Archives: Publication

New research shows forests, wetlands and blue-carbon ecosystems are absorbing far less CO₂ under heat stress, threatening India’s net-zero pathway

When policymakers tally national climate progress, they often balance a country’s emissions with the carbon captured by forests, wetlands, and coasts — nature’s “negative emissions”. The logic appears straightforward: Plant more trees, lock away more carbon, and buy time for the clean-energy transition. But this ledger is now showing red flags. New scientific evidence reveals a critical divergence. A global multi-method study published in Nature Ecology & Evolution finds that terrestrial carbon sequestration weakens markedly during intense warm extremes because plants’ photosynthesis declines faster than respiration. The mechanics may sound technical, but the implication is simple: Heat waves, prolonged high vapour-pressure deficits and drying soils reduce the carbon plants can fix, sometimes abruptly.

This vulnerability was foreshadowed in 2023, when fast-turnaround carbon-budget analyses showed that land and ocean sinks absorbed far less CO₂ than expected — a temporary collapse of the natural buffer that had stabilised atmospheric CO₂ growth for decades. This discovery altered the arithmetic of every climate plan. What previously looked like a margin for slower decarbonisation suddenly narrowed.

India’s story adds another layer. The Global Forest Resources Assessment 2025 (GFRA, 2025) by the FAO ranks India fifth among global carbon sinks, noting that between 2021 and 2025, India’s forests and tree cover absorbed about 150 million tonnes (Mt) of CO₂ per year. These figures reflect successful afforestation programmes and sustained attention to tree cover. But while satellites show India is greening, whether the functional capacity of this expanded cover to absorb carbon is sustainable remains uncertain. We may be adding trees on the map while losing efficiency under the canopy. For a country targeting Net Zero by 2070, this is not a footnote. Treating natural sinks as a stable backstop risks mispricing mitigation, misallocating scarce funds, and under-protecting livelihoods dependent on resilient ecosystems.

Recent research by IIT Kharagpur supports this concern. It finds that forests’ photosynthetic efficiency — the physiological ability of plants to convert sunlight and CO₂ into biomass — has declined in key regions. Heat, drought stress, shifting precipitation patterns and forest fragmentation mean that a hectare of forest today often sequesters less carbon than it did two decades ago. National carbon accounting is measuring area, not output, and risks conflating the two.

Another overlooked asset is wetlands and coastal “blue carbon”. Recent fieldwork in Assam and studies from India’s mangrove belts and seagrass meadows document large, concentrated soil carbon stocks. Some wetlands store tens of thousands of kilograms of carbon per hectare in their soils. Yet, these ecosystems are routinely excluded from mainstream climate accounting, under-monitored and under-financed. Institutional gaps further limit India’s ability to translate this potential into reliable mitigation credits.

Policy blind-spots and net-zero risks

What this means for policy, economics and modelling is both complex and critical.

First, India’s NDCs and domestic targets cannot assume stable sink performance. Ecological and macroeconomic models that treat nature-based removal as a fixed parameter will overstate mitigation capacity and understate the cost of emissions reduction. If a 10–20 per cent decline in sink efficiency occurs regionally — a realistic scenario under heat and drought stress — national emission pathways and carbon-pricing designs shift significantly. Policymakers must stress-test plans against ‘sink weakening’ and consider reversibility risks such as fire, pests and drought. For Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) modellers and Ecologically-Extended Input-Output practitioners, incorporating this stress-test is now an essential modelling task.

Second, the right policy mix is not “more planting” alone. India needs a three-part ARM framework:

• Avoid: Protect and manage existing high-integrity forests.
• Restore: Repair degraded ecosystems with resilience-building interventions.
• Measure: Build rigorous monitoring and reporting systems to track actual carbon uptake.

India should also operationalise instruments like payments for ecosystem services and ensure climate-proofed restoration funding reflects the risk of reversal rather than rewarding one-off plantation counts.

