UPSC Mains 2020 Sociology Paper - II
Section A
Q1(a) Elaborate A. R. Desai’s perspective to the study of Indian society. (150 words)
A. R. Desai was a Marxist sociologist who believed that to understand Indian society, we must study how people work, who owns land or factories, and how power is used. He did not focus mainly on religion or culture. Instead, he said that the way money, labor, and land are organized decides how people live and relate to each other.
In his book Social Background of Indian Nationalism, Desai explained that British rule joined India to world capitalism. Old landlords and kings lost power, while a new class of Indian businessmen and professionals grew strong and later led the freedom movement.
Desai also rejected romantic views that praised the old village system or caste order. He said caste helped the rich control workers and farmers. Through his studies on farmers’ struggles, city growth, and labor unions, Desai showed that inequality continued even after independence.
Q1(b) “Banning practice of ‘Sati’ is attributed to annihilation of a major social evil in colonial India.” Comment. (150 words)
The practice of Sati meant that a widow burned herself on her husband’s funeral fire. In 1829, Governor General Lord William Bentinck banned it by law. Indian reformer Raja Ram Mohan Roy strongly opposed Sati, calling it against both reason and the true spirit of Hindu texts.
This reform looked like a great moral step, but it also had other motives. The British wanted to show that they were more “civilized” and used such reforms to prove that their rule was just. So, the ban was both a humanitarian act and a political message.
Even after the law, many people secretly supported Sati, and some orthodox groups protested. The change came slowly because old beliefs were deep. Yet, this law started a wider discussion on women’s rights and social reform in India. It ended a cruel custom but also reflected British control over Indian society.
Q1(c) How do you justify Dumont’s deliberate stress on ideology that produce intellectualized account of Indian society? (150 words)
Louis Dumont, a French sociologist, studied the caste system in his book Homo Hierarchicus. He said that to understand Indian society, we must look at its ideas and beliefs, not just its economy or politics. He explained that caste works through the idea of purity and pollution—some groups are seen as more pure, others less so. This belief system, he said, keeps social order.
Dumont compared India with the West. He said Western society values equality and individual rights, while Indian society values hierarchy and duty, known as dharma.
Critics felt Dumont ignored daily realities like power, money, and politics. Still, Dumont’s focus was useful because it showed how Indian values form a different world-view. His approach helped compare cultures, though it sometimes made Indian society look too fixed and unchanging.
Q1(d) Explain the definitional problems concerning the tribal communities in India. (150 words)
It is not easy to define who is a “tribal” person in India. The Constitution uses the term Scheduled Tribes, but there is no single rule to decide which groups belong. Older governments used vague ideas like “simple lifestyle,” “living in forests,” or “being shy of outsiders.” These ideas often came from colonial times and made tribes look primitive.
Scholars have different views. Verrier Elwin said tribes are special because of their culture and traditions. D. N. Majumdar noticed that many tribal groups became similar to castes through education, politics, and contact with towns.
Today many tribal people work in cities, join markets, or fight for political rights. Movements like those in Jharkhand and Gorkhaland show new forms of identity. Since each state keeps its own list of tribes, benefits differ. So, tribes cannot be seen as isolated forest groups; they are diverse, changing, and active in modern life.
Q1(e) “Secularism was an outcome of 20th century humanistic radicalism.” Comment on this statement. (150 words)
Modern secularism grew from 20th-century movements that believed people should live by reason and humanity, not by strict religious control. After the world wars, many thinkers and leaders wanted freedom, equality, and peace. They saw that mixing religion with politics often led to hate and violence.
In India, leaders such as Jawaharlal Nehru and B. R. Ambedkar gave secularism a strong social meaning. Nehru said the state must treat all religions equally and encourage scientific thinking. Ambedkar linked secularism with social justice, especially the fight against caste discrimination.
Even after independence, India struggled with communal tensions, but the core idea stayed: every person should have dignity and equal rights, whatever their faith. Thus, secularism in the 20th century became both a moral value and a political principle born from humanistic ideals of compassion and equality.
Q2(a) “Indian caste system is unique and has been unhealthy for the growth of sociology of India.” How far do you agree with this view?
