04 November 2025

• Recent Event: TCS has announced its largest- ever layoff—about 20,000 jobs (3.2% workforce)—marking a major structural shift in India’s IT sector driven by AI automation.
• Trend: Other majors (Infosys, Wipro, HCL) are conducting similar “silent layoffs.”
• Significance: The IT industry, employing ~6 million and contributing 7% to GDP, faces its biggest transformation since the 1990s—from outsourcing to AI-driven innovation.

Key Points

• IT exports contribute $280 billion annually (NASSCOM 2024).
• AI automation is replacing routine coding and coordination.
• Tightening U.S./EU client budgets and H-1B visa costs are forcing localization.
• Skill mismatch: Legacy skills (SAP ECC, .NET, mainframes) are obsolete.
• TCS reskilled 550,000 in basic and 100,000 in advanced AI — model for others.
• Industry estimates suggest 50,000+ job losses by FY26 without reskilling.

Static Linkages

• Role of service sector post-1991 liberalization.
• Concepts of technological unemployment and productivity growth.
• Directive Principles (Art. 41, 43): Right to work and fair conditions. National initiatives: Digital India, India AI Mission, Skill India Mission, NEP 2020.
• PPP model in skill development.

Critical Analysis

• Pros:
  • Boosts efficiency and global competitiveness.
  • Encourages innovation and AI- based entrepreneurship.
  • Expands demand for high-end skills and product innovation.
• Cons:
  • Job losses in mid-level roles.
  • Weak social safety nets and reskilling systems.
  • Growing inequality between AI- skilled and others.
  • Dependence on Western markets persists.
• Stakeholders:
  • Workers face insecurity; firms seek leaner teams; policymakers must balance innovation with protection.

Way Forward

• Launch a National AI Upskilling Mission (via NITI Aayog).
• Curriculum reform in engineering to focus on AI, data, ethics.
• Mandate 6–9 months’ severance for large layoffs.
• PPP retraining programs and reskilling subsidies.
• Diversify export markets beyond the U.S.
• Support AI startups via fiscal incentives.
• Build social safety nets and mental health support.
• Ensure AI governance and policy clarity.

THE CASE FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

• Despite India’s clean energy push, the Grid Emission Factor (GEF) has risen from 0.703 tCO₂/MWh (2020–21) to 0.727 tCO₂/MWh (2023–24) (CEA).
• Non-fossil sources now form ~50% of installed capacity (June 2025), yet the grid is getting dirtier — revealing a capacity–generation gap and lack of system flexibility.

Key Points

• Installed Capacity (June 2025):
  • Non-fossil sources (renewables + hydro + nuclear): ~50%
  • Coal-based capacity remains dominant in generation share.
• Electricity Generation (2023–24):
  • Renewables (including hydro): 22% of total power generated.
  • Coal remains the primary energy source meeting surging demand.
• Capacity Utilisation:
  • Solar/Wind: 15–25%, versus 65–90% for coal and nuclear.
• GEF Trend:
  • Rising trend implies growing coal dependence during peak hours.
• CEA Projection:
  • GEF expected to decline to 0.548 by 2026– 27 and 0.430 by 2031–32, conditional on efficiency and flexible system reforms.
• Energy Efficiency Gains (BEE):
  • Energy savings (FY2017–18 to 2022–23):~200 Mtoe, avoiding 1.29 GtCO₂e emissions and saving ₹7.6 lakh crore.

Static Linkages

• GEF: Carbon emitted per MWh; used in carbon markets.
• Plant Load Factor: Explains generation– capacity mismatch.
• Round-the-Clock (RTC) Renewables: Integrate solar, wind, and storage.
• BEE & CEA: Under Energy Conservation Act, 2001 and Electricity Act, 2003.
• Energy Transition: Linked to NDCs and Mission LiFE.

Critical Analysis

• Positives
  • Global renewable leader; RTC power cheaper than coal.
  • BEE schemes (PAT, UJALA) cut emissions and save costs.
  • Improves energy security and demand-side flexibility.
• Challenges
  • Mismatch: Low renewable utilisation vs. high coal use.
  • Peak Imbalance: Demand peaks when solar dips.
  •   Transmission Gaps: Slow grid upgrades.
  • Lock-in Risks: Coal assets may become stranded.

Way Forward

• Flexible Tariffs: Incentivise off-peak power use.
• Storage Integration: Use EVs and home batteries as virtual plants.
• Tighten Efficiency Norms: Enforce 4–5 star appliances.
• Support SMEs: Expand PAT scheme.
• Scrappage Policy: Replace inefficient devices.
• Smart Grids: Build flexible, storage-backed systems.

