Floods, heatwaves and toxic air dominate lives, yet ecology remains a footnote in political agendas. Until voters demand otherwise, growth-at-all-costs will continue to define the discourse.
India is one of the most climate-vulnerable nations in the world. We face blistering heatwaves, erratic monsoons, glacial retreats in the Himalayas, devastating floods in Assam and Himachal, and choking air pollution in our cities. Yet, when it comes to political discourse and election campaigns, nature and climate seldom occupy center stage. Instead, the debates are dominated by promises of free electricity, jobs, roads, caste calculations, and welfare schemes. Why does the environment, despite its existential importance, remain sidelined in Indian politics?
The Tyranny of Short-Term Politics
The first reason lies in the mismatch between political cycles and ecological cycles. Elections in India are held every five years, sometimes sooner. Politicians are under pressure to deliver visible, tangible benefits that can be showcased quickly to the electorate — free rations, new highways, expanded metros, and subsidies. By contrast, environmental outcomes such as improved groundwater recharge, forest restoration, or reduced emissions are slow to manifest and rarely win immediate applause.
A leader cutting a ribbon on a new flyover offers instant political mileage. A leader announcing a climate adaptation program for farmers may secure long-term resilience, but the results are invisible in the short run. In the urgency of electoral politics, the slow burn of climate change struggles to compete with the immediacy of development promises.
Growth at All Costs
India’s development model has, for decades, been built around the narrative of high GDP growth through rapid industrialisation and infrastructure expansion. In this framework, environmental regulations are often portrayed as obstacles. Projects involving mining, coal plants, or large dams are justified as essential for jobs and growth.
Even though India has made remarkable progress in renewable energy — with solar and wind expanding rapidly — coal remains the backbone of our power grid. Political leaders hesitate to push hard for a green transition because they fear being branded as “anti-development.” The fear is that protecting forests or restricting polluting industries could be perceived as blocking investment and employment opportunities.
This “growth versus green” framing is deeply entrenched in our political economy, making it difficult for climate and nature to rise above the rhetoric of GDP numbers.
The Weakness of Environmental Institutions
India has some of the most comprehensive environmental laws in the world, including the Forest Conservation Act, the Environment Protection Act, and the Air and Water Acts. Yet, in practice, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) is often among the weaker ministries in terms of budget and influence. Its clearances are frequently overruled by more powerful ministries like Finance, Power, Coal, or Road Transport.
This institutional imbalance ensures that ecological considerations are rarely mainstreamed into the “big-ticket” policy decisions. Highways, smart cities, industrial corridors, and river-linking projects often proceed without sufficient attention to ecological sustainability. The result is that environmental priorities are treated as add-ons or afterthoughts, not core drivers of governance.
The Visibility Gap
Another reason why climate fails to dominate political discourse is the low visibility of ecological degradation. Inflation is felt in the price of onions every day. Unemployment is evident in households where young people sit idle. But biodiversity loss, soil erosion, or declining water tables unfold slowly and away from public scrutiny.
It is only when disasters strike — as in the catastrophic floods in Uttarakhand (2013), Kerala (2018), or Himachal (2023) — that nature briefly dominates headlines. Similarly, Delhi’s air pollution grabs attention when it reaches emergency levels, but soon fades until the next smog season.
This episodic attention undermines the sustained political momentum needed to push nature and climate to the center of the national agenda.
Public Priorities and Voter Behaviour
Ultimately, politics mirrors society. Most Indian voters, especially those from rural and low-income backgrounds, prioritise livelihood issues: jobs, healthcare, electricity, irrigation, and food security. Climate change may already be affecting these very concerns — erratic rainfall undermines farming, heatwaves impact labour productivity, floods destroy homes — yet the link is not always clear in the public imagination.
Surveys consistently show that while Indians care about the environment, it rarely ranks in their top three voting issues. As long as voters do not demand climate leadership, politicians have little incentive to put it at the heart of their campaigns.
Federal Complexity
India’s federal system further complicates climate governance. Environmental issues often cut across state boundaries — rivers, forests, and air pollution do not respect political borders. Yet, states frequently prioritise their own economic growth over ecological concerns. For example, states rich in coal reserves continue to push for mining, while those with forest cover often demand compensation for restrictions on development.
National commitments like India’s Net Zero by 2070 pledge depend heavily on state-level implementation. But since climate is not a vote-winner at the state level, it gets diluted in the political bargaining.
Signs of Change
Despite these challenges, there are reasons for cautious optimism. India has taken bold steps on the global stage:
- The International Solar Alliance positions India as a leader in renewable energy.
- The Panchamrit commitments announced at COP26 signal intent towards deep decarbonisation.
- The LiFE (Lifestyle for Environment) initiative launched by the Prime Minister reframes sustainability as a mass movement.
At the state level, Gujarat and Tamil Nadu have demonstrated how renewable energy can drive both jobs and investment. Sikkim and Himachal have experimented with bans on plastics and promotion of organic farming. These examples show that when climate action is linked to prosperity, pride, or health, it begins to resonate politically.
The Road Ahead
For India, bringing climate and nature into the political mainstream is not a luxury — it is a necessity. Over 60% of livelihoods depend on agriculture and natural resources. Unchecked ecological decline will translate directly into unemployment, migration, and economic shocks.
The real challenge is to reframe the narrative:
- Not “environment versus development,” but “environment as development.”
- Investments in clean energy, afforestation, soil health, and water security must be presented as the foundation of long-term prosperity.
- Political parties should integrate climate resilience into their welfare schemes — for instance, linking MGNREGA to ecological restoration, or including clean cooking and solar energy in poverty alleviation programs.
Above all, citizens themselves must demand stronger climate action. When voters connect extreme heat, polluted air, or water scarcity to their ballots, politicians will follow.
Conclusion
India’s tryst with destiny in the 21st century will be defined not just by GDP numbers, but by the health of its rivers, forests, and skies. Unless nature takes center stage in our political agenda, the costs will be borne by the poorest first, and eventually by all.
The environment is not a side issue; it is the stage on which every other political promise stands. India cannot afford to treat it as a footnote any longer.
Pull Quote
“The environment is not a side issue; it is the stage on which every other political promise stands.”
Author Bio
Raj Kumar Srivastava, IFS (Retd.), is former Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Karnataka, and currently Head – Nature-based Solutions & Strategy at IORA Ecological Solutions.
Tagline: Sustaining nature, people, and prosperity.