Third, India must elevate wetlands and blue carbon in national climate policy. Carbon stored in mangroves, seagrasses and wetland soils is real and often durable, yet markets and policy rarely reflect their value. Strengthening institutional capacity for inventory, community stewardship and verified blue-carbon projects would be a high-value, low-regret investment for coastal and riparian communities.

Fourth, as natural sinks show signs of weakening, India should diversify its mitigation portfolio. Feasible technological removals — such as direct air capture pilots and enhanced weathering R&D— should be accelerated, while nature-based solutions remain central for co-benefits including biodiversity, water regulation and livelihoods. Economics must guide the mix: compare marginal abatement costs under varied risk scenarios and factor in social value, not simply the tonnage of carbon removed.

Finally, India’s economic policy must treat forests and coasts as living infrastructure requiring recurrent budgets. Trees are not a one-time capital expense; they need corridors, fire management, water security and community incentives. This means shifting some climate finance from headline plantation targets towards long-term maintenance, monitoring and adaptive management.

A changing global context

This concern is especially relevant in the aftermath of the COP deliberations in Brazil, where countries updated their net-zero pathways. While negotiations rightly emphasise emissions cuts and climate finance, they still largely treat natural sinks as stable assets. The science shows this assumption requires urgent re-examination if global mitigation plans are to remain credible. For India’s climate-policy community and economists who build models to inform decision-makers, key steps include embedding sink-degradation risk into scenario design, expanding land-use modules to account for non-linear sink behaviour, and conducting sensitivity analyses to determine how much additional mitigation or investment is necessary if nature’s removal capacity declines.

Way forward

The story here is not doom but clarity. Nature has bought us time, but it was never an unlimited credit line. India has comparative advantages — large land areas, strong community institutions, expanding blue-carbon opportunities. If economic planners and modellers treat nature as potent but fragile, India can craft resilient pathways that reduce emissions without over-betting on a single, unstable form of removal. The alternative is to discover too late that the balance sheet does not add up — and by then, the costs will be far higher.

The writer is fellow, CGE Modelling and Policy Analysis, NCAER, New Delhi. Views are personal.

India needs a nationwide, real-time groundwater monitoring system with open access to data so communities know what they are drinking and irrigating with

On a sweltering afternoon in Punjab, a farmer lowers his bucket into the well that has sustained his family for generations. The water looks clear, but tests reveal a different story: uranium levels far above the permissible limit. In nearby villages, children suffer skeletal deformities from fluoride-laced groundwater, while families spend what little they earn on hospital visits. What is happening here is not just a public health tragedy; it is an economic calamity unfolding silently beneath our feet.

The latest Annual Groundwater Quality Report (2024) paints a grim picture. Nearly one-fifth of samples from over 440 districts exceed safe contamination limits. In Punjab, almost a third show uranium above permissible levels, with fluoride, nitrate, and arsenic also widespread. India’s dependence on groundwater, with 600 million people relying on it for drinking and most irrigation, makes this a national crisis.

The World Bank estimates that environmental degradation, largely from polluted water and soil, drains India of nearly $80 billion each year, around 6% of GDP. Health costs from unsafe water run into billions annually, while waterborne diseases result in millions of lost working days.

People at risk

The link between contamination and human capital loss is especially alarming. In Gujarat’s Mehsana district, fluorosis has disabled workers, reduced their earning capacity, and plunged households into cycles of wage loss and medical bills. Across the country, diarrhoeal illnesses still kill hundreds of thousands of children under five each year. Beyond these health tragedies, the consequences represent a steady erosion of India’s most valuable resource: its people.

Agriculture, which employs over 40% of Indians, is also under siege. Soil degradation affects nearly a third of the country’s land, with polluted irrigation water accelerating the decline. Heavy metals and residues in groundwater reduce yields and accumulate in crops. Research shows that farms near polluted stretches of water experience a drop in productivity and income.

