Why in news?

Deepavali, the Festival of Lights, has been inscribed on UNESCO’s List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity during the 20th Intergovernmental Committee session held at New Delhi’s Red Fort.

It is now the 16th Indian cultural element on the prestigious list. The inscription recognises Deepavali as a living tradition continuously recreated by communities, fostering social cohesion and contributing to cultural continuity and development.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Understanding UNESCO’s Intangible Cultural Heritage List
• How a Tradition Gets Inscribed on UNESCO’s Intangible Heritage List?
• India’s Cultural Heritages Recognised by UNESCO
• Deepavali in UNESCO Intangible Heritage List
• UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage List 2025: Key Additions

Understanding UNESCO’s Intangible Cultural Heritage List

• UNESCO’s Intangible Cultural Heritage List recognises living traditions and skills — unlike monuments or archaeological sites.
• It includes oral traditions, performing arts, festivals, social practices, traditional craftsmanship, and knowledge of nature.
• These practices, such as India’s Garba and Kumbh Mela or France’s baguette-making, are passed across generations, strengthen cultural identity, and preserve humanity’s shared heritage.

How a Tradition Gets Inscribed on UNESCO’s Intangible Heritage List?

• For a cultural practice to be inscribed, UNESCO requires it to be inclusive, representative, and rooted in the community.
• The aim is to recognise living traditions that embody shared identity and social habits — such as France’s baguette-making, which UNESCO says reflects everyday rituals and conviviality.
• To include an element on UNESCO’s Representative List of ICH, states must submit a nomination dossier for evaluation. Each country can nominate one element every two years.
  • India nominated the ‘Deepavali’ Festival for the 2024–25 cycle.
• As globalisation and conflict threaten cultural diversity, UNESCO emphasises preserving these social histories.
• The list also highlights traditions at risk: in 2022, four elements were marked for urgent safeguarding, including Vietnam’s Chăm pottery-making, Chile’s Santa Cruz de Cuca pottery, Albania’s Xhubleta garment craft, and Türkiye’s traditional Ahlat stonework.

India’s Cultural Heritages Recognised by UNESCO

• Apart from Deepavali added in 2025, India has several cultural traditions inscribed on UNESCO’s Intangible Cultural Heritage list.
• These include:
  • Festivals & Rituals: Durga Puja in Kolkata (2021), Kumbh Mela (2017), Nowruz (2016), Ramman festival of Garhwal (2009).
  • Performing Arts & Theatre: Sankirtana of Manipur (2013); Chhau dance, Kalbelia dance of Rajasthan, Mudiyettu of Kerala (2010); Kutiyattam Sanskrit theatre and Ramlila (2008).
  • Oral & Spiritual Traditions: Buddhist chanting of Ladakh (2012); Vedic chanting (2008).
  • Traditional Craftsmanship: Brass and copper utensil-making of the Thatheras of Jandiala Guru, Punjab (2014).
• These entries reflect the diversity and richness of India’s living heritage.

Deepavali in UNESCO Intangible Heritage List

• Deepavali, India’s iconic festival of lights, has been inscribed on UNESCO’s Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, alongside 19 other global traditions in 2025.
• This came a year after West Bengal’s Durga Puja made it to the prestigious list. The decision was taken during a key meeting of UNESCO being hosted at the Red Fort.
• What UNESCO Recognition Means for Deepavali?
  • Deepavali’s inscription enhances the festival’s global stature, strengthens efforts to preserve its traditions, and supports India’s cultural diplomacy, including among the diaspora.
  • The Intergovernmental Committee guiding the 2003 Convention promotes safeguarding measures, best practices, and funding support.
  • The recognition also boosts tourism, fosters cultural exchange, and helps sustain the artisans and communities who keep Deepavali’s living traditions vibrant.

UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage List 2025: Key Additions

• The 2025 Representative List features a diverse set of cultural traditions from across the world.
• Highlights include:
  • Performing Arts & Music: Amateur theatre of Czechia; Cuarteto music of Argentina; Cuban Son; Joropo of Venezuela; Mvet Oyeng musical art of Central Africa.
  • Festivals & Rituals: Deepavali (India); Gifaataa New Year festival (Ethiopia); Festivity of the Virgen of Guadalupe (Bolivia); Christmas Bram and Sambai (Belize).
  • Crafts & Traditional Skills: Brussels’ rod marionettes; Behzad’s miniature art (Afghanistan); Bisht weaving and practices across West Asia; Tangail saree weaving (Bangladesh); zaffa wedding tradition in parts of the Arab world.
  • Culinary Heritage: Commandaria wine (Cyprus); Koshary dish traditions (Egypt).
  • Community Practices: Guruna pastoral retreats (Chad–Cameroon); family circus tradition (Chile); Confraternity of flowers and palms (El Salvador); bagpipe craftsmanship in Bulgaria.

Why in news?

Australia has implemented a first-of-its-kind ban preventing anyone under 16 from using major social media platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, X, Snapchat, and Threads.

Under the new rules, minors cannot create new accounts and any existing profiles are being shut down. The move is historic and is drawing global attention, as other countries observe how the ban unfolds and whether it effectively protects children online.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• Australia Sets Global Precedent With Social Media Age Ban
• Why Australia Introduced the Under-16 Social Media Ban?
• Concerns Over Rights and Feasibility
• How Australia’s Rule Differs From India’s Approach?

Australia Sets Global Precedent With Social Media Age Ban

• Australia has become the first country to legally enforce a minimum age of 16 for social media use.
• Platforms like Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat and others must now block over a million underage accounts, marking a major shift in global online safety regulation.
• What the New Australian Law Mandates?
  • Under the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act, platforms must:
    • Take “reasonable steps” to identify under-16 users and deactivate their accounts.
    • Block new account creation by anyone below 16.
    • Prevent workarounds, such as fake birthdays or identity misrepresentation.
    • Have a grievance mechanism to fix errors where someone is wrongly blocked or allowed.
  • This shift places direct responsibility on tech platforms to verify user ages and enforce compliance — something never before mandated at this scale.
• Key Exemptions in the Law
  • The Australian government has excluded several online services from the age-ban:
    • Dating apps
    • Gaming platforms
    • AI chatbots
  • This has raised questions, especially as some AI tools have recently been found allowing inappropriate or “sensual” conversations with minors.

Why Australia Introduced the Under-16 Social Media Ban?

• The Australian government says the ban aims to shield young users from the “pressures and risks” created by social media platforms.
• These include:
  • Addictive design features that encourage excessive screen time
  • Harmful or unsafe content affecting mental health and well-being
  • High levels of cyberbullying — over half of young Australians report experiencing it
• The government argues that stronger safeguards are required because existing platform policies have failed to protect minors.
• Regulatory Impact: Big Tech Under Pressure
  • The new law has forced major companies such as Meta, Google and TikTok to overhaul their systems.
  • Meta has reportedly begun deactivating under-16 accounts.
  • Platforms that fail to block under-16 users face penalties up to AUD 33 million.
  • Although tech companies oppose the law publicly, all have stated they will comply.
  • Importantly, children themselves aren’t penalised for attempting to access social media — only platforms are.

Concerns Over Rights and Feasibility

• The Australian Human Rights Commission has criticised the blanket ban, arguing that:
  • It may restrict a child’s right to free expression
  • It risks pushing children to unsafe, unregulated online spaces
  • Enforcement challenges could weaken the effectiveness of the law
• Debate continues over whether this strict ban is the right solution or if more balanced, protective alternatives exist.
• The Risk of State Overreach
  • Digital rights advocates warn that child-safety regulations can expand into tools of state control. Examples include:
    • Turkey, where child-safety powers were used to remove political posts.
    • Brazil, where similar laws restricted election content.
    • India, where online speech is already heavily regulated.
  • Safety rules can become a gateway to censorship.
• Why Bans Often Fail in Practice?
  • Teenagers repeatedly bypass restrictions using VPNs, fake ages, and loopholes.
  • The internet’s decentralised design — originally meant for resilience — makes enforcing bans extremely difficult.
  • Meanwhile, platforms like Twitch host thriving creator economies, complicating blanket restrictions.
• Reactions: Tech Pushback, Parental Support
  • Tech companies warn the new rules may be impractical and intrusive.
  • Parents and safety advocates widely support the move, citing rising online harms, bullying, and mental-health concerns among teenagers.
  • The law is now being closely watched by other governments as a possible model for future regulation.

