Editorial Analysis 1: “Even the most rational approach to ethics is defenceless if there isn’t the will to do what is right”
Context & issue
An editorial prompt uses the quote by Alexander Solzhenitsyn: “Even the most rational approach to ethics is defenceless if there isn’t the will to do what is right.”
While this is not tied to one specific current-event, it is timely for UPSC because it invites reflection on ethics in governance, public life, institutions and policy implementation. The date 27 Oct suggests this piece is intended as a thought-piece for ethics or GS4.
Importance for UPSC
- GS Paper 4: Ethics, integrity and aptitude.
- Useful for essay/ethics questions: the gap between good policy and implementation, “will of the actor” and ethical governance.
- Offers a philosophical bridge between realistic policy design and moral imperative.
Key dimensions of analysis
- Understanding the quote
- Rational ethical frameworks (codes, rules, procedures) are necessary but not sufficient. Without the will — resolve, commitment, moral courage — they can fail.
- In other words: good laws + protocols are moot if actors do not act ethically or have the resolve to implement them.
- Application to governance and policy
- India has many good policies—right to information, codes of ethics in public service, anti-corruption laws, environmental laws—but implementation often lags because of lack of institutional will or political will.
- The recent editorial on attracting Indian-origin scientists emphasised institutional culture (will) is as important as policy.
- Example: Even with strong environmental laws, large infrastructure projects sometimes go ahead without thorough clearances because of weak will to enforce compliance.
- In public services, mere existence of a code of ethics (e.g., in auditing bodies, professions) is not enough unless the will to act (whistle-blow, penalize, reform) is present.
- Thus, the quote invites us to reflect: Are our institutions designed to generate will? Are incentives aligned? Do we hold actors accountable?
- Ethics vs procedure
- Ethics is not just compliance with rules; it is spirit behind the rules. Will is that spirit.
- Rational design of codes (e.g., public servants’ code of conduct, procurement rules) is akin to building the mechanism. But unless individuals/organisations decide to act ethically, the mechanism may be bypassed.
- For example, corporate codes of ethics may exist, but if corporate culture tolerates malfeasance, the code is ineffective.
- Will – how to cultivate it?
- Leadership matters: ethical leadership sets tone. Public service leaders (bureaucrats, political leaders) must act with integrity, transparency, courage.
- Institutional systems: accountability, transparency, independent oversight encourage will. If wrong-doers see impunity, will shrinks.
- Incentives and culture: Recognise ethical behaviour; discourage rent-seeking; build culture where doing right is valued.
- Education & values: Ethics training, sensitisation, storytelling of role-models help build internal will.
- Citizen engagement: A vigilant society creates external pressure, which reinforces institutional will.
- Consequence management: When wrong-doing is punished and right-doing rewarded, institutional will gets a boost.
- Way forward / Recommendations
- For public institutions: embed not just rules but institutional design that aligns individual will with public good (performance-linked incentives, open data, citizen audit).
- For policy-makers: While drafting policies, factor in behavioural aspects: How will the policy ensure actors want to implement it? Include human-factor, change-management.
- For UPSC aspirants / future administrators: Recognise that your own will (resolve, integrity) is a key asset. Rules test the actor; will defines outcome.
- For civil society/academia: Promote discourse on ethical culture, highlight success/stories, hold institutions to account—thus reinforcing will externally.
Critique / Balanced view
- Over-emphasis on will may overlook systemic constraints (resource shortage, structural corruption, legacy inertia). Will must be supported by enabling systems.
- The story of ‘will’ also raises the question of how to measure and sustain it. Will can wane if not institutionalised.
- Sometimes, structural reform (design, incentives, manpower) may matter as much or more than individual will. One cannot rely solely on personal integrity at scale.
Conclusion
The quote—“…the most rational approach to ethics is defenceless if there isn’t the will to do what is right”—is a powerful reminder for governance and public administration. Policies, codes, rules matter; but unless there is a will—to act, to implement, to enforce—they remain words on paper. For India, for its institutions, for the bureaucracy, this means building not only legal/organisational frameworks but also nurturing the moral commitment, cultural habit, leadership resolve, and citizen accountability that transform policy into practice. For UPSC aspirants, this editorial theme is a gold-mine: it ties ethics, integrity, public service motivation, institutional design and reform into one coherent reflection.