The risks extend beyond village boundaries. Contamination undermines not only the quantity but also the quality of crops. International buyers are increasingly demanding traceability and safety standards, and instances of export rejections over contamination concerns highlight the dangers of complacency. If such problems spread to staples such as rice, vegetables, or fruits, India’s $50-billion agricultural export sector could face serious losses.

Groundwater contamination also deepens inequality. Wealthier households can buy bottled water or invest in filtration systems, but poorer families cannot. Out-of-pocket expenses already account for most health spending, leaving households with little buffer. In rural areas, dependence on contaminated aquifers traps communities in cycles of ill health, debt, and declining productivity. The damage extends to the next generation, as children growing up with cognitive impairments from arsenic or fluoride exposure face limited prospects for education and employment.

Reckless over-extraction, already more than one and a half times the sustainable limit in Punjab, forces farmers to drill deeper, worsening water quality and increasing fertilizer use, creating a vicious cycle that undermines the long-term viability of agriculture.

Way forward

Yet solutions exist if policymakers act with urgency. First, India needs a nationwide, real-time groundwater monitoring system with open access to data so communities know what they are drinking and irrigating with. Second, enforcement against industrial effluents and untreated sewage must be strengthened; the current weak framework effectively allows industries to pass the costs onto society. Third, agricultural policy must shift away from input subsidies that encourage chemical overuse, towards incentives for crop diversification, organic practices, and micro-irrigation. Fourth, decentralised treatment systems, from community water filters to low-cost purification units, can provide immediate relief to affected villages.

In Nalgonda district, Telangana, community water purification units have provided safe drinking water to villages long plagued by fluorosis, leading to a measurable decline in new cases among children. In Punjab and Haryana, pilot programmes promoting diversification away from water-intensive paddy to pulses and maize have reduced pressure on aquifers, lowered chemical use, and maintained farmer incomes. These successes show that locally tailored interventions can deliver results while broader reforms are implemented.

Finally, stricter export quality checks and farmer training are needed to safeguard India’s reputation in global markets.

Groundwater contamination is not a marginal issue but a hidden economic drain. Unlike water scarcity, which can sometimes be reversed, contamination is often permanent. India faces a choice: continue treating contamination as invisible, allowing short-term gains to impose massive long-term losses, or recognise it as one of the country’s most urgent challenges. To sustain growth and secure its future, India must act decisively.

The poison beneath our feet has been ignored too long. Delay will only raise the price. Half-measures are no longer enough; only bold, coordinated action can prevent this crisis from becoming a national catastrophe.

Dr. Sreoshi Banerjee is Postdoctoral Researcher at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and Mr. Raktimava Bose is consultant at National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER), respectively. Views are personal.

India must integrate coastal ecosystems into its climate strategy. Its maritime geography is not merely a conduit for commerce; it is an ecological asset of strategic significance.

What if the solution to India’s net-zero ambition isn’t just on land but beneath the waves? The ‘blue economy’ is India’s overlooked trillion-dollar lever where environmental sustainability, economic growth, and strategic maritime power intersect. With a coastline stretching over 11,098.81 km and an Exclusive Economic Zone of 2.3 million sq km, India holds vast, untapped marine wealth. Yet, the blue economy continues to remain peripheral to economic planning, climate policy, and industrial strategy.

The Union budget 2024-25 marked a welcome departure with the launch of Blue Economy 2.0 aimed at building climate-resilient coastal livelihoods through aquaculture, mariculture, and sustainable marine tourism. However, one vital component within this ecosystem continues to receive inadequate attention: blue carbon. Representing the carbon sequestered by marine-vegetated ecosystems such as mangroves, tidal marshes, and seagrasses, blue carbon constitutes a high-impact, nature-based solution to climate change.

