• India’s air pollution crisis is deeply embedded in a bewildering range of sectors and governance issues.
• Over 80% of Indians are exposed to air pollution. As a result, India is witnessing a public health crisis of epic proportions.
• The Government of India has passed various laws and policies to control and prevent this rapid environmental degradation.
• However, these laws and policies, so far, haven’t been implemented strictly-thereby leading to an insignificant effect.

CPCB

• The CPCB is a statutory organization constituted on 22 September 1974 under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.
• In the early days under this Act, its main function was to promote cleanliness of streams and wells in different areas of the States.
• The Board became fully functioned in 1981, under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act.
• The sole responsibility of the board was:
• To improve the quality of air
• To prevent, control or abate air pollution in the country
• It falls under the ambit of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC).
• The functions of the CPCB includes:
• Advising the Central Government on various pollution issues,
• Coordinating activities of the State Pollution Control Boards,
• Resolving their disputes,
• Collecting and compiling data regarding air and water pollution,
• Other ancillary responsibilities.

Challenges faced while tackling air pollution

1. Lack of strict implementation of laws

• The Government is failing to enforce stricter laws on the power plant emission norms, despite the data of the emissions from them worsens the air quality.
• Although, the government has deferred the compliance schedule several times and allowed inefficient plants to continue.

2. Lack of diverse representation of stakeholders

• Policymaking on air quality in India continues to be siloed, which gave rise to the harmful effects of long-term and short-term exposure to poor air quality.
• There is hardly any representation from the public health sector and the medical fraternity in decision-making bodies such as state pollution control boards (SPCBs).
• However, other stakeholders such as state corporations, industry associations and municipal bodies that are potential polluters are well represented.

3. Lack of capacity

• One of the main reasons air pollutions continues to rise is that the regulatory institutions’ lacks capacity and capability to respond appropriately to the issue and its evolving nature.
• There are several concerns regarding the deficiencies in the frontline pollution regulators such as:
• Inadequate personnel
• Part-time and underqualified leadership
• Lack of technical capacity and finance
• The SPCBs in the Indo-Gangetic Plain region have an average vacancy of 40% in their sanctioned staff strength, with regional offices bearing the brunt.
• The leadership positions in several states are part-time appointments, and the tenures of people appointed to these positions are often shorter than a year.
• With staff overstretched and an unstable leadership, boards spend most of their time on routine consent-granting functions relating to industries.
• With the little time left there is no focus on the other systematic reforms such as:
• Envisioning, planning, and executing longer-term programmes for pollution control,
• Compliance monitoring and enforcement
• Training personnel for the functioning

Looking ahead

• Action plans for activating emergency measures, while necessary in the short-term, risk makes the complacent about the underlying systemic constraints.
• For substantial and sustained improvements in air quality, the government needs to facilitate coordination in planning and implementation across varied sectors, departments and levels of government.
• It needs to tackle all major sources of pollution parallelly and introduce structural changes in crucial sectors such as agriculture and transport.
• A prerequisite is to be set for attempting to accomplish the institutional framework with sufficient autonomy, convening power and bureaucratic heft.
• A good starting point would be rapidly addressing the institutional capacity constraints faced by most environmental regulators, particularly SPCBs.
• The boards are envisioned as the autonomous entities with the government’s (other) policy objectives.
• For making them work, strong political coupled with bureaucratic support is required to realise this vision.
• This means affording them with:
• The freedom to hire, retain and train the staff they need
• Appointing competent leadership through a robust and transparent process
• Ensuring that the leadership enjoys an assured tenure of three to five years.
• The boards must also have representation from a more comprehensive set of stakeholders, including experts in air quality management and those from the public health sector.
• Policymaking on air quality can only be evidence-informed and effective if it accounts for and prioritises public health outcomes.

Moving in this direction of improving the autonomous body to control the pollution would be a clear signal from the State that it, at long last, is giving the issue of air pollution the attention, it deserves.