Tribunal Ruling on South China Sea Dispute and China’s Response

CPR FACULTY ANALYSE
INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

As an international tribunal in The Hague rejected China’s claim to sovereignty over most of South China Sea, ruling instead in favour of the Philippines, and China refused to abide by the decision, CPR faculty comment on it:

In an interview to Rajya Sabha TV (above), Shyam Saran unpacks the various aspects of China’s claims over the waters of the South China Sea; deconstructs the tribunal ruling and its impact; and contextualises China’s response geopolitically.
G Parthasarathy in an interview on NDTV analyses China’s dismissal of the tribunal decision rejecting its claims to the South China Sea and how this is likely to lead to increased tensions internationally, including commenting on how India should respond.
In China’s Challenge to the Law of the Sea, Brahma Chellaney writes that China’s refusal to accept the decision of the tribunal is indicative of its ‘incremental approach to shaping the region according to its interests’ through ‘confounding, bullying and bribing adversaries’.

Understanding Artificial Intelligence (AI)

FULL LEARNING VIDEO
TECHNOLOGY

Artificial Intelligence and its Simple Usage

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is the intelligence displayed by machines such as computers by observing and learning from the environment, in a way similar to humans. It is based on the idea of building machines that can think, act and learn just like human beings and thus accomplish tasks that have historically required human intelligence. Whether it is the application of digital personal assistants, personalised recommendations for content on the Internet, the usage of applications like Google Maps for directions or the automatic categorisation of emails into ‘important’ and ‘spam’ folders – all these are simple instances of AI.

Ethical and Legal Concerns

AI has permeated the realms of ordinary life without us realising. While the above may be minor examples in the way the technolgy is used, there exist several larger breakthroughs. AI has noteworthy applications in various fields including healthcare, agriculture, transportation, aviation, finance, education, marketing etc. The most interesting use of this technology is in the development of self-driving cars. While consumer cars with the autopilot function that can park, steer and brake by themselves exist today, there is a race to see who can create a car that is absolutely driverless. This has created an ethical dilemma that is worth probing: In case of an unavoidable accident, who does the AI save – the pedestrians on the road or the passengers in the car? How is such a decision, concerning human life, made? Is the machine playing God by making such choices? And, in such an accident, who is to be blamed and punished, considering the absence of a driver.

The Way Forward

While AI is slowly replacing human beings in tasks that can be observed and learned, one must question whether it can really ever replicate human emotions and interaction? Clearly, our relationships with each other are undergoing a change as AI gets better at modelling human behavior. We must recognise that a line should be drawn when it comes to the use of such technology. At a time when even groceries can be ordered using AI, eliminating any need for human contact, it is evident that AI is changing the functioning of society as we know it. While this technology offers innumerable positives, it is essential to exercise some caution so that unknowingly we are not controlled by a technology that was invented to simplify our lives. It is also important to tackle the challenges that come with the use of AI, such as privacy and security concerns, the lack of awareness, lack of data, and high costs of adoption. This would enable a smooth transition for all, as people slowly migrate from traditional technologies that AI will now replace.

This learning video has been produced by Centre for Policy Research as part of the Metamorphoses- Talking Technology project, being executed in partnership with the India International Centre and NITI Aayog.

Two Years of Modi Government

FULL VIDEOS OF PANEL DISCUSSION FEATURING PRATAP BHANU MEHTA

 

Ideas for India organised a panel discussion featuring Pratap Bhanu Mehta from CPR, Pranab Bardhan from the University of California, and Mihir Sharma from Bloomberg View/ORF, moderated by Ideas for India editor Parikshit Ghosh. The discussion spanned a range of topics (videos hyperlinked below):

The complete transcript of the panel discussion is available at the Ideas for India website.

Trends in India’s Residential Electricity Consumption

PART 2 OF A BLOG SERIES BY THE CENTRE FOR POLICY RESEARCH (CPR) AND PRAYAS (ENERGY GROUP)
ENERGY RESEARCH

The series is titled Plugging in: Electricity consumption in Indian Homes.

Electricity consumption in Indian homes has tripled since 2000. The percentage of households with access to electricity has increased from 55% in 2001 to more than 80% in 2017. In 2014, an electrified Indian household consumed about 90 units (kWh) of electricity per month on an average; enough to run four tube-lights, four ceiling fans, a television, a small refrigerator, and small kitchen appliances with typical usage hours and efficiency levels in India. This is three-fourths of the average monthly household consumption in China, a tenth of that in the USA, and a third of the world average. In this post, we take a closer look at data on India’s residential electricity and the disparities in access and consumption across states. We also reveal some inconsistencies between different sources, pointing to the need for better data.