India’s mangrove cover, at 4,991.68 sq km, plays a pivotal role in carbon sequestration, biodiversity protection, and coastal buffering. Despite their capacity to store up to four times more carbon per hectare than terrestrial tropical forests, blue carbon ecosystems are neither fully integrated into India’s climate accounting under the Paris Agreement nor into its carbon market frameworks. Worse, these ecosystems are facing threats due to extreme pollution, rising sea levels, coastal erosion, and extreme weather events. An estimated 75-199 million tonnes of plastic waste now pollute the oceans, with over 33 billion pounds added annually, alongside chemical runoff and untreated sewage. This pollution severely degrades marine biodiversity and diminishes the ocean’s capacity to sequester carbon. Notably, the die-off of microscopic algae like phytoplankton, responsible for absorbing 30-40% of global CO₂ emissions, undermines one of the most effective natural carbon sinks.

Recent fiscal interventions signal intent. The Union budget 2025-26 earmarked Rs 25,000 crore for a Maritime Development Fund, targeting investments in shipbuilding, port electrification, logistics, and marine infrastructure. This includes Rs 6,100 crore to modernise public shipyards and Rs 2,850 crore to skill India’s youth in maritime technologies, laying the groundwork for a green maritime industrial base capable of producing low-emission vessels and sustainable port ecosystems. Concurrently, the fisheries sector has received a substantial boost. The Pradhan Mantri Matsya Sampada Yojana saw a 64% rise in allocation. These funds will scale up infrastructure for fish harbours, cold chains, and processing units, aiming to reduce post-harvest losses, raise export readiness, and transition towards carbon-neutral fisheries.

What remains missing is a direct fiscal and policy impetus for restoring and conserving blue carbon ecosystems. Hearteningly, Tamil Nadu has articulated a pathway for coastal prosperity, focusing on sustainable shipbuilding, seafood processing, eco-tourism, and mangrove restoration.

To unlock the full potential of blue carbon, India must integrate coastal ecosystems into its formal climate strategy. This includes recognising their carbon sequestration capacity in updated Nationally Determined Contributions, incorporating them into voluntary carbon markets and climate finance mechanisms, and prioritising their restoration. Dedicated funding for blue carbon conservation, improved scientific monitoring, and state-level incentives for coastal ecosystem management are essential.

India’s maritime geography is not merely a conduit for commerce; it is an ecological and economic asset of strategic significance.

Sanjib Pohit is a Professor and Sovini Mondal is a Research Associate at the National Council of Applied Economic Research. Views are personal.

The current care-giving model is overwhelmingly informal and family-based, with little to no state or institutional support.

In the quiet routines of everyday Indian households, an invisible yet indispensable workforce is at play, one that fuels the nation’s social fabric through everyday acts of care. Whether it is a grandmother helping with child-care, a father tending to an ageing parent, a mother attending to a toddler or the elderly, the care economy in India is thriving, albeit unrecognised and unremunerated. Data from the NSSO’s Time Use Survey-2024 reveals an economy hidden in plain sight, an immense engine of social welfare.

On average, an individual dedicates an average of over two hours (120.7 minutes) daily of caring activities for children and the bulk of this is directed towards routine activities such as bathing, minding the children, feeding them, and helping with school-work. An average of 1 hour 40 minutes is dedicated for caring adults which includes assisting the elderly with daily life, providing emotional support, passive care or assisting adults with medical care which can include feeding, cleaning and other physical care. 

Urban vs rural divide

Urban dwellers spent marginally more total time on care-giving work for both children and adults compared to their rural counterparts. On average, urban residents spent 122.3 minutes on child care and 101.0 minutes on adult care, while rural residents spent 120.0 minutes and 99.0 minutes, respectively. A more significant difference emerges when looking at the type of care. Rural residents spent significantly more time on medical related care for both children and adults.

This is likely driven by limited and inadequate access to sufficient healthcare facilities and other critical professional services, forcing families to personally manage such medical care needs. Conversely, rural households, which are more likely to be extended families, can better share non-medical related care duties. In contrast, urban families are typically nuclear, meaning fewer members are available to divide responsibilities, which often increases the overall care burden per person despite having greater access to professional care services.