Editorial Analysis 2: “What next for Delhi’s air-pollution challenge — just awareness drives and court orders won’t clean Delhi’s air”
Importance for UPSC
- GS Paper 3: Environmental pollution; air quality; governance; health-environment linkages.
- GS Paper 2: Policy implementation; inter-governmental coordination (Centre-State); judiciary’s role; public policy tools.
- Also fits into Essay/themes: sustainable cities, health & environment, urban governance.
Key dimensions of analysis
- Current status & policy interventions
- Delhi-NCR remains one of the most polluted urban regions globally; seasonal spikes in winter due to stubble burning, vehicular emissions, secondary pollutants, topography, meteorology.
- Government interventions: Graded Response Action Plan (GRAP), fire-cracker bans, restrictions on construction/vehicles, public transport enhancements, court mandates.
- The editorial observes that even with court orders and awareness drives, the problem persists—meaning deeper issues are at play.
- Why are awareness drives and court orders not enough?
- Implementation gap: Policies exist; yet execution (monitoring, enforcement, fines) is weak. For example, stubble-burning controls often fail due to weak alternative cropping incentives.
- Fragmented governance: Multiple jurisdictions (Delhi, Haryana, UP, Punjab) complicate coordination. Air pollution is transboundary but responses remain state-centric.
- Structural inertia: Legacy vehicle fleet, slow public transport upgrade, thermal power plants, diesel generators, construction dust—all entrenched.
- Behavioural challenge: Awareness alone doesn’t guarantee behavioural change (vehicular use, use of LPG, crop residue management) unless alternatives/incentives exist.
- Judicial orders, awareness campaigns are top-down and episodic: They may raise attention but lack sustained institutional follow-through, funding, local engagement.
- Deeper structural issues to address
- Crop residue burning in Punjab/Haryana: Farmers resort because of cost, time, lack of alternatives. Need crop diversification, machines for residue management, incentives.
- Urban emissions: Rapid motorisation, weak public transport, old vehicles, inadequate emissions norms enforcement.
- Construction & dust: Permits often given without strict dust control/regulations; monitoring is lax.
- Meteorology & geography: Delhi basin traps pollutants; need anticipatory measures (e.g., reduction in emissions ahead of inversion) rather than reactive.
- Institutional incentives: Responsibility remains diffused; fines/penalties not strong deterrents; stakeholder engagement limited.
- Way forward / Recommendations
- Shift from awareness + ad-hoc judicial orders to institutionalised, systemic reforms: e.g., permanent air-board with powers across states; unified data and action; real-time monitoring tied to penalties.
- Invest in alternatives: Provide farmers affordable residue removal tech; incentivise crop diversification (sugarcane, pulses); subsidise multi-crop harvesting machines.
- Upgrade public transport & urban mobility: Rapid expansion of metro, bus-rapid transit; scrappage scheme for old vehicles; stricter vehicle emission norms; incentivise EVs.
- Pre-emptive action: Use meteorological forecasts to trigger temporary restrictions before pollution spikes; plan for chemical speciation and source apportionment to target interventions.
- Public-private-citizen synergy: Behaviour change must go with infrastructure (e.g., residential biomass conversion, indoor-outdoor linkage); local urban bodies need active city-level plans.
- Transparent accountability: Use public dashboards, air-quality index alerts tied to actionable steps (e.g., schools closed, odd-even) and track responsible agencies.
- Critique / Balanced view
- While deeper structural reforms are necessary, awareness campaigns and court orders have value—they keep the issue alive, mobilise citizens, create pressure. They are not worthless.
- Some structural changes (e.g., agriculture transformation) take long-term investment and cannot yield immediate results; so interim measures (awareness, alerts) still serve a purpose.
- However, the editorial’s emphasis is correct: without systemic implementation and structural change, the same cycle of emergency action + pollution spike will repeat.
Conclusion
The struggle to clean Delhi’s air shows that policy design alone—awareness drives, court-orders—is insufficient. What matters is institutional will, coordinated governance, structural transformation and citizen-engagement. For UPSC aspirants, this issue neatly demonstrates the fault-lines between policy and implementation, between singular interventions and systemic reform. The key takeaway: To address complex problems like air pollution, governments must move beyond band-aids to robust systems, cross-jurisdictional coordination, behaviour-change plus infrastructure, and, critically, sustained will to implement.