All states show considerable increase in total residential electricity consumption in recent years according to data compiled by the Central Electricity Authority (CEA) from distribution companies (see Figure 1). Between 2004 and 2015, states like Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand with low initial household electrification showed a high growth rate of their residential electricity use (about 11%-16%). States with higher household electrification like Delhi, Punjab, Haryana, and Tamil Nadu grew at lower, but still substantial, rates (6%-8%), with high absolute numbers.

Figure 1: Residential Electricity Consumption growth in selected states (2004-2015)
Source: Annual General Reviews for individual years (CEA).
The CEA data along with the census data and the rural electrification data can be used to estimate average monthly electricity consumption of an electrified household in different states. We validate this against the tariff orders issued by state regulators and find interesting results (see Figure 2).

Three insights emerge:

One, an electrified household in Delhi consumes about 250-270 units or kWh of electricity per month on average, approximately the same average amount consumed by an electrified household in Germany. At the same time, such an electrified household in Delhi consumes significantly more than other Indian cities (Chandigarh: 208 units; Ahmedabad: 160 units; Puducherry: 150 units; and Mumbai: 110 units). This is in part due to high ownership of air-conditioners (12% of total households) and air-coolers (70%), and tariff subsidies in Delhi. Yet, other socio-economic reasons still need to be examined.
Two, electrified households in larger states like Maharashtra, Gujarat, and Tamil Nadu, with higher rates of electrification, consume on an average a lower amount of about 80-90 units per month. Karnataka is on the lower end with about 60 units. On the other hand, households in Punjab (about 150 units) and Haryana (about 110 units) consume much more. . While there may be some discrepancies in the data due to incorrect reporting on use and number of consumers by distribution companies, the scale of these discrepancies is likely to be small given the limited number of un-metered and illegal connections in the residential sector.
Three, states like Uttar Pradesh (UP), Jharkhand, and Chhattisgarh show high monthly household electricity consumption. It is unlikely that states with a high share of newly electrified households and low reliability of power supply consume as high as an average household in Chandigarh or Mumbai. The reported household consumption is high possibly due to metering issues. For instance, 40% of the total residential connections in UP are rural un-metered connections. As their actual consumption is not metered, the distribution companies estimate their consumption based on norms approved by the regulator (currently the norm is 144 kWh/kW/month, a high number). Distribution companies have not conducted any sample studies to justify this norm despite being asked by the regulators. High estimation of consumption from un-metered connections as well as measurement issues in metered connections can mask the actual consumption.
Finally, the electricity consumption within states also exhibit significant inequity at the household level. According to the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO)’s surveys, about 20% of electrified households consume less than 30 units of electricity per month, while about 80% consume less than 100 units per month. In rural areas, 90% of the electrified households consume less than 100 units. This distribution varies with states. In most states, about 15-20% of all the households consume less than 30 units per month. The states consuming the least electricity are Karnataka, West Bengal, Bihar, and Jharkhand. For more details on results see our recent report.

Understanding the factors that lead to such variation in consumption patterns across states and households is important for managing future electricity demand (and to monitor the performance of schemes such as UDAY for the financial revival of distribution companies, and Saubhagya for providing electricity connections to all un-electrified homes). This requires accurate and comprehensive data on electricity consumption which, at present, is a serious area of concern (particularly the limited reporting by distribution companies).

In the next two posts, we look at the most basic use of electricity in Indian homes – lighting – and how the provision of lighting services are changing in the country.

This piece is authored by Aditya Chunekar and Sanjana Mulay from Prayas (Energy Group).

This blog series is also available on the Prayas website here.

This article was republished in Eklavya Magazine in Hindi under ‘स्रोत विज्ञान एवं टेक्नॉलॉजी फीचर्स’, and can be accessed here.

To subscribe to email updates on the series, click here.

Other posts in this series:

Electricity Consumption in Indian Homes
India’s LED Lighting Story
Illuminating Affordable Homes
The Efficiency of Appliances
Appliances used in Affordable Housing
Electrifying the National Capital Region
Exploring the different uses of household appliances
Role of human behaviour in driving electricity use

ThoughtSpace Episode 4: Analysing the evolving India-China relations

A CONVERSATION BETWEEN SENIOR FELLOW SHYAM SARAN AND RICHA BANSAL
PODCAST INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

Relations between India and China have changed considerably over the past decade as China’s growth rate outpaced India’s, placing both countries in unique and different positions in the current global geopolitical context.