WOMEN’S WORLD

• India’s women’s cricket team, led by Harmanpreet Kaur, won the ICC Women’s World Cup 2025, defeating South Africa by 52 runs at D.Y. Patil Stadium, Navi Mumbai.
• This is India’s first-ever Women’s World Cup title, echoing the 1983 men’s victory.
• The win marks a transformational moment for women’s sports, boosting gender parity, visibility, and institutional focus on women’s cricket.

Key Points

• Leadership: Harmanpreet Kaur (Captain), Amol Muzumdar (Coach).
• Performers: Jemimah Rodrigues (127* vs Australia in semis), Shafali Verma, Deepti Sharma, and Smriti Mandhana.
• Historical Context: India had earlier lost in 2005 & 2017 finals; this victory completes a long journey.
• Impact: Expected surge in sponsorship, grassroots participation, and sports economy.
• Policy Angle: Reinforces initiatives like Khelo India and Beti Bachao Beti Padhao.

Static Linkages

• Article 15(3) – Allows special provisions for women.
• National Sports Policy, 2001 – Promotes gender equity and inclusivity.
• Sports Authority of India (SAI) – Key institution for sports excellence.
• NITI Aayog’s Strategy @75 – Calls sports a driver of social transformation.
• UN SDG 5 – Advocates gender equality in all domains.

Critical Analysis

• Pros:
  • Elevates women’s visibility in sports.
  • Boosts sponsorship and youth participation.  Strengthens India’s soft power globally.
• Challenges:
  • Persistent gender pay gap and media bias.  
  • Weak grassroots infrastructure.
  • Bureaucratic hurdles in sports administration. Stakeholders:
  • Players: Seek parity and recognition.
  • Government: Aims to mainstream women’s sports.
  • Private Sector: New investment avenues.
  • Public: Expanding support and engagement.

Way Forward

• Implement equal pay and contract parity in sports.
• Expand Khelo India Women’s Leagues at grassroots.
• Foster public–private partnerships for sports infrastructure.
• Mandate gender balance in sports governance.
• Promote gender-inclusive sports education in schools.

• On November 1, 2025, Kerala announced the eradication of extreme poverty on its 69th formation day.
• The milestone follows the Extreme Poverty Eradication Programme (EPEP) launched in May 2021 by the second LDF government under CM Pinarayi Vijayan.
• The initiative builds on Kerala’s legacy of decentralised governance and community participation initiated by the People’s Plan Campaign (1996).
• It aligns with SDG 1: No Poverty and demonstrates the power of local self- governance in inclusive development.

Key Points

• Lead Agency: Local Self-Government Department (LSGD) with Kudumbashree Mission and community groups.
• Identification:
  • 4 lakh enumerators identified 64,006 families (1,03,099 people) based on four criteria — food, health, livelihood, housing.
• Intervention:
  • Micro plans created for each family ensuring access to housing, IDs, healthcare, livelihood, palliative care, and in some cases organ transplants.
• Verification: Multi-tier vetting by Gram Panchayats and Block Committees.
• Impact:
  • NITI Aayog’s MPI 2023: Kerala least poor State — 0.55% multidimensionally poor vs. India’s 14.96%.
• Next Phase: EPEP 2.0 launched to prevent relapse into poverty.

Static Linkages

• Constitutional Basis:
  • Art. 243G and 11th Schedule empower Panchayats for social justice and poverty eradication.
• Evolution: From Tendulkar/Rangarajan Committees (consumption-based) to NITI Aayog’s MPI (multi- dimensional).
• Kudumbashree (1998): Kerala’s CBO model under the State Poverty Eradication Mission.
• Decentralisation: Rooted in 73rd Constitutional Amendment (1992).

Critical Analysis

• Strengths
  • Evidence-based targeting: Customised micro plans.
  • Convergent Governance: Multi-departmental coordination.
  • Grassroots Empowerment: Kudumbashree-led community mobilisation.
  • Balanced Model: Welfare + growth + sustainability.
• Challenges
  • Tribal exclusion risks and unemployment pressures.  Fiscal stress in sustaining welfare-heavy systems.
  • Limited replicability beyond Kerala due to unique social capital.
• Stakeholder Views
  • Government: Model of compassionate governance.
  • Critics: Seeks more focus on job creation and productivity.
  • Community: Enhanced dignity and empowerment.

Way Forward

• Institutionalise EPEP 2.0 with a Social Registry for dynamic tracking.
• Link welfare with green industries and skill-based employment.
• Launch tribal-focused poverty eradication micro plans.
• Integrate data through Aadhaar-linked welfare systems.

