(a) While defining the green architecture, discuss its principles and challenges in response to climate change in India. 20 (b)…

(a) Green architecture

Green architecture is sustainable, energy-efficient design that minimises resource use, emissions and ecological harm while ensuring occupant comfort. Its principles are site optimisation through orientation, shading and microclimate use; water conservation via rainwater harvesting, greywater reuse and low-flow fixtures; energy efficiency through passive design, insulation, solar power and efficient equipment; material sustainability using local, recycled and low-embodied-carbon materials; and indoor environmental quality through daylight, ventilation and non-toxic finishes. In India, climate change intensifies urban heat islands, monsoon variability, coastal flooding and high cooling energy demand, making such design urgent. The CII-Sohrabji Godrej Green Business Centre, Hyderabad, and Suzlon One Earth, Pune, show how green roofs, water recycling, solar energy and passive cooling can reduce footprints. Yet principles must vary by climate zone: hot-dry areas need shading and thermal mass, warm-humid coasts need cross-ventilation and moisture control, composite cities need hybrid systems, cold regions need insulation and solar heat, and temperate zones need seasonal adaptability. India's framework includes the GRIHA and IGBC rating systems, the Energy Conservation Building Code (ECBC 2017) for commercial buildings and the Eco-Niwas Samhita (2018) for homes, but adoption is uneven. Challenges include high initial cost, skilled labour, maintenance, fragmented and weakly enforced building codes (ECBC is notified in only some states), certification that is not followed by performance monitoring, and retrofitting older stock.

Island regional planning. For island territories, regional planning is not optional but existential. Lakshadweep’s coral atolls have limited freshwater, low elevation, cyclone exposure and tourism pressure, requiring integrated coastal zone management, desalination/groundwater protection, disaster-resilient infrastructure and carrying-capacity-based tourism. For Lakshadweep, this means protecting coral reefs, lagoons and seagrass beds; for Andaman, it means limiting construction in eco-sensitive zones. The Island Coastal Regulation Zone Notification (2019) provides the legal frame. Andaman & Nicobar Islands combine biodiversity hotspots, seismic and tsunami vulnerability, limited land, and indigenous communities, demanding eco-sensitive zoning, restricted development, resilient ports/roads and community-led conservation under the Island Development Agency framework (2017), while protecting the territories of Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups such as the Jarawa, Shompen and Sentinelese. The Great Nicobar project (transhipment port, airport and township) shows the stakes: supporters stress strategic and economic gains, while critics point to forest loss, reef and turtle-nesting impacts and risks to the Shompen, which is why integrated regional planning rather than project-by-project clearance matters. Plans should use GIS, remote sensing and climate projections to map flood, erosion and sea-level rise risks. Carrying-capacity limits should guide hotel density, water use, and waste treatment. Such planning links land, water, energy, transport and ecology, preventing fragmented growth and preserving carrying capacity. It balances development with conservation, ensuring tourism, fisheries and settlement stay within ecological limits.

(c) Boundary issues

India’s international boundaries create security, resource and climate governance challenges. With Bangladesh, the legacy of enclaves (exchanged under the 2015 Land Boundary Agreement), shifting river boundaries, and fencing affect livelihoods and cross-border movement, alongside Teesta water sharing and irregular migration. With Pakistan, Sir Creek’s tidal-river status, LoC instability and the Siachen/AGPL standoff raise maritime and security concerns. With China, the undefined LAC, transboundary rivers (the Brahmaputra dams in Tibet) and flashpoints from Doklam (2017) to Galwan (2020) create strategic ambiguity; the October 2024 disengagement at Depsang and Demchok eased but did not settle the dispute. With Myanmar, cross-border insurgency and the 2024 decision to end the Free Movement Regime and fence the 1,643 km border complicate border management, since Naga, Kuki-Zo and Mizo communities live on both sides. In the northeast, border management must balance security with cross-border trade and cultural ties. With Nepal, Kalapani–Lipulekh–Limpiyadhura claims (shown in Nepal's 2020 map) and the shifting Gandak channel at Susta remain sensitive. The India–Bhutan boundary is settled, but China–Bhutan claims near Doklam directly affect the Siliguri Corridor. India's claimed 106 km boundary with Afghanistan lies in Pakistan-occupied Gilgit-Baltistan along the Wakhan corridor, so it is not under Indian control. Maritime boundaries with Sri Lanka (1974 and 1976 agreements, Katchatheevu), Maldives (1976) and Indonesia (1974 and 1977) are legally settled; the live issues are Indian fishermen's arrests and bottom trawling in the Palk Bay, poaching and security in the Andaman Sea, and EEZ surveillance, which require fisheries regulation and joint patrols. These disputes affect national security, transboundary river and delta management, and climate migration. They also require joint hydrological data sharing, delta erosion control, and climate-migration protocols.