This has been most evident in recent times with China’s open opposition to India’s NSG membership bid; its blocking India’s move to ban Masood Azhar; and pledging large aid packages to other South Asian countries at the recent BRICS summit. India, on the other hand, has grown increasingly closer to the US; attempted to take on China over the South China sea dispute; and not shied away from a muscular response to terrorism emanating from Pakistani soil, notwithstanding China’s proximity to Pakistan. Add to this Donald Trump’s victory in the recent US elections and what this posits for the future.

In the fourth episode (above) of CPR’s podcast, ThoughtSpace, Richa Bansal talks to Shyam Saran, a Senior Fellow at CPR and a career diplomat, who is a respected authority on India-China relations, on the evolving India-China relations and what the future holds.

ThoughtSpace Episode 22: Understanding the Implications of the Pakistan Election Results

A CONVERSATION BETWEEN AMB G PARTHASARATHY AND RICHA BANSAL
INDIA-PAKISTAN PODCAST

In an election that was marred by allegations of rigging, military interference and violence, Pakistan recently elected former cricketer, Imran Khan as Prime Minister. While Khan has called for a resolution of all issues with India, it is essential for India to discern whether his words translate into action, going forward.

In the 22nd episode of CPR’s podcast, ThoughtSpace (above), Richa Bansal talks to Honorary Research Professor at CPR and former ambassador to Pakistan, G Parthasarathy about this development across the border.

Amb Parthasarathy delves into the role of the army in the governance of Pakistan and sheds light on the possible future of India – Pakistan relations, focusing on issues like homegrown terror within Pakistan, terror groups targeted at India, Kashmir, and future trade relations between the two countries.

Amb Parthasarathy has also written on the subject in ‘The Tribune’,  ‘The Economic Times’, ‘PrimeTimes.IN’ and ‘The New India Express’.

ThoughtSpace Episode 48: How to regulate India’s economy to enable growth

PODCAST FEATURING DR KP KRISHNAN AND YAMINI AIYAR

Listen to episode 48 of ThoughtSpace featuring Dr KP Krishnan and Yamini Aiyar.

As we debate the future of the Indian economy, the issue of regulation has emerged consistently as a crucial fault line. How does India design regulatory systems in ways that are effective, constrains capital where needed, but at the same time builds markets, enables the unleashing of animal spirits, and protects labour and citizens? These are critical roles the state is meant to play, but given India’s complex regulatory system, it has been argued that the only way ahead for India is to rid ourselves of the regulatory cholesterol to unleash animal spirits and build the Indian economy. In such a scenario, what ought to be the role of the state in building regulatory institutions and mediating the relationship between capital and labour?

In this episode, Yamini Aiyar, President & Chief Executive of CPR, speaks with Dr KP Krishnan, Professor at the National Council of Applied Economic Research and former IAS officer. Dr Krishnan sheds light on the difference between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ regulatory cholesterol, shares examples of positive financial regulation by the state, and calls for participatory processes in the design of regulation.

For more information on the centre’s work, follow CPR on Twitter @CPR_India or visit www.cprindia.org. You can read more on TeamLease’s work on India’s compliance regime and regulatory cholesterol here and here.

ThoughtSpace Episode 3: Analysing Donald Trump’s Victory

A CONVERSATION BETWEEN SENIOR FELLOW NEELANJAN SIRCAR AND RICHA BANSAL
PODCAST INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

On November 8, the American electorate voted in Donald Trump as the 45th president of the United States, a phenomenon that the world is trying to deconstruct.

In the third episode (above) of CPR’s podcast, ThoughtSpace, Richa Bansal talks to Neelanjan Sircar, a Senior Fellow at CPR and an in-house election expert, who was born and raised in the US, to unpack the results of these presidential elections. Sircar both contextualises Donald Trump’s victory historically and analyses it by interpreting the data available.

Tilting at Titling: Will We Ever Get it Right?

A TALK BY DEEPAK SANAN
RIGHTS

Incomplete and inconclusive land titling in India poses serious challenges to the conduct of business, and often creates situations of injustice by facilitating dispossession and displacement. This leads to disputed ownership with many cases under litigation for decades.

Listen to the talk (above) by Deepak Sanan where he reviews the reasons for such infirmities in land titles in India, and also explains how the government typically deals with these. He particularly highlights why the government’s approach is insufficient to deal with the issue systematically.

ThoughtSpace: Right to Sanitation in India – Critical Perspectives

PODCAST IN COLLABORATION WITH OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS AND BLOG ON NEW BOOK BY PHILIPPE CULLET, SUJITH KOONAN AND LOVLEEN BHULLAR

 

Listen to the full episode of the CPR podcast, ThoughtSpace (above), featuring Senior Visiting Fellow, Philippe Cullet, about the book, ‘Right to Sanitation: Critical Perspectives’ co-edited by him, Sujith Koonan and Lovleen Bhullar, published by Oxford University Press. The book represents the first effort to conceptually engage with the right to sanitation and its multiple dimensions in India, as well as its broader international and comparative setting. This episode of ThoughtSpace is in collaboration with the Oxford University Press, a department of University of Oxford that furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide.

