems
Some operational GPIs still do not comply (448 in 2025), and only 27 of 40 operational CETPs comply.
Enforcement depends on State Pollution Control Boards, and the figures are reported by the government itself.
About 30% of sanctioned projects are still incomplete, with delays from DPR approval, land availability and other bottlenecks.
Treated wastewater reuse depends on state policies, and Jharkhand is still awaiting Cabinet approval.
Way forward
Strengthen SPCB capacity and continuous online monitoring (OCEMS) so that bypasses and defunct plants are caught early.
Extend sector charters to more industries and upgrade CETPs with biological treatment and reuse.
Speed up pending DPRs and land clearances and monitor outcomes on the ground, not just capacity created.
Expand reuse of treated wastewater, nature-based solutions and community participation across states and cities.
Put in your answer
Sugar sector water use: Freshwater use fell from 155 L/T cane in 2017 to 58 L/T cane in 2025.
Namami Gange progress data: 527 projects sanctioned at ₹43,266 crore; 368 completed as of August 2026.
Integrated approach: The Minister said river rejuvenation must go beyond pollution abatement to cover water availability, groundwater security, biodiversity and community participation.
Small river framework: Consultation workshops in New Delhi, Pune and Guwahati in July-August 2026 fed into a Framework for Small River Rejuvenation.
UPSC’s own questions that come close to this issue, from our Prelims and Mains banks.
No practice question for this one; the card may still help an answer. Why: Lasting programme on the syllabus. This release is a review meeting with no new provision or figures to build a question on.
On 8 October 2026, the Department of School Education & Literacy ran a nationwide screening of a 30-minute inclusive education module through the PRASHAST portal. Over 60,000 schools took part and more than 72 lakh teachers have been sensitised.
What it is
PRASHAST is a school-based digital tool to identify children with probable disability conditions covered under the RPwD Act, 2016. Teachers screen students using a two-part checklist of observable indicators. Special educators then validate cases and facilitate referrals for medical assessment.
Nature of tool
PRASHAST is a school-based digital screening tool for children with probable disabilities under the RPwD Act, 2016.
Who does what
Teachers screen using a two-part checklist; special educators validate cases and facilitate referrals for medical assessment.
Reach
More than 72 lakh teachers have been sensitised through the module.
Implementing body
The Department of School Education & Literacy, Ministry of Education, runs it, in line with NEP 2020 and the RPwD Act.
Don’t confuse with Screening vs diagnosis: PRASHAST flags probable disability from observable indicators. It is not a medical diagnosis; medical assessment follows referral.
Schemes: 52 Prelims questions since 2013, 10 in Prelims 2026 alone. They test features, the period and who funds it. In Mains, 33 news-triggered questions, mostly GS3.
Why it matters
Early identification in schools helps children with disabilities get timely support and supports the RPwD Act and NEP 2020 goals.
The whole-school approach brings in non-teaching staff, making school spaces more accessible.
Problems
Teacher screening based on observable signs may miss cases or mislabel children, so validation by special educators is key.
Shortage of trained special educators and medical assessment facilities can delay referrals.
Way forward
Train and recruit more special educators and link screening to timely medical assessment and support services.
Protect children's data and avoid stigma while screening.
Put in your answer
Whole-school approach: Sensitising teachers and non-teaching staff shows inclusion is a shared responsibility; useful as an example in answers on inclusive education.
UPSC’s own questions that come close to this issue, from our Prelims and Mains banks.
No practice question for this one; the card may still help an answer. Why: Digital screening tool tied to the RPwD Act, 2016. A lasting topic, but this release gives only participation figures, so a question is unlikely.
On 8 October 2026, NHAI released a document on 'Wildlife Mitigation Measures & Structures' to mark National Wildlife Week (2-8 October). Union Minister Nitin Gadkari released it at a Chintan Shivir in Ekta Nagar, Gujarat.
What it is
Wildlife mitigation structures are crossings and barriers built into highways so animals can move between habitats safely. They include underpasses, overpasses, culverts and canopy crossings, plus fencing, signage and speed limits. They address habitat fragmentation, barrier effects and animal-vehicle collisions.
Number of structures
More than 2,150 wildlife mitigation structures have been built or proposed along National Highways.
Spending
About Rs 19,700 crore has been invested in wildlife mitigation and related environmental protection over five years.
Types of measures
Structural measures include underpasses, overpasses, culverts and canopy crossings. Non-structural ones include signage, fencing and speed regulation.
Fencing and noise barriers
Guide fencing and noise barriers cover over 300 km of highway alignments, to steer animals to crossing structures.
Monitoring
NHAI uses camera trapping to track wildlife movement and review how well the measures work.
Don’t confuse with Underpass vs overpass: An underpass lets animals pass beneath the road; an overpass is a vegetated bridge over the road. The release says more was spent on underpasses (about Rs 4,600 crore) than overpasses (about Rs 650 crore).
Don’t confuse with Structural vs non-structural measures: Structural measures are built crossings. Non-structural measures are fencing, signage, speed limits and noise barriers.
Environment: Prelims tests bodies, programmes and the law behind them; Mains asks why plans fall short.
Why it matters
Reduces habitat fragmentation and wildlife deaths on roads, supporting biodiversity conservation.
Shows an effort to balance infrastructure growth with environmental safeguards and make highways safer for users too.
Problems
Crossings work only if animals use them; design and placement depend on local ecology and movement patterns.
Highway expansion through sensitive corridors keeps raising conflicts between development and conservation.
Way forward
Use monitoring data such as camera trapping to evaluate and improve crossing designs.
Plan mitigation at the alignment stage with conservation agencies, as the document stresses collaboration.
Put in your answer
Guide fencing and noise barriers: Fencing and noise barriers over 300 km are an example of non-structural mitigation.
UPSC’s own questions that come close to this issue, from our Prelims and Mains banks.
No practice question for this one; the card may still help an answer. Why: Lasting topic of roads and wildlife corridors. The release gives spending and structure counts but no legal or body facts a question can turn on.
India deposited its Instrument of Acceptance for Phase 1 of the WTO Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies in July 2026, while pressing for a 25-year transition period and a per-fisher benchmark in Phase 2. Examine the provisions of the Agreement and discuss its impact on India, especially on small-scale and artisanal fishers.