1. Editorial: The “Cess” Pool – A Crisis in Fiscal Federalism
Source: Business Standard
Context
As the Finance Commission deliberates on the next devolution cycle, this editorial highlights the “Invisible Erosion” of state finances through the Centre’s increasing reliance on Cesses and Surcharges.
Multi-Dimensional Analysis
The Constitutional Loophole (Article 270/271) Under Article 270, the Centre must share the “Divisible Pool” of taxes with the states. However, Article 271 allows the Centre to levy cesses and surcharges for specific purposes, which do not have to be shared. The editorial notes that the share of cesses in the Centre’s Gross Tax Revenue has jumped from 10% in 2012 to nearly 25% in 2025.
The “Vertical Imbalance” While the 15th Finance Commission mandated a 41% share for states, the “Effective Devolution” (when cesses are excluded) is often only 31-32%. This creates a “Vertical Imbalance” where the Centre has all the revenue-raising powers, but the States have all the expenditure responsibilities (health, education, police).
The Shrinking Divisible Pool By keeping a large chunk of revenue as cesses (like the Health and Education Cess or the Road and Infrastructure Cess), the Centre is effectively “shrinking” the pool of money available for the states. This forces states to increase their Debt-to-GSDP ratios, threatening the overall macro-economic stability of the country.
The “Centrally Sponsored Scheme” (CSS) Trap The editorial argues that the Centre then uses the cess money to fund “Centrally Sponsored Schemes” (like Jal Jeevan Mission). While these are national priorities, they come with “conditionalities” that limit the states’ autonomy to design policies according to local needs.
Conclusion
Fiscal federalism is a “two-way street.” The editorial calls for the Finance Commission to recommend a cap on cesses or to include a portion of them in the divisible pool to restore the spirit of Cooperative Federalism.
2. Editorial: The Stubble Burning Anomaly – Data vs. Reality
Source: The Hindu
Context
Despite the government claiming a 90% reduction in stubble burning in 2025, Delhi’s air quality remains “Severe.” This editorial exposes the “scientific dishonesty” in measuring pollution success.
Multi-Dimensional Analysis
The “Fire Count” Fallacy The government relies on Satellite Fire Counts (Active Fire Locations). The editorial reveals that farmers have learned to “game the system.” Most polar-orbiting satellites (like NASA’s VIIRS) pass over India between 10 AM and 2 PM. Farmers now wait until the evening to burn their stubble, effectively “hiding” the fire from the satellite’s eye.
The Case for “Burnt-Area Estimates” Unlike fire counts, which only capture the moment of burning, Burnt-Area Mapping uses high-resolution imagery to look at the ground after the fire. Independent data shows that while fire counts dropped by 90%, the total burnt area only decreased by 30%. The editorial critiques the Ministry of Environment for not making this year-wise burnt-area data public.
Mass Spectrography: The Missing Link To truly know if stubble burning has decreased, we need “Chemical Fingerprinting” of the air in Delhi. Using mass spectrography, scientists can distinguish between “Biomass smoke” (stubble) and “Vehicle smoke.” The government’s reluctance to invest in this “Real-Time Source Apportionment” indicates a preference for “convenient data” over “scientific truth.”
The Policy Silo The editorial concludes that the “Carrot and Stick” approach (subsidies for machinery vs. penalties) is failing because it treats stubble burning as an “isolated air issue.” It is actually a “Water-Energy-Soil” issue. Until the crop diversification away from Paddy is incentivized, the fires will continue to burn, whether the satellites see them or not.
Conclusion
“Selective data” is worse than no data. For a credible pollution policy, the Centre must move toward Transparency in Burnt-Area Estimates and embrace scientific scrutiny.