The Indian caste system is considered unique because it combines religion, birth, and ritual ranking into one structure. Sociologists such as G. S. Ghurye described it as a system based on hereditary occupation, endogamy, and hierarchy, where each group has its fixed place in the social order. Louis Dumont later explained caste through the idea of purity and pollution, which he saw as different from the class system in Western societies that is based mainly on wealth or income.
This uniqueness gave Indian sociology both strength and limitation. On one side, it offered scholars a concrete subject to study. Many early sociologists, both Indian and Western, wrote detailed studies of caste villages, rituals, and hierarchies. On the other side, this same focus made Indian sociology narrow. Too much attention went to describing caste traditions, while new issues such as urban life, class conflict, or social mobility were often ignored.
M. N. Srinivas tried to modernize this field by introducing concepts like Sanskritisation and Dominant Caste, showing that caste can change through imitation or local power. Yet even his work remained largely inside the caste framework. Marxist sociologists like A. R. Desai criticized this trend. They argued that caste was being treated as timeless, while its link to class, economy, and colonial history was being neglected.
Today, caste is not just a ritual matter. It affects politics, jobs, and even online discussions about inequality and representation. When sociology studies caste only as a religious system, it misses these wider realities.
Thus, the caste system has given Indian sociology rich material, but its overemphasis has sometimes slowed the growth of a broader and more critical sociology.
Q2(b) Discuss Whitehead’s contention that caste has potential to displace class and colonial contradiction.
Whitehead said that in India, caste can hide or replace class conflict. He meant that people often understand inequality through caste labels rather than through economic classes like “rich” and “poor.” Because of this, the real problem of exploitation becomes harder to see.
In colonial India, this was very clear. British rulers brought new economic systems such as plantations and cash-crop farming. Landlords and traders—usually from higher castes—benefited the most. Poor farmers and laborers, often from lower castes, suffered. But people explained their suffering as “caste fate” instead of an unfair economic system. A. R. Desai, a Marxist sociologist, also said that British capitalism in India worked through caste divisions. It made people fight within castes instead of uniting as one working class.
Whitehead also noticed that religion made caste powerful. Each caste’s duty, or dharma, was said to be fixed by birth and by divine will. So a poor worker might think, “This is my destiny,” instead of asking why he is poor. The British made this stronger by listing castes in censuses and official records. That gave caste a legal identity and distracted attention from colonial exploitation.
After independence, caste politics stayed strong. Reservations and caste-based parties helped the marginalized gain rights, but they also kept caste boundaries alive. Instead of thinking “we are all workers,” people still thought “we are this or that caste.”
However, leaders like Dr. B. R. Ambedkar and later Bahujan movements changed this picture. They showed that caste is not divine—it is a social tool that creates economic and social inequality. Ambedkar’s call to “annihilate caste” was also a call to end class oppression.
So, Whitehead was right that caste can hide class and colonial conflict. But when people understand caste as a form of exploitation, it can also reveal the truth behind those inequalities.
Q2(c) “Indian rural society is a faction-ridden society.” Discuss. (150 words)
In many Indian villages, people often divide into small competing groups called factions. These groups usually form around caste, family ties, land control, or local politics. Sociologist F. G. Bailey, who studied villages in Orissa, showed how local leaders form such factions to gain power and influence decisions in the village.
For example, when there is a panchayat election, one faction may be led by a dominant caste landlord, while another forms around a rising group of small farmers or backward castes. Both sides try to win government projects, jobs, or welfare benefits for their supporters.
Sometimes, factionalism creates conflict and slows development work, like road building or school repairs. Yet it also forces groups to negotiate and share power, which can strengthen democracy at the local level. Thus, Indian rural society shows both unity and division—factions reveal social inequality but also help political participation grow.
Q3(a) Examine the colonial policy of segregation of tribes under the Government of India Act, 1935.
The Government of India Act of 1935 was a turning point in how the British ruled India’s tribal areas. For the first time, they officially divided the country into Excluded Areas and Partially Excluded Areas. These were mostly in the North-East, Central India, and parts of what are now Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, and Odisha. The British said that tribal people were “primitive” and not ready to join modern political life, so these regions would be kept separate.
