Recently the government of India launched Mission LiFE (Lifestyle for Environment). The Mission is “designed with the objective to mobilise at least one billion Indians and other global citizens to take individual and collective action for protecting and conserving the environment in the period 2022–28. Within India, at least 80 percent of all villages and urban local bodies are aimed to become environment-friendly by 2028.”
In the current fiscal year (2022-23) Mission LiFE is focusing on “Change in Demand, by nudging individuals, communities and institutions to practice simple environment-friendly actions (LiFE actions) in their daily lives.”
Since the Mission LiFE has been launched in the 75th year of India’s independence, a comprehensive and non-exhaustive list of 75 individual LiFE actions across 7 categories has been identified by the NITI Aayog (implementing agency for Mission LiFE). (see details here)
This is a brilliant initiative, inasmuch as it seeks to solicit active cooperation of all citizens through specific, measurable, easy to practice and non-disruptive actions. The objectives are indubitably noble and desirable.
However, if we evaluate this Mission in light of the current macroeconomic and social conditions especially inequality; poor quality of human life, e.g., malnutrition and hunger; food inflation etc. the difficulties in implementation are too obvious.
For example, consider the following:
The list of 75 actionable, inter alia includes the following entries:
“64. Prefer consuming natural or organic products.
67. Practice natural or organic farming.”
It is widely accepted that the fundamental right to life enshrined in the Article 21 of the Constitution of India encompasses the right to live with dignity that includes the right to food and other basic amenities. Accordingly, providing food security to the citizens has been one of the most common programs of all the governments in the past seven decades. However, the concept of food security has undergone considerable changes in the past couple decades. In the earlier days, it was focused more on food sufficiency in the country; whereas in the past couple of decades the focus has shifted to make the households food secure in terms of calorie intake rather than making the food available. We can say that the focus of food security programs has now shifted to ‘nutrition’ from ‘starvation’ in earlier days.
The National Food Security Act (NFSA) 2013, accordingly marked another “paradigm shift in the food security from welfare to rights based approach”. NFSA legally entitled about two third of the Indian population to receive highly subsidized food grains under the Targeted Public Distribution System. Presently approximately 81.34 crore persons are entitled to receive benefits under NFSA. This includes beneficiaries under the Mid-day Meal program and Integrated Child Development Services. (See here for details).
Recently, the central government has cleared the release of GM Mustard Hybrid seed DMH11 - based on the recommendations of GEAC under the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change. The decision to remove “unscientific ban” on GM crops has been hailed as “in the best interest of our farmers and the nation” (see here). The decision disregards all the concerns of environment experts, and even Swadeshi Jagran Manch (SJM), an associate organization of the ruling party.
Obviously there is goal incongruence. The climate goals and the objectives of Mission LiFE are at odds with the need to augment food production, especially oil seeds, to achieve the objectives of food security, and self-reliance (Aatmnirbharta), price stability, doubling farmers’ income, faster economic growth and improving current account.
It will be challenging to strike a balance between the climate goals and immediate socio-economic targets. A successful negotiation to find optimum solution would be the key to success. I shall be watching this space keenly to see how the battle evolves.