An interview with Philippe Cullet, detailing more information about the book and its contents can be read below:

Where would you situate this book in the socio-political landscape?

Sanitation has evinced considerable interest from policy-makers, lawmakers, researchers and even politicians in recent years. Its transformation from a social taboo into a topic of general conversation is evident from the central role of sanitation in recent Bollywood blockbusters, such as Piku (2015), Toilet ek prem katha (2017) and Padman (2018). Toilet ek prem katha is particularly interesting since it directly mirrors the policy framework of the central government that seeks to ensure open defecation free India by 2 October, 2019.

In fact, insofar as policymaking and implementation is concerned, sanitation has emerged from the shadows in the past five years. The Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM) has led to the construction of millions of toilets throughout the country. Several states have been declared Open Defecation Free (ODF) in the last couple of years. This is a positive development in terms of emphasising the urgency of addressing the sanitation crisis.

This also fits well with various judicial pronouncements since the 1990s where sanitation has been recognised as a fundamental right derived from the constitutional right to life. Yet, ongoing policy initiatives are not linked to a rights perspective, and a statutory framework to transform the promise of the judicially recognised right to sanitation into reality is absent. For the right to sanitation to be realised, its multiple dimensions must be addressed holistically beyond the instrumental mechanism of constructing toilets.

What would you say is the unique contribution of this book?

This book provides the first comprehensive analysis of the diverse dimensions of the right to sanitation. It exposes the limits of the current framework that lacks mechanisms to ensure the realisation of the right to sanitation in urban and rural areas on a universal basis, while ensuring the realisation of other rights, such as the rights to equality, environment, health and water.

How would you summarise the contents of this book?

As mentioned above, this book addresses the various dimensions of the right to sanitation. The realisation of this right is crucial in itself as well as for ensuring the realisation of various other rights, including the rights to environment, health and water. The book examines and analyses the different law and policy initiatives that have been undertaken to address issues that affect the realisation of the right to sanitation. These initiatives include the construction of toilets to address insanitary conditions, the development of sewerage infrastructure and other measures undertaken to control water pollution and to reuse wastewater, and legislative reforms related to the conditions of work of sanitation workers. Further, this book highlights issues that are not new but are yet to be satisfactorily addressed such as manual scavenging and gender equality, explained in more detail further down in this interview.

You mention at the start that the statutory framework for realising the right to sanitation is absent. Does this mean that there is no legal framework for sanitation?

No, the absence of statutory recognition of the right to sanitation does not mean that there is a complete void. There are various legal instruments that address some specific aspects of sanitation but there is no comprehensive sanitation legislation and what exists is not framed around a rights perspective.

In certain cases, there has been a clear legal framework, such as the one calling for the eradication of manual scavenging that has been in existence for decades. Yet, this has not been enough to ensure its complete elimination perhaps because of the deep link between the practice of manual scavenging and caste. In addition, the all too frequent news of sanitation workers dying in the sewers dispels the impression that we are any closer to the elimination of all practices amounting to manual scavenging.

Further, the gender dimension of sanitation has often been instrumentalised in government interventions. For instance, protection of the dignity of women was presented as the primary rationale for construction of toilets in official campaigns for behaviour change until 2017 when sufficient pressure led to a specific acknowledgment that this was problematic in policy documents, hopefully leading to a change on the ground.

Does this book have international and comparative relevance?

Yes, this book has relevance in international and comparative contexts. It will contribute to the ongoing discourse on the right to sanitation at the international level. The conditions, concerns and challenges in India may be similar to situations in other developing and least developed countries. Therefore, the book contributes to reimagining the right to sanitation from the perspective of the global South.

It does so in particular through its mix of conceptual work and grounded research, with a number of the book’s chapters being based on extensive ground-level work in the states of Kerala, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh.

About the editors 

Philippe Cullet, Sujith Koonan and Lovleen Bhullar are the editors of Right to Sanitation in India: Critical Perspectives. Philippe Cullet is Professor of International and Environmental Law at SOAS University of London and a Senior Visiting Fellow at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi. Sujith Koonan teaches at Campus Law Centre, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi. Lovleen Bhullar holds a PhD in law from SOAS University of London, and is associated with Environmental Law Research Society, New Delhi.

The book can be accessed at OUP India, here.

The book can be accessed at OUP global, here.