Polluter Pays or Government Pays? Understanding PPP, Trans-Boundary Air Pollution & Judicial Trends — An Analysis

Air pollution in Delhi–NCR has become one of the most debated environmental governance challenges in India. While vehicular emissions, industrial discharge, construction dust and waste burning account for the major share of PM2.5 pollutants, the political and judicial narrative has often shifted the blame towards farmers in Punjab and Haryana for seasonal stubble burning.

This debate offers a crucial learning lens for UPSC aspirants — especially in topics like Environmental Governance, Judiciary, Federalism, Ethics, and Sustainable Development.

---

1. Polluter Pays Principle (PPP): Concept & Constitutional Status

The Polluter Pays Principle (PPP) states that:

The person, entity, or sector responsible for environmental damage must bear the cost of preventing or remedying it.

In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union of India (1996), the Supreme Court declared PPP as part of the law of the land.

Later, it gained statutory backing under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.

🟢 Why PPP is important for governance?

• Encourages responsible industrial behaviour

• Internalises environmental costs

• Promotes sustainability through accountability

However, the application of PPP becomes complex in cases involving:

• Multiple polluters

• Diffuse or non-point sources

• Transboundary pollution

Delhi-NCR pollution falls exactly into this category.

---

2. Standley Case — Introducing Proportionality to PPP

The Standley Case (European Court of Justice, 1999) dealt with nitrate pollution from agriculture and industry in the UK.

Farmers argued they should not bear liability for pollution largely arising from industrial sources. The court added a new layer:

PPP must be applied with proportionality

Meaning:

Liability must reflect the extent of contribution to pollution.

📌 UPSC takeaway

Seasonal stubble burning cannot be solely held responsible for Delhi’s air quality decline when:

• Vehicles contribute major PM2.5 pollution

• Industries emit toxic gases

• Urban construction generates dust

• Waste burning adds smoke

Blaming farmers alone violates the principle of proportional attribution.

---

3. Air Pollution is Trans-Boundary — Lessons from International Law

Air pollution rarely remains confined within political borders.

Important international precedents

Case / Convention	Significance
Trail Smelter Case (1941)	Canada is held liable for pollution damage in the U.S.
Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (1979)	Recognised cross-border pollution
Gothenburg Protocol (2012)	PM2.5 is classified as a long-distance pollutant
ASEAN Haze Agreement (2002)	Regional framework for forest-fire haze

Recent research (Zhang et al., Nature 2017) highlights that:

PM2.5 impacts are intensified by international trade and atmospheric transport.

🟡 Implication for India

Delhi’s pollution must be seen as:

• Regional

• Seasonal

• Trans-boundary

• Multi-sectoral

PPP alone cannot address such complex atmospheric systems.

---

4. Shift from Polluter Pays to Government Pays Principle

Although PPP exists legally, the judiciary often leans towards:

Corrective Justice over Deterrence

In cases like:

• Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action (1996)

• Vellore Citizens Case

• S. Jagannath vs Union of India

The courts focused on:

• Compensation to victims

• Environmental restoration

Rather than punishing polluters in proportion.

This has created an unintended shift:

From Polluter Pays Principle ➝ to Government Pays Principle

Where:

• Government funds monitoring & restoration

• Public money replaces accountability burden

• Polluters face weaker deterrence

---

5. Why has the Judiciary taken this approach?

✔ Welfare-state orientation

Most pollution victims:

• Are poor

• Lack of legal resources

• Cannot fight industry lobbies

So the judiciary acts as a protector of collective environmental rights.

❌ But challenges remain

• Pollution costs are not fully internalised

• Polluters don’t bear the true economic burden

• Preventive approaches remain weak

Environmental duties of citizens (Article 51A(g)) are rarely emphasised.

---

6. Key UPSC Relevance — Where can this be asked?

📌 GS-2

• Governance & Public Policy

• Role of Judiciary

• Federalism & Centre-State Relations

📌 GS-3

• Environment & Climate Change

• Pollution Management

• Sustainable Development

📌 Ethics (GS-4)

• Inter-generational equity

• Environmental justice

• Responsibility vs welfare approach

📌 Essay Paper

Likely themes:

• “Environmental governance and judicial activism in India”

• “Development vs sustainability — balancing equity and accountability”

• “Pollution responsibility in a welfare-state democracy”

---

7. Way Forward — A Balanced Multi-Stakeholder Framework

✔ Apply proportional liability

• Industries, vehicles, construction, waste systems, agriculture

• All must share responsibility based on contribution

✔ Strengthen emission monitoring & source apportionment

✔ Promote cooperative federalism

✔ Encourage sustainable agricultural alternatives

✔ Internalise environmental costs through:

• Green taxes

• Market-based instruments

• Extended producer responsibility

✔ Empower local governments & pollution control agencies

✔ Promote citizen environmental duties alongside rights

---

Conclusion

Delhi’s pollution crisis is not just an environmental issue — it is a governance, legal, ethical and policy challenge.

Blaming a single actor oversimplifies a complex system.

A just approach should:

• Balance PPP with proportionality

• Recognise transboundary pollution dynamics

• Strengthen institutional accountability

• Promote responsible behaviour across all sectors

This evolving debate offers rich insights for UPSC aspirants preparing for environment, governance, and ethics questions.