Topic 1 : The problem of equity in IPCC reports
Context
In a study published on March 4, researchers analysed more than 500 future emissions scenarios the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessed in its latest reports. It found that across all 556 scenarios, income, energy-use, and emissions disparities between developed and developing countries are projected to continue up to 2050.
IPCC assessment reports
- Typically, IPCC reports comprise three Working Group reports: one on physical science, one on climate adaptation, and one on mitigation action.
- One synthesis report consolidates findings from the three Working Group reports.
- Each report assesses climate-related scientific literature to capture the state of scientific, technical, and socio-economic knowledge on climate change.
- The IPCC is currently in its Seventh Assessment cycle (AR7).
Accessing future scenarios
- The IPCC uses ‘modelled pathways’ to estimate what it will take to limit the warming of the earth’s surface.
- These pathways are drawn using Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) that describe human and earth systems.
- IAMs are complex models that examine possible futures of the energy and climate system and economies.
- Its macroeconomic models can point to future growth levels in terms of GDP; its energy models can project future consumption; vegetation models can examine land-use changes; and earth-system models use the laws of physics to understand how climate evolves.
- With such integration across disciplines, IAMs are meant to provide policy-relevant guidelines on climate action.
The study and the findings
- They assessed 556 scenarios in IPCC’s AR6 report and found they project that per-capita GDP across Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, West Asia and the rest of Asia, which together constitute 60% of the world’s population, will be below the global average even in 2050.
- They spotted similar inequities between the Global North and the Global South vis-à-vis the consumption of goods and services and both energy and fossil fuel consumption.
- The scenarios were also found to project higher carbon sequestration from land-based carbon sinks (like forests) and higher deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies in developing countries compared to developed ones.
- Thus, poorer countries, they concluded, would bear the burden of both mitigation action and carbon dioxide removal and CCS.
Essentiality of equity
- The principles of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities are enshrined in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
- Article 3 of the Convention states countries “should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities.
- These principles recognise that while tackling climate change requires global action, richer countries are better placed to shoulder bigger climate action responsibilities than poorer ones.
- By viewing climate action solely through the lens of global-level technical and economic feasibility, mitigation pathways modelled using IAMs often run counter to equity principles.
- Equity in this sense would imply that developed regions need to accelerate towards net negative emissions and make the remaining carbon budget available to other less developed regions.
Conclusion
In the study, the authors conclude that construction of IPCC scenarios will need to be both equitable and environmentally sound.
Topic 2 : How were the new Election Commissioners selected?
Context
The two officials of Election Commissioners recently appointed by the President of India are the first to be appointed under the new law governing appointments to the constitutional body, the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.
Election of new ECs
- In terms of the new law, the two ECs were selected by a three-member Selection Committee, comprising Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Union Home Minister Amit Shah, and the Leader of the Indian National Congress in the Lok Sabha, Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, as leader of the largest party in the Opposition.
- They were chosen out of a shortlisted panel of six names. The shortlisting was done by a committee which, according to the Act, is headed by the Union Minister for Law and Justice and includes two officials of the rank of Secretary to the government.
History of The process
- Article 324 of the Constitution vests the “superintendence, direction and control of elections” in an Election Commission.
- It also says the EC shall consist of the Chief Election Commissioner and such number of other Election Commissioners, if any, as the President may fix from time to time.
- This provision was subject to any law made in that behalf by Parliament.
- However, for nearly 40 years from the adoption of the Constitution, the EC only had a Chief Election Commissioner (CEC). It was not until October 1989 that it became a multi-member body.
- However, the appointment of two Election Commissioners was rescinded within a short time, that is on January 1, 1990.
- A law was enacted in 1991 to fix the conditions of service of the CEC and the ECs, and amended in 1993. However, it did not provide for any appointment process.
- In the absence of any particular process being laid down by parliamentary law, the President has been appointing the CEC and ECs.
- The only known process is that the Law Ministry puts up a panel of names to the Prime Minister, who recommends the appointment of one of them as EC to the President.
- It had become a convention to appoint officials as ECs first and then, on the completion of the tenure of the CEC, the senior EC was elevated as CEC.
The Supreme Court rule
- In Anoop Baranwal versus Union of India, a five-member Constitution Bench ruled that it was the intention of the makers of the Constitution that the power to appoint the CEC and other ECs was not meant to be given exclusively to the executive and that the power was to be exercised “subject to any law made by Parliament”.
- The court said the appointments should be made by a three-member committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha (or the leader of the party that is largest in the Opposition) and the Chief Justice of India.
- It was in response to this that Parliament enacted the 2023 Act, which received presidential assent and was notified late in December 2023.
The criticism
- The foremost criticism from those who have challenged the new Act is that it has removed the CJI from the selection panel and has made a Union Minister a member instead.
- This gives the executive a two-one majority in the three-member committee.
- The government has argued that the Act does not really remove the CJI from the appointment process, as the inclusion of the CJI was only a stop-gap arrangement put in place until the enactment of a law.
Conclusion
While the Bill aims to formalize the appointment process for the CEC and ECs, maintaining the Election Commission’s autonomy and independence is crucial for upholding democratic principles.