How Australia’s Rule Differs From India’s Approach?

• Unlike Australia’s blanket ban, India does not restrict children from using social media.
• Instead, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 focuses on parental consent and data safeguards.
• Key points:
  • No minimum age for social media use, but anyone under 18 is treated as a child under the law.
  • Platforms must implement a “verifiable parental consent” mechanism before processing children’s data — though the law does not prescribe how this must be done.
  • Companies are prohibited from processing children’s data in ways that may harm their well-being.
  • Platforms cannot track, monitor behaviour, or run targeted ads toward children.
• India’s model is therefore data-protection–centric, not access-restricting, unlike Australia’s outright ban for under-16s.

Context:

• The Supreme Court’s judgment in the 16th Presidential Reference has attracted both criticism and praise. The debate centres on whether the Court should fix timelines for high constitutional authorities such as the President, Governors, and Speakers.
• The judgment emphasises strict adherence to the written Constitution, avoiding judicial innovation where the text is silent.
• However, critics argue that this reflects a reluctance to exercise the Court’s broader constitutional duty—interpreting the Constitution in a manner suited to present-day realities.
• Such judicial restraint, they warn, weakens the Court’s role as a guardian of constitutional accountability.
• The Constitution does not prescribe timelines for many crucial functions of constitutional authorities.
  • A key example is the Speaker’s quasi-judicial role under the Tenth Schedule, where they decide disqualification cases due to defection.
  • Despite the importance of these decisions, no time limits have been specified, often leading to long delays and political misuse.
• This article highlights how the Supreme Court’s judgment in the 16th Presidential Reference has raised serious concerns about judicial restraint, constitutional accountability, and the misuse of constitutional silences by authorities such as Governors and Speakers.

The Lack of Timelines Creates a Constitutional Anomaly

• The absence of fixed timelines for key constitutional actions has produced a serious anomaly.
• Legislatures have a fixed five-year term, yet defection cases under the Tenth Schedule can remain undecided until the term expires — allowing defecting legislators to escape consequences entirely. This undermines the very purpose of the anti-defection law.
• Similar issues arise with Governors withholding assent or delaying action on Bills.
• While Governors may return a Bill for reconsideration, they cannot indefinitely sit on legislation and effectively block laws without justification.
• Such inaction contradicts the Constitution’s design, as only courts — not Governors — have the authority to invalidate legislative or executive acts.

The Irony in the Supreme Court’s Verdict

• The Supreme Court’s decision in the Presidential Reference ironically strengthens the very problem it was expected to resolve.
• By refusing to impose timelines on constitutional authorities — particularly Governors — the Court held that since Article 200 contains no explicit timeline, none should be read into it.
• This effectively legitimises Governors indefinitely withholding assent to Bills, allowing them to stall laws passed by elected Assemblies.
• In doing so, the Court not only ceded ground to the executive but also failed to recognise how constitutional silence can be misused to undermine democratic functioning.

A Missed Opportunity to Uphold Constitutional Morality

• The judgment also overlooks the doctrine of constitutional morality — a principle championed by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar in 1948.
• He urged that constitutional morality must guide those interpreting and operating the Constitution so that its spirit prevails even where the text is silent.
• In recent years, courts have invoked constitutional morality to advance progressive values in cases such as Sabarimala (women’s entry) and LGBTQIA+
• Here, however, the Court declined to use that interpretive tool, missing an opportunity to protect the Constitution from misuse and ensure that its foundational ideals are upheld.