In Excluded Areas, the elected legislature had no power at all. The British Governor ruled directly and could make laws as he wished. In Partially Excluded Areas, the legislature had some say, but only with the Governor’s approval. This meant that while other parts of India were slowly gaining self-rule, tribal areas remained under strict British control.
The British claimed this policy was to “protect” tribal culture and independence. But the real motive was political and economic. By isolating these regions, they stopped Indian nationalists from spreading anti-British movements there. It also helped them easily exploit the forests and mineral resources without facing local protests.
Even after independence, this legacy continued through the Fifth and Sixth Schedules of the Constitution, which give special rights to tribal areas. However, unlike the British plan of isolation, the post-independence goal became one of balanced development and participation.
In short, the 1935 Act made tribal segregation look protective, but it mainly served colonial control. Understanding this helps explain today’s debates about tribal autonomy, inclusion, and self-governance.
Q3(b) Discuss the dynamics of ‘migrant workers’ in India in the context of Corona pandemic.
When the COVID-19 lockdown began in March 2020, millions of migrant workers in India suddenly lost their jobs. These workers—masons, factory helpers, drivers, hotel staff, and street vendors—form the invisible base of India’s cities. Most come from poorer states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand, and Odisha to work in big cities such as Delhi or Mumbai. They live in crowded rooms and depend on daily wages.
When transport stopped and workplaces shut down, their lives collapsed overnight. Many could not pay rent or buy food. With no trains or buses running, thousands began walking hundreds of kilometres home, carrying small children and bags on their heads. Some died on the roads from exhaustion or hunger. These painful images showed how weak India’s social protection system was for its poorest citizens.
The problem was not just poverty—it was systemic neglect. Most migrants had no written job contracts, no health insurance, and no access to government rations in the cities because their ration cards were registered in their home villages. Caste and class made things worse: lower-caste migrants often got the hardest work but least help.
The government reacted in several ways. It arranged Shramik trains to carry workers home, provided free food under the PMGKAY scheme, and opened temporary shelters. Later, the One Nation One Ration Card (ONORC) plan tried to make ration benefits portable anywhere in India. But progress was slow, and many workers were left out because there was no reliable database of migrants.
Courts and NGOs stepped in with relief, yet the crisis exposed how cities still see migrants as outsiders rather than citizens.
The pandemic made one truth clear: India’s economy depends on migrant workers, but its policies rarely protect them. Their experience is a warning that true development must include mobility, security, and dignity for all workers.
Q3(c) How does Andre Beteille justify ‘middle class in India? (150 words)
Sociologist André Béteille explained that the Indian middle class is not one simple group but a mix of people with different roles and values. Many are teachers, officials, doctors, journalists, or business owners. They connect India’s traditional ways of life with modern institutions like schools, courts, and democracy.
Béteille said the middle class lives with a contradiction. Publicly, they speak about equality, merit, and progress. But privately, they often follow caste and religion when choosing friends, marriages, or networks. For example, a person may support reservation policies in public but prefer hiring someone from their own community.
After India’s economic reforms, this class became larger and more consumer-oriented, focused on jobs, education, and lifestyle. Yet Béteille warned that they are not always progressive—their fear of losing privilege can make them resist change. Thus, he saw the Indian middle class as both a bridge and a barrier to social equality.
Q4(a) Discuss the conceptual issues about lineage and descent in India. Give suitable illustrations.
The ideas of descent and lineage help us understand how people in India connect themselves to their ancestors and families. Descent means the general rule by which a person traces family ties—either through the father’s line, the mother’s line, or both. Lineage is a smaller group within that rule, where members can name their common ancestor and share family duties and rights.
In most parts of India, descent is patrilineal. This means ancestry, property, and family name pass through men. The Hindu gotra system is a good example. Every Hindu man belongs to a gotra, and marriage within the same gotra is forbidden. This rule not only decides who one can marry but also strengthens patriarchal control and male authority.