The aged as care providers

Contrary to common perceptions that the elderly are primarily care recipients, data reveals that senior citizens in India are active contributors to care activities. Those aged over 65 spent an average of 108.3 minutes per day on caring for children, and 117.6 minutes on adult care which is more than that by many younger age groups, say those in the age group of 36-45 or the 56-65 age groups. Even those in the age groups of 56-65 years spent more time on care work than those in the lower age groups.

This suggests that a substantial portion of family care is an intergenerational and intra-generational duty, with older persons often caring for their elderly spouses, siblings, or even great-grandchildren. This is a quiet crisis as those who need care often end up as care-givers, putting immense physical and emotional strain on a vulnerable demographic. The increasing dependence on older family members has also risen due to shifting family structures and the rise of nuclear households. Their contribution highlights the dual vulnerability of the elderly. As both caregivers and potential care-receivers, the elderly pose critical questions.

A shifting balance

In a revealing comparison of care-giving patterns across genders, data shows marked differences in the time men and women spend on caregiving activities. While both men and women participate actively in care work, the divide in certain areas reflects traditional gender roles that continue to shape responsibilities within households.

On average, women spend 141 minutes daily on child care, nearly double the 80.4 minutes reported by men. This gap is most evident among younger women (15-35 years), who handle much of the non-medical child care like feeding and playing. However, men spend more time on medical care for children (88.8 minutes against 62 for women), suggesting a more focused involvement in occasional health-related tasks.

In contrast, men spend more time caring for adults at an average of 105.3 minutes daily compared to women at 96.9 minutes. This is especially true for non-medical adult care, where men report higher involvement across most age groups, particularly those who are in the higher age groups.

Thus, data suggest the evolution of a unique care-giving roles by each of the genders. While the core responsibility for daily, non-medical childcare remains largely with women, data suggest that care-giving roles are becoming increasingly complex. Men are taking on equal or greater responsibility in critical areas like adult care and medical child care, challenging the monolithic view of gender roles in the home.

A sector hiding in plain sight

With India’s demographic transition of a rising life expectancy and growing nuclear families, the demand for structured care-giving services is set to surge. This presents both a challenge and an opportunity. The current care-giving model is overwhelmingly informal and family-based, with little to no state or institutional support. Hence, there is immense scope to formalise care-giving through professional services, trained home helpers and community support programmes. Transitioning even a fraction of these care activities into paid services could unlock umpteen opportunities for the care economy. It would create employment, especially for women while ensuring that care is delivered with dignity, professionalism, and consistency.

The future prospects

Care-giving activities is the invisible engine of Indian households, overwhelmingly provided by women and largely absent from economic calculations. Recognising, redistributing, and reducing this massive burden through better policy, investment, and public awareness is not just a matter of fairness, it is essential for India’s socio-economic progress. As we stand on the cusp of demographic, social, and economic shifts, it is time that we begin to value the time spent on care and the people who provide it. The sheer volume of care-giving hours, a slow but rising ageing population, and the decline of the joint family model create a powerful economic imperative for a formal care-giving sector. India’s elderly population is projected to soar, meaning the current family-based care system is simply unsustainable.

As more educated women enter the paid workforce and the “sandwich generation” (caring for both children and elderly parents) faces severe time-poverty, the willingness to pay for professional services right from nannies and daycares to specialised elder and palliative care will gradually rise.

By taking decisive actions like investing in training, guaranteeing fair wages, and establishing strong regulatory oversight, India can successfully formalise its care economy. This move will achieve a dual purpose, it will honour and value the historic contribution by such caregivers, and it will ensure a rapidly ageing India can meet its care needs with dignity, professionalism, and an enormous new wave of economic opportunity.

Baruah is Fellow at National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER), New Delhi, and Wankhar is a retired Government of India officer. Views are personal.