Ambedkar’s Warning and the Costs of Judicial Hesitation

• B.R. Ambedkar had cautioned that a Constitution could be subverted not by changing its text but by altering the form of administration.
• His warning is strikingly relevant today: Speakers delaying defection rulings and Governors withholding assent to Bills beyond the Assembly’s tenure exemplify how constitutional processes can be distorted without formally breaking the law.
• Ambedkar recognised that not every administrative detail could be written into the Constitution.
• Instead, he placed trust in future courts and institutions to uphold constitutional morality and protect the spirit of the document.
• Yet, the Supreme Court’s reluctance to mandate timelines for constitutional authorities undermines this very trust.
• By refusing to interpret constitutional silences in a way that prevents misuse, the Court risks enabling outcomes that contradict the Constitution’s purpose and democratic ideals.
• This moment serves as a reminder that constitutional morality — the principle Ambedkar saw as essential for the Republic’s future — remains far from fully realised in India’s political and administrative culture.

Context

• The controversy surrounding Vande Mataram reflects ongoing struggles over historical memory, constitutional values, and the political ownership of nationalism.
• Although the song occupies a revered place in India’s anti-colonial heritage, its meaning has repeatedly been reshaped by competing visions of national identity.
• The current revival of debate in Parliament suggests an effort to reinterpret settled questions and redefine symbolic markers of national unity.

Historical Roots of the Song and Its Early Controversies

• Rabindranath Tagore’s 1896 Rendition and Controversy
  • Vande Mataram, composed by Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay in 1875, became a powerful emblem of India’s freedom struggle.
  • Rabindranath Tagore’s 1896 rendition at the Congress session embedded it within the nationalist imagination.
  • Yet its later stanzas, rich in Hindu goddess imagery, raised concerns among Muslim leaders who regarded certain verses as religiously exclusionary.
  • These objections gained urgency after the Government of India Act, 1935 ushered in provincial elections, compelling the Congress to adopt a more inclusive public posture.
• CWC Adoption of First Two Stanzas
  • A turning point came in 1937 when the Congress Working Committee, chaired by Jawaharlal Nehru and attended by major leaders such as Sardar Patel, Rajendra Prasad, Maulana Azad, and Subhas Chandra Bose, unanimously resolved to adopt only the first two stanzas for public and official occasions.
  • Though Mahatma Gandhi was not a formal member, he was influential in shaping the final wording.
  • The committee affirmed the song’s historic significance while recognising the validity of Muslim objections.
  • The selected stanzas were deemed non-religious, inclusive, and reflective of the song’s essence.
  • This decision was guided by the need for communal harmony and the practical responsibility of administering provinces with diverse populations.

Constituent Assembly Debates: Settling the Question

• Following Independence, the Constituent Assembly revisited the status of national symbols.
• Its composition highlighted India’s pluralism: despite the post-Partition Hindu majority, leaders such as B.R. Ambedkar entered the Assembly through cross-community political arrangements.
• The Assembly considered three contenders, Vande Mataram, Sare Jahan Se Achha, and Jana Gana Mana.
• While Sare Jahan Se Achha carried secular appeal, concerns arose due to Allama Iqbal’s later association with the Pakistan movement.
• The Assembly ultimately selected Jana Gana Mana as the national anthem, while giving Vande Mataram a place of honour.
• Notably, the Constitution made no mention of a national song, allowing its status to remain customary rather than legal.
• The distinction became clearer in 1976 when the 42nd Constitutional Amendment introduced fundamental duties, including respect for the national anthem and flag, without extending similar provisions to the national song.

Legal and Judicial Interventions

• Courts have occasionally engaged with the question of Vande Mataram.
• In 2017, the Madras High Court suggested that schools sing it weekly and offices monthly, even recommending translation for those unable to sing it in Bengali or Sanskrit.
• The Delhi High Court considered petitions urging equal treatment of the national song and anthem.
• The Union government argued that while both deserve equal respect, only the national anthem enjoys legal protection under the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971, which criminalises disruptions to the anthem but provides no parallel regime for the national song.
• This distinction underscores the enduring legal separation between the two symbols.

Contemporary Revival of the Controversy: Symbolic Politics or Constitutional Engineering?