Some communities, however, follow matrilineal descent. The Nairs of Kerala and the Khasis of Meghalaya trace ancestry through the mother’s line. Yet, even here, authority often stays with maternal uncles or men, showing that lineage and power do not always follow the same path.
Certain tribes like the Gonds and Bhils use a bilateral or cognatic system, where family is traced through both parents. This shows that there is no single pattern of descent in India.
Many scholars like Radcliffe-Brown and Louis Dumont saw descent as the main structure keeping society organized. But later thinkers, especially feminist scholars, argued that such theories ignore the power of women and the flexibility found in real life.
For example, in some patrilineal families, women manage money or make key decisions even if rules say men should lead. This difference between “rule” and “reality” is important.
Modern laws on inheritance and tribal property still struggle with these mixed patterns, showing how complex and varied descent really is in India.
Q4(b) Analyze household dimensions of family in India.
A household is not exactly the same as a family. It means a group of people who live together, share food, space, and income, and help each other with daily work. A household can include parents, children, grandparents, relatives, servants, or even non-relatives living together. This makes it a very useful unit for studying real life in India, where living arrangements are diverse.
The traditional joint family household—especially in North India—includes many generations under one roof, sharing income and property under the control of the oldest male. Sociologist I. P. Desai said the joint family has not disappeared; it has simply changed form. Families now may live separately for jobs or schooling but still support each other financially and emotionally.
In modern cities, nuclear households—just parents and children—are becoming more common. Urban living costs, migration, and women’s work outside the home make smaller families practical. Yet, as Leela Dube noted, even in nuclear homes, old ideas of patriarchy remain. Men are often seen as heads, and women are expected to cook, care, and maintain family honor.
From a feminist perspective, the household is also a site of inequality. Thinkers like Sylvia Walby said women’s unpaid domestic work is part of a hidden economy—it keeps the household running but is rarely valued. In rural areas, caste rules decide who cooks, cleans, or even enters certain parts of the home.
Pierre Bourdieu’s idea of habitus helps explain how daily habits—like who eats first or how respect is shown—teach each generation its place. The idea of a moral economy, discussed by James Scott, appears when families share food or help neighbors in hard times to protect dignity and honor.
Thus, the household is not just a physical space. It is a living system where love, labor, hierarchy, and adaptation meet—revealing both care and control in Indian family life.
Q4(c) Write a note on cultural pluralism in multi-religious society like India. (150 words)
Cultural pluralism means that people of many religions and cultures live together while keeping their own traditions. In India, this diversity is very old. Thinkers like Amartya Sen call it part of India’s “argumentative tradition,” where different faiths and ideas have always debated and coexisted.
Sociologists such as T. N. Madan and Ashis Nandy say that Indian secularism is not about strict separation of religion and state, as in the West, but about mutual respect and tolerance. Rajni Kothari noted that India’s democracy allows different groups—Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, and others—to share power peacefully.
The Constitution protects pluralism through Articles 25–30, which give freedom of religion and cultural rights. But events like the 2002 Gujarat riots or debates over hijab bans remind us that pluralism needs constant care. Even so, Bhakti and Sufi traditions, and shared festivals like Eid and Holi, keep India’s plural spirit alive.
Section B
Q5(a) Point out the benefits of ‘green chemistry’ for agrarian transformation in India. (150 words)
Green chemistry means using methods and materials that do not harm the environment. In farming, it replaces strong chemical fertilizers and pesticides with natural and safer options. This helps the soil stay alive and healthy and keeps rivers and groundwater clean. For example, using cow dung compost or neem-based sprays instead of chemical ones can protect both the crops and the farmers.
These eco-friendly inputs, like bio-fertilizers and biopesticides, help good bacteria grow in the soil. Over time, the land becomes more fertile and needs fewer outside chemicals. Farmers also spend less money on costly fertilizers and avoid health problems caused by long exposure to toxins.
This idea supports Gandhiji’s dream of self-reliant villages. A good example is Andhra Pradesh’s Zero Budget Natural Farming (ZBNF), where farmers use local, natural materials instead of factory-made chemicals. Combining such methods with new digital tools can make farming both sustainable and profitable.