RUSSIA’S OIL EXPORTS TO INDIA DROP

Context of the News

• On Oct 22, 2025, the US sanctioned Russian oil giants Rosneft & Lukoil over the Ukraine war.
• Following this, Russia’s oil exports to India fell from 1.95 mn bpd → 1.19 mn bpd (Kpler data).
• The sanctions take effect Nov 21, prompting Indian refiners to act cautiously.
• HMEL has suspended imports; IOC and RIL pledged compliance with sanctions.
• Shipments till mid-November remain unaffected as they were pre-sanctioned.

Key Points

• Russian crude = 34% of India’s oil imports (Oct 2025).
• Rosneft & Lukoil earlier supplied ⅔ of India’s Russian crude.
• Secondary sanctions risk: non-US entities may face penalties.
• India to diversify imports — West Asia, Africa, Latin America.
• India imports ~88% of crude needs, 3rd-largest global consumer.
• Nayara Energy (part-owned by Rosneft) may continue limited intake.

Static Linkages

• Energy Security: uninterrupted & affordable supply.
• BoP impact: higher oil bills widen CAD.  
• Sanctions enforcement: by US OFAC
• Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR): safeguard against shocks.
• Strategic Autonomy: balancing US–Russia ties.  OPEC+: Russia’s role in global oil supply.

Critical Analysis

• Pros:
  • Pushes diversification of crude sources.
  • Reinforces strategic autonomy & diplomatic balance.
  • Encourages renewable transition.
• Cons:
  • Supply & pricing volatility.
  • Risk of secondary sanctions on refiners/banks.  
  • Strain on India–Russia energy axis.
• Stakeholders:
  •  Govt – balancing geopolitics & energy needs.  
  • Refiners – compliance & continuity.
  • Consumers – vulnerable to price hikes.

Way Forward

• Diversify energy sources & expand SPR.
• Increase domestic exploration & renewables.
• Use rupee-based or non-dollar trade channels.  
• Strengthen diplomatic dialogue with US & Russia.

AN INDIAN WAY FOR G2

Context of the News

• Recent Event:
•  Former U.S. President Donald Trump’s all-caps tweet — “THE G2 WILL BE CONVENING SHORTLY” — signals revival of the U.S.–China “G2” idea, first proposed by economist C. Fred Bergsten (2005).
• Background:
  • Concept: The U.S. and China as a “caucus of two” to stabilize global recovery.
  • Gained traction post Global Financial Crisis (2008–09) when China’s fiscal stimulus aided global rebound.
  • Evolved from “trade war” and “decoupling” to Biden’s “de-risking” policy.
  • Marks a pragmatic reset amid global supply disruptions and inflation.

Key Points

• Reflects deep interdependence between the world’s two largest economies.
• China’s economic resilience and retaliatory trade actions limited U.S. leverage.
• For India, foreign policy priorities are shifting —
  • Earlier: Engage U.S. to manage China.
  • Now: Engage China to manage U.S.
• Jaishankar’s “India Way” (2020) stresses multi-alignment: engaging U.S., managing China, reassuring Russia, and deepening Asia outreach.
• India’s global influence now hinges on its Asian partnerships.

Static Linkages

• Non-alignment → Multi-alignment: From Nehruvian autonomy to 21st- century strategic balancing.
• Panchsheel Principles (1954): Basis of peaceful coexistence and sovereignty.
• Act East & Neighbourhood First Policies: Anchor India’s regional diplomacy.
• Economic Survey 2023–24: Highlights India’s resilience in a fragmented world.
• Indo-Pacific vision: Reinterpretation of Nehru’s Asian solidarity.

Critical Analysis

• Opportunities:
  • Could stabilize global trade and inflation.
  • Expands space for middle-power diplomacy.  Strengthens India’s balancing role in G20, BRICS+, SCO.
• Challenges:
  • A G2 framework may sideline India’s strategic autonomy.
  • May weaken Indo-Pacific coalitions like QUAD.
  • Risk of U.S.–China bipolarity reducing India’s policy flexibility.
• Stakeholder Views:
  • U.S.: Pragmatic engagement to manage economic shocks.
  • China: Recognition of parity with the U.S.
  • India: Advocates multipolar Asia, not G2 dominance.
  • ASEAN/EU: Favour balance, wary of duopoly.

Way Forward

•  Deepen multi-alignment and Asian partnerships (Japan, ASEAN, Gulf).
• Use G20, BRICS+, SCO for balanced engagement.
• Promote economic self-reliance and supply- chain diversification.
• Advance “Strategic Autonomy 2.0” as voice of the Global South.