• The renewed parliamentary debate is striking because the issue was conclusively settled both in 1937 and during constitution-making.
• One explanation for its revival lies in symbolic politics, where invoking Vande Mataram allows contemporary leaders to present themselves as champions of nationalism while indirectly questioning the judgment of earlier figures such as Patel, Nehru, and Gandhi.
• Selective memory transforms a nuanced historical decision into a simplistic narrative of compromise.
• A second possibility is the intention to elevate the national song’s legal status.
• Proposals to create a new fundamental duty to respect Vande Mataram suggest the potential to reshape national symbols without constitutional amendment, echoing procedural strategies used in other policy domains.
• Such a move could eventually facilitate the introduction of a new national anthem or alter the established symbolic framework of the Republic.

Conclusion

• The evolution of Vande Mataram demonstrates how national symbols must adapt to pluralistic realities.
• Leaders such as Nehru, Patel, Gandhi, and Rajendra Prasad acted not out of hesitation but out of a commitment to inclusive nationalism.
• By respecting the song while choosing an anthem aligned with India’s secular ethos, the Constituent Assembly safeguarded national unity.
• True patriotism lies in recognising the historical complexity of national symbols and preserving the pluralistic balance that has shaped India’s democratic identity.

Why in News?

• The World Inequality Report 2026 (3rd edition after 2018 and 2022), released by the World Inequality Lab and led by economists such as Thomas Piketty, highlights the deepening income, wealth, and gender inequalities across India and the globe.
• The findings are crucial for achieving inclusive growth, social justice, welfare economics, SDGs, and climate equity across India and the globe.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• India’s Income and Wealth Inequality
• Global Inequality Trends
• Geographic Inequality Shift (1980–2025)
• Gender Inequality
• Climate Inequality
• Reasons Behind Inequality
• Challenges Identified, Policy Recommendations and Way Forward
• Conclusion

India’s Income and Wealth Inequality:

• Average income and wealth: Average annual income per capita is around 6,200 euros (PPP), and average wealth stands at about 28,000 euros (PPP).
• Income inequality:
  • Top 10% earners capture 58% of national income. The bottom 50% receive only 15% of income.
  • This is a jump from 57% (top 10%) and 13% (bottom 50%) in the 2022 Report.
• Wealth inequality:
  • The richest 10% hold 65% of total wealth. The top 1% own 40% of India’s wealth.

Global Inequality Trends:

• The top 0.001% (~60,000 ultra-rich) own wealth three times the bottom 50% of humanity. Their share rose from 4% (1995) to 6% (2025).
• The global top 10% own 75% of world wealth; bottom 50% own just 2%.
• The top 1% control 37% of global wealth—more than eighteen times the wealth of the entire bottom half of the world population. 

Geographic Inequality Shift (1980–2025):

• China: By 2025, China’s position has shifted upward with much of its population having moved into the middle 40%, and a growing share having entered the upper-middle segments of the global distribution.
• India (lost relative ground): In 1980, a larger part of its population was in the middle 40%, but today almost all are in the bottom 50%.
• Sub-Saharan Africa: Remains concentrated in the lower half of the global distribution.

Gender Inequality:

• Indian perspective: Female labour force participation remains extremely low at 15.7%, and there are persistent income gaps across sectors.
• Global perspective:
  • Excluding unpaid work, women earn only 61% of what men earn per working hour; and when unpaid labor is included, this figure falls to just 32%.
  • Women capture just 25% of global labour income, a share that has barely shifted since 1990.
  • Regional shares of women’s labour income:
    • Middle East & North Africa (MENA): 16%
    • South & Southeast Asia: 20%
    • Sub-Saharan Africa: 28%
    • East Asia: 34%
    • Europe/North America: ~40%

Climate Inequality:

• The poorest 50% contribute only 3% of carbon emissions linked to private capital ownership. While the top 10% account for 77% of emissions.
• The wealthiest 1% account for 41% of private capital ownership emissions, almost double the amount of the entire bottom 90%.

Reasons Behind Inequality:

• The inequality in India (and globe) remains deeply entrenched across income, wealth, and gender dimensions, highlighting persistent structural divides within the economy.
• These structural divides are -
  • Low female workforce participation.
  • Weak multilateralism on global redistribution.
  • Rise of ultra-wealth concentration.
  • Weak taxation systems and loopholes for the ultra-rich.