Q5(b) Analyze the issues related to the citizenship in contemporary India. Give suitable illustrations. (150 words)
Citizenship in India today is a debated topic because it touches people’s identity and belonging. The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) of 2019 created controversy since it offered citizenship to people from certain religions but excluded Muslims. Many felt this went against India’s secular Constitution, which treats all religions equally.
The plan for a National Register of Citizens (NRC) added more fear. In Assam, many poor and illiterate people, especially Muslims, were unable to prove their citizenship and faced the risk of losing their rights or being detained. This raised serious human rights concerns.
Some state governments, like Kerala and West Bengal, refused to apply the CAA, showing how national and state interests sometimes clash. The tension reflects what sociologist T. H. Marshall described as a struggle between legal citizenship and social inclusion. In simple terms, people want not only legal documents but also respect, dignity, and a sense of belonging as citizens in a modern democracy.
Q5(c) Give an account of the consequences and remedies of chronic malnutrition in India. (150 words)
Chronic malnutrition means that children do not get enough nutrients for a long time. This causes weak growth, poor learning ability, and frequent illness. When children are undernourished, they perform poorly in school and later struggle to find good jobs. This keeps families trapped in poverty.
According to the NFHS-5 survey, India’s progress in reducing malnutrition has slowed, especially in villages and tribal areas. The Global Hunger Index 2023 also placed India low, showing how many people still suffer from hunger.
To fix this, programs like the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), mid-day meal schemes, and Poshan Abhiyaan need to work better. For example, giving fortified meals with added iron or vitamins can improve children’s health. Teaching mothers about nutrition and keeping villages clean through WASH — Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene — also help. As Amartya Sen explains, true change happens when people gain the ability and freedom to make their own decisions, and eradication of malnutrition is the first step towards this objective.
Q5(d) How does the New Education Policy, 2020 aim to eradicate disparities in the system of education in India? (150 words)
The New Education Policy (NEP) 2020 aims to make good education available to everyone, especially to those who have been left behind — such as girls, children from SC and ST groups, students in rural areas, and people with disabilities. The policy says that children should study in their mother tongue till Grade 5. This helps them understand lessons better and makes school feel more familiar, reducing early dropouts.
The NEP provides funds, scholarships, and special education zones for disadvantaged students. It also promotes digital learning through programs like DIKSHA and the National Educational Technology Forum, though internet access is still unequal in many areas.
Instead of rote memorization, the NEP focuses on understanding and skills. It also encourages community participation so that local people can support schools. Inspired by Paulo Freire’s idea of education as freedom, the policy aims to make learning equal, creative, and empowering for all.
Q5(e) What do you understand by democratic federalism? How does it promote decentralization of power in India? (150 words)
Democratic federalism means that power is shared between the central government, state governments, and local bodies, and that people at all levels can take part in decisions. In India, this happens through a three-tier system — Union, State, and Local — which helps bring government closer to the people.
The 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments gave more authority to Panchayats in villages and municipalities in cities. This allows local communities to plan their own projects, manage funds, and express their needs directly. It follows Dr. B. R. Ambedkar’s vision of equality in political participation.
For instance, programs like MNREGA and Swachh Bharat succeed best when local bodies lead them. This approach, called “subsidiarity,” means decisions are made at the level closest to the citizens. Still, too much financial control by the centre and politics in local elections weaken this system. Stronger financial freedom and cooperation, such as through the GST Council, can make Indian federalism more effective.
Q6(a) Discuss in detail the main issues of development planning in mixed economy like India.
India’s economy is called a mixed economy because it includes both government planning and private business activity. The goal after Independence was to use the government’s power for social welfare while allowing markets to create growth. But over time, this system has faced many problems.
The first problem is how to divide resources fairly. The government must choose where to spend—on big industries or on jobs for rural people. In the early years, planners followed the Mahalanobis model, which focused on heavy industries such as steel and machinery. This helped industrial growth but ignored rural employment. Many villages stayed poor and underdeveloped.
