Answer the following questions in about 250 words each:
(a) Discuss the major environmental movements in India. How have they influenced policy-making? (15 marks)
(b) Critically evaluate the National Food Security Act, 2013. What are its achievements

Question

Answer the following questions in about 250 words each:
(a) Discuss the major environmental movements in India. How have they influenced policy-making? (15 marks)
(b) Critically evaluate the National Food Security Act, 2013. What are its achievements and shortcomings? (15 marks)

UPSC Answer Check · Accepted Answer

Begin with a brief introduction acknowledging the interconnectedness of environmental sustainability and food security in India's development trajectory. For part (a), allocate ~125 words covering Chipko, Narmada Bachao Andolan, and Silent Valley movements with specific policy outcomes like Forest Rights Act 2006. For part (b), use the remaining ~125 words for a balanced critical assessment of NFSA 2013—covering PDS reforms, maternity benefits, and gaps in implementation like exclusion errors and storage losses. Conclude by linking environmental conservation to sustainable food security.
- For (a): Names at least 3 major environmental movements (Chipko 1973, Narmada Bachao Andolan 1985, Silent Valley 1973, Appiko 1983, or Tehri Dam) with leaders (Sunderlal Bahuguna, Medha Patkar) and specific policy impacts (Forest Rights Act 2006, National Green Tribunal 2010, Environmental Protection Act 1986 amendments)
- For (a): Explains causal mechanism—how grassroots mobilization translated into legislative/judicial outcomes, not just lists movements
- For (b): Identifies NFSA 2013 core provisions—75% rural and 50% urban population coverage, 5 kg/person/month subsidized grains, maternity benefit of Rs. 6000, and children's nutrition schemes
- For (b): Critically evaluates with specific achievements (reduced hunger, PDS digitization, women's empowerment) AND shortcomings (Aadhaar linkage exclusion errors, 33% storage losses, inadequate grievance redressal, fiscal burden on states)
- For (b): Uses comparative data or recent CAG/PIB reports on implementation gaps in states like Bihar, Jharkhand vs. Kerala, Chhattisgarh

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Concept correctness	25%	7.5	Accurately identifies environmental movements with correct chronology (Chipko 1973, not 1970s vaguely), distinguishes between conservation vs. displacement-focused movements; for NFSA, correctly states 67% coverage figure, entitlement quantities, and constitutional status (not a fundamental right but legal entitlement)	Names major movements but conflates dates or leaders; states NFSA provisions approximately correct but confuses coverage percentages or omits maternity benefits; minor factual errors in policy outcomes	Confuses movements (e.g., calls Chipko anti-dam), invents non-existent policies, or fundamentally misunderstands NFSA as guaranteeing food as fundamental constitutional right; significant chronological or factual errors
Numerical accuracy	15%	4.5	Precise data: Chipko 1973 Reni village, Narmada 30 dams project, NFSA 75%/50% coverage, 5 kg grain, Rs. 6000 maternity benefit, 33% storage loss figure, 2.68 lakh crore estimated cost; uses recent FAO/State of Food Security reports	Approximate figures correct (e.g., 'about two-thirds coverage' for 67%, 'around 5000 rupees' for maternity benefit); no precise citations but order of magnitude acceptable	Wildly incorrect numbers (e.g., 100% coverage, 10 kg entitlement, Rs. 600 maternity); omits all quantitative aspects or invents statistics
Diagram quality	10%	3	Includes a well-labeled flowchart showing movement → policy pathway (e.g., Chipko → 1980 Forest Policy → FRA 2006) OR a schematic of NFSA implementation chain from Centre→State→FPS→Beneficiary with grievance mechanism; neat, legible, enhances explanation	Simple unlabeled timeline or basic PDS pyramid diagram; adds some visual value but lacks integration with text or incomplete labeling	No diagram, or irrelevant sketch (e.g., food pyramid for nutrition), or messy uninterpretable drawing that confuses rather than clarifies
Step-by-step derivation	25%	7.5	For (a): Clear logical flow—movement origin → key events → specific policy demand → policy outcome with timeline; for (b): Structured critical evaluation—objective → methodology of assessment → achievements with evidence → shortcomings with evidence → balanced conclusion; uses 'however,' 'conversely,' 'evidence suggests' connectors	Presents information in sequence but lacks explicit causal links; some structure visible but drifts between description and evaluation without clear signposting; conclusion present but formulaic	Random listing of movements and NFSA features without logical order; no discernible argument structure; jumps between parts (a) and (b) confusingly; missing introduction or conclusion
Practical interpretation	25%	7.5	Connects environmental movements to contemporary relevance (climate justice, EIA 2020 controversies, Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers Act implementation); for NFSA, discusses COVID-19 PMGKAY extension, One Nation One Ration Card portability, and specific state innovations (Odisha's e-PDS, Chhattisgarh's Mitanin program); suggests concrete improvements	Mentions general contemporary relevance but lacks specific examples; acknowledges implementation challenges without depth; conclusion offers generic recommendations ('government should do more')	No connection to current affairs or ground realities; purely theoretical treatment; ignores implementation context entirely; suggests impractical or already-implemented solutions

Q8

Directive word: Critically evaluate

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

Key points expected

Evaluation rubric

Practice this exact question

More from Civil Engineering 2022 Paper II