Challenges Identified, Policy Recommendations and Way Forward:

• Regressive taxation:
  • Effective tax rates decline sharply for billionaires and centi-millionaires. As a result, States lose revenue, impacting education, healthcare, and climate action.
  • Strengthen progressive taxation - Implement wealth taxes on ultra-rich. Eliminate tax loopholes and ensure effective tax compliance.
• Gendered labour burden:
  • As unpaid work is undervalued, it depresses women’s economic mobility.
  • Addressing gender inequality - Recognize and reduce unpaid care work through public provisioning. Increase female labour participation through skilling, flexibility, childcare.
• Inter-country inequality:
  • India’s global position worsened compared to China. Limited transition of population into the global middle class.
  • Redistributive social protection - Expand cash transfers, pensions, unemployment benefits. Targeted support to vulnerable households.
• Climate responsibility gap:
  • High emitters evade accountability; vulnerable populations bear disproportionate impact.
  • Climate justice framework - Equitable sharing of emissions responsibility. Incentivize green technologies and sustainable consumption.
  • Strengthen global multilateralism - Coordinated global approach to taxation, climate, and redistribution.
• Inequality within the top:
  • Even within rich groups, inequality widens due to extreme concentration of power.
  • Public investment in human capital - Free, high-quality schooling; universal healthcare, nutrition, childcare; and closing early-life disparity.

Conclusion:

• The World Inequality Report 2026 underscores that India and the world are witnessing historic levels of inequality.
• India’s relative decline in the global distribution and persistently low female participation indicate deep structural issues.
• As Thomas Piketty notes, promoting equality is essential to tackle the social and climate challenges of the coming decades.
• For India, achieving inclusive growth, social justice, and SDG targets will require strong political will, effective governance, and sustained investment in human capital.

Why in the News?

• India posted a robust 8.2% GDP growth, supported by strong manufacturing and services activity.
• However, the IMF assigned India a ‘Grade C’ in national income accounting, highlighting structural weaknesses and statistical gaps.

What’s in Today’s Article?

• GDP Growth (Current performance, Macroeconomic Stability Indicators, IMF’s Assessment, Structural Vulnerabilities)

Current Growth Performance

• India’s economic output for the quarter reached 48.63 lakh crore, significantly higher than the previous year. The broad-based expansion shows that the current momentum goes beyond a mere post-pandemic rebound.

• Manufacturing grew 9.1%, indicating stronger industrial demand and higher capacity utilisation.
• Services expanded 9.2%, now forming 60% of GDP, with financial services at 10.2%, signalling buoyant credit growth and high transaction volumes.
• Agriculture, supported by improved reservoir levels and horticulture output, rose 3.5%, showing a slight improvement in rural incomes.
• Real GVA rose from Rs. 82.88 lakh crore to Rs. 89.41 lakh crore, confirming real value creation rather than price effects.

• Crucially, nominal GDP grew only 8.8%, showing that inflation, previously a major concern, remained under control through 2024-25.
• Household consumption grew 7.9%, reflecting resilient domestic demand.

Macroeconomic Stability Indicators

• Several macro indicators underline India’s economic resilience:

• Inflation eased, dipping even below target toward the end of 2024-25.
• Bank credit growth remained strong, with well-capitalised banks holding buffers above regulatory norms.
• Fiscal consolidation continued, supported by buoyant GST and direct tax revenues.
• The current account deficit remained modest, helped by strong services exports and diversified forex reserves.

• These signals collectively suggest that India continues to grow even as global economic activity weakens.