The second issue is bureaucratic delay. Plans made in New Delhi often move through many layers of approval before action begins. Projects get stuck in paperwork and lose touch with local needs. Economist Amartya Sen has said that such rigid planning forgets human well-being and innovation.
Another major issue is regional imbalance. Some states like Gujarat and Maharashtra developed fast, while others like Bihar and Odisha stayed behind. This gap led to migration, unemployment, and frustration among poorer states.
Weak implementation has also harmed planning. Programs such as MNREGA face wage delays and corruption, which reduce trust among people.
After 1991, the government reduced control over the economy. The private sector grew rapidly and created new wealth, but this also widened inequality. Rich states and big companies gained more, while poor farmers and workers lagged behind.
Finally, development planning often ignores people’s voices and the environment. Even though the 73rd and 74th Amendments gave power to local bodies, real participation is still limited. Large projects like dams or SEZs displaced many families without fair rehabilitation.
For India to progress, planning must now become more local, people-centered, and environmentally careful—balancing growth with equality and sustainability.
Q6(b) Do you think MSP (Minimum Support Price) Scheme for agriculture can help in rural development? Elaborate your response with suitable examples.
The Minimum Support Price (MSP) is a system through which the government fixes a minimum rate for crops and promises to buy them at that price. This gives farmers protection when market prices fall. If used well, it can strongly support rural development.
The biggest benefit is income security. Farmers, especially small and marginal ones, face uncertain markets. Prices can drop suddenly due to good harvests or middlemen. MSP helps them avoid selling at a loss. For example, if paddy prices fall in Punjab, the government still buys it at the declared MSP, ensuring steady income. With more money in hand, farmers spend on food, clothes, and education, which strengthens the entire rural economy.
MSP also encourages investment in better farming. When farmers feel assured about prices, they use improved seeds, fertilizers, and irrigation. This happened during the Green Revolution, which increased yields and food production in India.
It also supports food security. The grain bought through MSP goes to the Food Corporation of India (FCI) and then to the Public Distribution System (PDS), which supplies subsidized food to poor families. This chain creates jobs in transport, storage, and processing, spreading benefits across villages.
But there are problems too. MSP mostly covers wheat and rice, encouraging monoculture and overuse of water, especially in Punjab and Haryana. It also benefits a few regions because states like Bihar lack proper procurement centers. Many farmers do not know about MSP or are left out because they don’t own formal land titles.
Yet there are success stories. In Chhattisgarh, the state government buys both rice and forest produce at MSP. This policy has raised tribal incomes and reduced seasonal migration.
To truly help rural India, MSP must cover more crops, involve local cooperatives, and link with digital systems like e-NAM and Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs). With fair prices and better access, MSP can combine income stability with ecological and social progress.
Q6(c) How can skill development programme induce social change? Illustrated. (150 words)
Skill development programmes help people gain practical abilities that lead to better jobs and higher income. When people learn new skills, they become more confident and independent, which helps bring social change. For example, when young people or women from poor families learn computer work, tailoring, or electrical repair, they can earn on their own and no longer depend entirely on others.
The government’s Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY) has trained millions of people. It not only gives jobs but also restores the dignity of labour, especially for those from rural or marginalized backgrounds. Sociologist Robert Merton would call this a latent function—the hidden social benefits that go beyond income, such as self-respect and inclusion.
In Tamil Nadu, women trained in tailoring under the DAY-NULM programme now form self-help groups, earning steady incomes and gaining agency. Such examples show that skill training can reduce inequality and bring cultural change in communities.
Q7(a) Elaborate the causes, consequences and other concerns of growth of urban settlements in India.
Cities in India have grown rapidly, especially after Independence. According to the 2011 Census, about 31% of Indians lived in urban areas, and this number is expected to rise above 40% by 2030. The story of India’s urban growth is shaped by both hope and hardship.
One major reason is rural-to-urban migration. Many people move to cities because they face unemployment, low farm incomes, or caste-based restrictions in villages. Cities seem to offer more jobs and freedom. For example, young men and women from Bihar and Uttar Pradesh often move to Delhi or Mumbai to work in factories, shops, or the service sector.
