NCAP 2025: Are India’s air quality priorities aligned with ground realities?

India's battle against crippling air pollution, a public health crisis affecting millions, finds its primary weapon in the National Clean Air Programme (NCAP). Launched in 2019, NCAP's ambitious goal was to achieve a 20-30% reduction in particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10) concentrations by 2024, using 2017 as the base year, across 131 'non-attainment cities' – cities that consistently fail to meet national ambient air quality standards. The programme represents a significant governmental commitment to addressing one of the most pressing environmental challenges facing the nation.

The current debate, encapsulated by 'NCAP 2025' and its revised funding rules, brings into question whether the programme's strategic priorities are genuinely aligned with the complex, on-ground realities of pollution sources. The core concern is that the new funding mechanisms might inadvertently incentivize cities to focus on certain easily measurable interventions, rather than tackling the most critical, often politically sensitive, and difficult-to-manage pollution sources like industrial emissions, vehicular pollution, construction dust, road dust, and biomass burning. Effective air quality management demands a holistic approach, tailored to the unique emission inventory of each city, and a policy framework that empowers local bodies to implement targeted, impactful solutions.

Key stakeholders in this crucial environmental initiative include the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), which formulates and oversees the policy; the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), responsible for monitoring, technical guidance, and implementation coordination; and the State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs), which play a vital role at the state level. Crucially, Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) and city administrations are at the front lines, receiving funds and executing projects on the ground. Citizens are the ultimate beneficiaries and, increasingly, active participants through awareness and advocacy. Industries and various sectors contributing to pollution are also significant stakeholders, whose compliance and adoption of cleaner technologies are essential.

This alignment issue holds immense significance for India. Air pollution is not merely an environmental problem; it's a profound public health crisis. The Lancet Planetary Health journal reported in 2020 that air pollution contributed to 1.67 million deaths in India in 2019, accounting for 17.8% of the total deaths in the country. This translates into staggering economic losses due to premature mortality and morbidity, impacting productivity and increasing healthcare burdens. Beyond health, air pollution affects agricultural yields, visibility (impacting tourism), and contributes to climate change, posing a multi-faceted threat to India's sustainable development goals. If NCAP's funding rules fail to address the primary sources effectively, India risks falling short of its clean air targets, perpetuating health crises, and undermining its economic potential.

Historically, India's environmental protection journey gained significant momentum after the Stockholm Conference of 1972. This led to the enactment of key legislation such as the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and subsequently, the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, which established the CPCB and SPCBs. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, provided a comprehensive framework. The urgency for NCAP arose from the persistent failure of many cities to meet air quality standards despite these laws, highlighting the need for a targeted, time-bound, and funded program. The constitutional mandate for environmental protection is enshrined in Article 48A of the Directive Principles of State Policy, which directs the State to 'endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country.' Furthermore, Article 51A(g) makes it a Fundamental Duty of every citizen 'to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures.' The implicit right to a clean environment is also read into Article 21, the Right to Life.

The future implications are critical. A misaligned funding strategy could lead to a 'tick-box' approach, where funds are spent on visible but less impactful measures, while major polluters continue unchecked. This could erode public trust, delay genuine progress, and necessitate more drastic and costly interventions later. Moving forward, NCAP needs to evolve into a more adaptive and data-driven program. This means strengthening local capacity for emission inventory development, promoting inter-agency coordination, ensuring transparent monitoring, and fostering public participation. Emphasizing performance-based funding, rather than simply expenditure, could be a way to ensure better outcomes. The success of NCAP is not just about achieving targets; it's about safeguarding the health and future of India's population and ensuring responsible environmental governance.