IMF's Grade C Assessment: What It Means

• Despite India’s strong growth numbers, the IMF assigned India a ‘Grade C’ for its national income accounting framework.
• This rating does not evaluate the GDP growth rate itself but the statistical system supporting it. Key shortcomings highlighted:
  • Use of an outdated base year (2011-12).
  • Dependence on the Wholesale Price Index (WPI) due to the absence of Producer Price Index (PPI) deflators.
  • Single deflation method, which introduces cyclical bias.
  • Significant gaps between production and expenditure data, indicating incomplete coverage of the informal sector and expenditure components.
  • Lack of seasonally adjusted data in quarterly accounts.
  • No consolidated datasets for States and local bodies after 2019.
• The IMF’s view suggests that India’s “statistical backbone” needs strengthening to match its economic muscle.

Uneven Recovery Across Sectors

• Despite strong headline numbers, the growth pattern shows unevenness:
  • Mining grew barely 0.04%, due to prolonged monsoon disruptions.
  • Electricity and utilities grew only 4.4%, affected by a mild winter, reducing peak load demand.
• These sectors are foundational for industrial growth. Their sluggish performance indicates that the recovery has not spread uniformly across the real economy.
• The sectoral contribution to GVA stands at: Primary: 14%, Secondary: 26%, Tertiary: 60%
• This structure mirrors a service-driven economy, but India’s employment profile still remains heavily tilted toward low-productivity agriculture and informal services.

Structural Vulnerabilities

• India’s long-term challenges, highlighted both by the RBI and IMF, include:
• Weak Export Competitiveness
  • Trade protectionism, tariff uncertainty, and global geopolitical tensions threaten India's export growth. Structural scaling of goods exports remains limited.
• Labour Productivity Issues
  • A mismatch exists between India’s output structure and its employment structure. A large share of the workforce remains in low-productivity sectors.
• Fragile Statistical and Institutional Capacity
  • The absence of updated base years, comprehensive data, and modern statistical tools weakens policy evaluation.
• External Pressures on the Rupee
  • Although seemingly stable, the rupee continued to face downward pressure due to a strong U.S. dollar and fluctuating foreign capital flows.
• These issues do not negate India’s growth achievement but underscore the need for deeper institutional reforms to sustain high growth over time.

About Sultanpur National Park:

• Sultanpur National Park, formerly known as Sultanpur Bird Sanctuary, is located in Haryana.
• It consists primarily of marshy lakes and floodplains.
• It includes a core area has the main Sultanpur Lake/Jheel.
  • The Sultanpur Jheel is a seasonal freshwater wetland with fluctuating water levels throughout the year.
  • This shallow lake is mostly fed by waters from River Yamuna’s Gurgaon canal and the overflowing waters of the neighboring agricultural lands.
  • It gained national attention in the late 1960s due to the conservation efforts of ornithologists Peter Michel Jackson and Dr. Salim Ali, who frequently visited the site for birding.
• It was recognised as a Ramsar site in 2021.
• It has been identified as an Important Bird Area by BirdLife International.
• Flora: The vegetation of this park is tropical and dry deciduous, and the flora includes grasses, dhok, khair, tendu, ber, jamun, banyan tree, neem, berberis, Acacia nilotica, and Acacia tortilis.
• Fauna:
  • It forms a part of the ‘Central Asian Migratory Flyway’ and thousands of migratory birds from the countries of Russia, Turkey, Afghanistan, and Europe visit the park during the winter months.
    • Winter Migrants: Greater Flamingos, Northern Pintails, Eurasian Wigeons, Common Teals, and Bar-headed Geese.
    • Resident Birds: Indian Peafowl, Red-wattled Lapwings, Cattle Egrets, and White-throated Kingfishers.
    • Rare/Threatened Species: Sarus Crane, Black-necked Stork, and Indian Courser have been recorded here.
  • Other faunal species, such as Nilgai, Sambar, Golden jackals, wild dog, striped hyenas, Indian porcupine, mongoose, etc., are also found here.