Economic liberalization after 1991 also accelerated urban growth. New industries, IT parks, and service hubs concentrated around cities such as Bengaluru, Pune, and Hyderabad, drawing workers from across India. Government policies like Special Economic Zones (SEZs) and the Smart Cities Mission encouraged further development in selected areas.
Urban growth is also driven by population increase and education-based mobility. Families move to cities so that children can study and find better futures. In addition, natural population growth—higher births than deaths—adds to city numbers every year.
However, this rapid expansion has created serious problems. Many people cannot afford housing, so more than one-third of city residents live in slums or informal settlements with poor sanitation and water supply. Roads are crowded, garbage piles up, and air quality worsens. Green belts and wetlands around cities are often destroyed to make space for construction.
Social divisions are also visible. Rich families live in gated colonies with private services, while poorer groups crowd into congested neighbourhoods. This separation deepens inequality.
Cities like Mumbai and Chennai now face new dangers—heavy floods, heatwaves, and water shortages. Weak local governance and overlapping authorities make solutions slow.
Urban growth in India cannot be stopped, but it can be made fairer and safer. Strengthening urban local bodies, improving land use planning, and focusing on sustainable, inclusive development are the keys to managing this transformation wisely.
Q7(b) Evaluate the nature and scope of anthropogenic influence on Climate in India and also analyze the environmental movements arising out of it.
Human activity—what scientists call anthropogenic influence—has become one of the biggest reasons for climate change in India. As the country’s economy and population have grown, industrialization, deforestation, and urbanization have changed the air, land, and water systems that shape our climate.
The most visible impact comes from greenhouse gas emissions. India is the third-largest emitter in the world. Coal-based power plants, petrol and diesel vehicles, and expanding transport networks release large amounts of carbon dioxide. In many Indian cities, you can see the haze from vehicles and industries on most days.
Deforestation and land-use change are also major problems. Forests are cut for mining, roads, and dams, reducing natural carbon sinks. When trees are lost, the land heats up faster and rainfall patterns become irregular.
Urbanization adds further stress. Concrete buildings and asphalt roads trap heat, creating “urban heat islands.” In cities like Delhi, temperatures can be 3–4°C higher than nearby rural areas. Construction dust and vehicle smoke make air pollution worse.
In agriculture, paddy cultivation and livestock farming produce methane, another strong greenhouse gas. Stubble burning after harvest in north India releases smoke that affects air quality and winter weather.
These human actions have serious effects: rising temperatures, irregular monsoons, more frequent floods and cyclones, and melting Himalayan glaciers that threaten future water security.
India has also seen many environmental movements as people fight to protect nature and their livelihoods. The Chipko Movement (1973) in Uttarakhand, led by rural women, stopped tree cutting and inspired others. The Narmada Bachao Andolan protested against big dams that displaced thousands. Movements like Silent Valley, Appiko, and Save Western Ghats defended forests and biodiversity.
Today, newer campaigns—like the Save Aarey Forest in Mumbai, protests against coal mining in Chhattisgarh, and youth-led Fridays for Future strikes—show how citizens are again raising their voices.
These struggles have evolved from saving trees to demanding climate justice—that development must not destroy lives or ecosystems. Together, they remind us that India’s climate challenge is deeply human, and our solutions must involve the people most affected.
Q7(c) Are the contemporary farmers’ movements in India changing their course? Discuss. (150 words)
Farmers’ movements in India today are different from the older ones. Earlier, protests like the Shetkari Sanghatana mainly demanded higher crop prices or cheaper fertilizers. Now, movements such as the 2020–21 protests against the new farm laws have become larger, more organized, and national in scope.
These movements use social media, legal petitions, and alliances with workers’ unions and civil groups to make their voice stronger. This shows a shift toward what sociologist Alain Touraine calls new social movements—those focused not only on economic issues but also on rights and identity.
Today’s farmer movements demand fair Minimum Support Prices (MSP), land protection, and even climate justice. Women and Dalit farmers participate more actively, which makes the movements broader and more inclusive.
So yes, the nature of these movements is changing—they are now more united, aware of constitutional rights, and strategic in their fight for a fair agricultural system.
