Delhi’s Pollution Crisis: A Case Study of Beijing’s Approach

• Delhi’s population and surrounding areas significantly contribute to year-round toxicity due to vehicular emissions and traffic congestion.

• The National Green Tribunal (NGT) initiated a new approach to combat air pollution, but the National Clean Air Programme, launched in 2019, has made minimal impact.

• The Supreme Court has questioned the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM), which has been dealing with symptoms and not responding to interdependent causes driven by rapid urbanization.

• The majority of toxicity in Delhi, Los Angeles, and Beijing comes from vehicles, with 20% coming from soil dust and less than 20% from other sources.

• The usual response to point sources of pollution is not effective for dispersed sources, which have a strong societal component and few viable options.

• Farmers of Haryana and Punjab are in worse situation, with technological solutions failing to conserve groundwater.

• The Supreme Court is not adjudicating between the fundamental rights of farmers and those of Delhi residents to implement a management plan.

• Delhi is facing the classic bureaucratic response to a complex political problem, with bureaucratic steps, unverified claims, statistical compliance, and shifting responsibility.

• A review of Beijing’s approach to controlling air pollution by the United Nations Environment Programme provides useful lessons.

• Beijing’s techno-political management system builds public awareness to deal with toxicity, forecasting severe smog levels, having over 30,000 low-floor buses, and requiring additional measures to manage regional transportation.

• The Court should mandate the Graded Response Action Plan and the preparation of a toxicity management plan for the national capital and surrounding areas with budgetary allocations and political endorsement.