About Large Language Models (LLMs):

• An LLM is a type of artificial intelligence (AI) program that can recognize and generate text, among other tasks.
• LLMs are trained on huge sets of data, hence the name “large.”
• LLMs are built on machine learning: specifically, a type of neural network called a transformer model, which excels at handling sequences of words and capturing patterns in text.
• In simpler terms, an LLM is a computer program that has been fed enough examples to be able to recognize and interpret human language or other types of complex data.
• Many LLMs are trained on data that has been gathered from the Internet—thousands or millions of gigabytes’ worth of text.
• But the quality of the samples impacts how well LLMs will learn natural language, so LLM's programmers may use a more curated data set.
• LLMs use a type of machine learning called deep learning in order to understand how characters, words, and sentences function together.
  • Deep learning involves the probabilistic analysis of unstructured data, which eventually enables the deep learning model to recognize distinctions between pieces of content without human intervention.
• LLMs are then further trained via tuning: they are fine-tuned or prompt-tuned to the particular task that the programmer wants them to do.
• What are LLMs Used For?
  • LLMs can perform various language tasks, such as answering questions, summarizing text, translating between languages, and writing content.
  • Businesses use LLM-based applications to help improve employee productivity and efficiency, provide personalized recommendations to customers, and accelerate ideation, innovation, and product development.
  • LLMs serve as the foundational powerhouses behind some of today’s most used text-focused generative AI (GenAI) tools, such as ChatGPT, Claude, Microsoft Copilot, Gemini, and Meta AI.
• Since LLMs are now becoming multimodal (working with media types beyond text), they are now also called “foundation models”.
• Though they are groundbreaking, LLMs face challenges that may include computational requirements, ethical concerns, and limitations in understanding context.

Quick Definitions:

• Machine learning: A subset of AI where data is fed into a program so it can identify features in that data.
• Deep learning: Trains itself to recognize patterns without human intervention.
• Neural networks: Constructed of connected network nodes composed of several layers that pass information between each other.
• Transformer models: Learn context using a technique called self-attention to detect how elements in a sequence are related.

About Solar Storm:

• A solar storm is a sudden explosion of particles, energy, magnetic fields, and material blasted into the solar system by the Sun.

What Causes a Solar Storm?

• The Sun creates a tangled mess of magnetic fields.
• These magnetic fields get twisted up as the Sun rotates — with its equator rotating faster than its poles.
• Solar storms typically begin when these twisted magnetic fields on the Sun get contorted and stretched so much that they snap and reconnect (in a process called magnetic reconnection), releasing large amounts of energy.

These powerful eruptions can generate any or all of the following:

• a bright flash of light called a solar flare.
• a radiation storm, or flurry of solar particles propelled into space at high speeds.
• an enormous cloud of solar material, called a coronal mass ejection, that billows away from the Sun.

How Does a Solar Storm Affect?

• When directed toward Earth, a solar storm can create a major disturbance in Earth’s magnetic field, called a geomagnetic storm, that can produce effects such as radio blackouts, power outages, and beautiful auroras.
• They do not cause direct harm to anyone on Earth, however, as our planet’s magnetic field and atmosphere protect us from the worst of these storms.

 What are Solar Flares?

• A solar flare is an intense burst of radiation, or light, on the Sun.
• These flashes span the electromagnetic spectrum — including X-rays, gamma rays, radio waves, and ultraviolet and visible light.
• Solar flares are the most powerful explosions in the solar system — the biggest ones can have as much energy as a billion hydrogen bombs.

What are Radiation Storms?

• Solar eruptions can accelerate charged particles — electrons and protons — into space at incredibly high speeds, initiating a radiation storm.

What are Coronal Mass Ejections (CMEs)?

• A CME is an enormous cloud of electrically charged gas, called plasma, that erupts from the Sun.
• A single CME can blast billions of tons of material into the solar system all at once.
• CMEs occur in the outer atmosphere of the Sun, called the corona, and often look like giant bubbles bursting from the Sun.

Key Facts about Aditya-L1:

• It is the first space-based observatory-class Indian solar mission to study the Sun.
• It was by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).
• The spacecraft is placed in a halo orbit around the Lagrangian point 1 (L1) of the Sun-Earth system.
• A satellite placed in the halo orbit around the L1 point has the major advantage of continuously viewing the Sun without any occultation/eclipse.
• This provides a greater advantage of observing the solar activities continuously.
• The spacecraft is carrying seven payloads to observe the photosphere, chromosphere, and outermost layers of the Sun using electromagnetic and particle detectors.