Air pollution in Delhi’s National Capital Region has once again foregrounded a familiar narrative: blaming farmers in neighbouring States for the capital’s choking air. While stubble burning does contribute seasonally, scientific evidence and legal principles suggest that the problem — and responsibility — is far more complex. The debate also exposes the limits of applying the polluter pays principle in cases of diffuse and transboundary pollution.
What drives air pollution in Delhi NCR
In the , vehicular emissions remain the dominant source of air pollution, especially for PM2.5 and toxic gases such as nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and benzene. Construction activity, road dust, diesel generators and industrial sources further add to the load.
Despite this, public discourse and even judicial interventions have often placed disproportionate responsibility on seasonal stubble burning by farmers in Punjab and Haryana. This framing overlooks the fact that Delhi’s pollution is largely urban, continuous and locally generated, while stubble burning is episodic and seasonal.
The polluter pays principle in Indian law
The polluter pays principle (PPP) is a globally recognised rule of environmental liability, requiring those who cause pollution to bear the costs of prevention and remediation. In “Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union of India (1996)”, the declared PPP to be part of Indian environmental law, later reinforced through the Act, 2010.
At its core, PPP is about cost internalisation — ensuring that environmental damage is not treated as a free externality.
Why PPP becomes complex for air pollution
Air pollution rarely arises from a single point source. In Delhi NCR, it involves:
- Multiple point sources such as vehicles and industries
- Non-point sources like dust and biomass burning
- Seasonal and transboundary influences
In such settings, strict application of PPP becomes difficult. Liability cannot be fairly assigned without considering proportionality and relative contribution. This is especially relevant where pollution crosses administrative and political boundaries.
Lessons from international environmental jurisprudence
The 1999 Standley case before the European Court of Justice, dealing with agricultural nitrates under the EU Nitrates Directive, introduced an important nuance: proportionality. Farmers could not be held solely responsible for pollution caused partly by industrial sources.
Similarly, the landmark Trail Smelter Arbitration recognised that pollution can cause harm across borders, holding a Canadian smelter liable for damage in the United States. These cases underline that air pollution is not merely local but regional and even global in character.
Air pollution as a transboundary phenomenon
Scientific evidence increasingly shows that PM2.5 travels long distances, influenced by atmospheric circulation and trade-linked emissions. International frameworks such as the and the ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution reflect this understanding. The 2012 amendment to the Gothenburg Protocol formally recognised PM2.5 as a long-range pollutant.
This global experience cautions against simplistic attribution of blame to one group, such as farmers, for a multi-source urban pollution crisis.
From polluter pays to government pays
In India, judicial practice has gradually shifted from strict PPP to what is effectively a government-pays principle. In cases such as Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action and S. Jagannath, courts prioritised compensation to victims and environmental restoration, funded largely by the State.
While this welfare-oriented approach protects vulnerable citizens who cannot litigate against polluters, it also weakens incentives for prevention by failing to fully internalise pollution costs for major emitters.
The role of an activist judiciary
India’s activist judiciary often steps in where regulatory institutions fail. Governments are directed to bear monitoring and mitigation costs, while polluters face delayed or partial accountability. This reflects concern for social justice but leaves unresolved questions about individual duties under Article 51A(g) and collective responsibility for environmental protection.
What to note for Prelims?
- Polluter Pays Principle recognised in Indian law through Supreme Court judgments.
- Air pollution involves point, non-point and transboundary sources.
- PM2.5 recognised internationally as a long-range pollutant.
- Key cases: Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum, Trail Smelter Arbitration.
What to note for Mains?
- Critically assess the limits of PPP in addressing urban air pollution.
- Discuss the role of proportionality and transboundary effects in environmental liability.
- Examine the shift from polluter pays to government pays in Indian environmental governance.
- Analyse the balance between welfare-oriented judicial intervention and long-term environmental accountability.