Q8(a) Colonial administrators helped to construct the very traditionalism which marked the Indian society as “backward’. Comment critically.
When the British ruled India, they did not only control its land and economy—they also controlled how Indians were understood and described. Through their reports, laws, and schools, they created an image of India as an ancient and backward society, full of rigid customs and unchanging traditions. This idea made British rule seem necessary, as if they were bringing “civilization” to a static people.
One major way they did this was through the census and surveys. British officers like H. H. Risley divided people into strict groups of caste and tribe. Earlier, these identities were flexible and varied from place to place, but the British turned them into fixed boxes. This process, which scholars later called the “ethnographic state,” made caste seem permanent and all-important.
They also created laws based only on religious texts, ignoring local customs. For example, when deciding family or inheritance disputes, courts looked at selected Sanskrit or Islamic texts instead of the mixed practices people actually followed. This gave more power to upper-caste and patriarchal norms and made inequality part of official law.
In education, Thomas Macaulay’s Minute (1835) promoted English learning and Western thought while calling Indian knowledge “superstitious.” Books by colonial scholars like James Mill described Indian history as despotic and stagnant. These writings spread the belief that Indians were traditional and incapable of progress without British help.
Later thinkers such as Partha Chatterjee and Bernard Cohn explained that this “traditional India” was largely a colonial invention—a way to define Europe as modern and India as its opposite. Sociologists G. S. Ghurye and M. N. Srinivas noted that colonial ethnographies wrongly presented Brahmanical practices as if they represented all of India.
Because of this, reform became harder. Colonial policies strengthened social conservatism and justified British control. The idea of India as “backward” still influences how society is seen today. Understanding this helps us decolonize our thinking and see Indian traditions as diverse, evolving, and deeply human.
Q8(b) What were the salient features of the India’s Population Policy (2000)? How far its goals have been achieved?
The National Population Policy (NPP) 2000 was made to help India manage its growing population in a fair and healthy way. Before this, population programs were strict and target-based. The new policy tried to treat people with respect and give them the right to make their own choices about family size.
The policy had three clear goals.
The immediate goal was to provide safe birth control methods, reduce deaths of mothers and babies, and make sure every child received vaccination.
The medium goal was to bring the Total Fertility Rate (TFR) — the number of children a woman has on average — down to 2.1 by 2010. This number means each couple just replaces themselves.
The long-term goal was to stabilize India’s population by 2045.
To reach these goals, the policy promoted voluntary family planning, better maternal and child health services, and delayed marriage for young people. It also asked panchayats and NGOs to spread awareness about small families and health benefits.
There has been real progress. The fertility rate fell from 3.2 in 2000 to 2.0 in NFHS-5 (2019–21). Infant deaths dropped from 68 per 1,000 births to 28, and mothers are now safer during childbirth. More families use contraception, especially female sterilization, though men’s participation is still very low.
However, some states like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh still have higher fertility and poor child health. In many villages, people marry early, and teenagers lack knowledge about reproductive health. In tribal and remote areas, hospitals and clinics remain few and far away.
Overall, the NPP 2000 has worked well in many parts of India but not everywhere. The next step is to educate and empower women, involve men equally in family planning, and improve health services in rural and tribal areas so that every family can live a healthy, secure life.
Q8(c) Point out the main causes of child labour’ in India. How far the State policies have succeeded in its elimination? (150 words)
Child labour in India continues mainly because of poverty and the lack of good schools. In many poor families, children have to work to help earn money, especially in farms, small workshops, or as house helpers. In some communities, children are expected to follow traditional jobs linked to their caste or family trade.
Although the Constitution forbids child labour under Article 24, and laws like the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986—updated in 2016—ban work for children under 14, enforcement remains weak. Many children still work in hidden informal sectors where rules are not followed.
Schemes like the Right to Education Act (2009) and Mid-Day Meal Programme encourage schooling by making it free and providing meals. Yet, social pressure and poverty keep many children away from classrooms.
The government’s PENCIL Portal helps track rescue and rehabilitation, but coverage is limited. True change will need community-based action that tackles poverty, education, and awareness together.
