Previous Year Question
Consider the following statements:
Statement I: At the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28), India refrained from signing the ‘Declaration on Climate and Health’.
Statement II: The COP28 Declaration on Climate and Health is a binding declaration; and if signed, it becomes mandatory to decarbonise the health sector.
Statement III: If India’s health sector is decarbonised, the resilience of its health-care system may be compromised.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
Both Statement II and Statement III are correct and both of them explain Statement I.
Both Statement II and Statement III are correct but only one of them explains Statement I.
Only one of Statements II and III is correct and that explains Statement I.
Neither Statement II nor Statement III is correct.
Correct Answer: C
Detailed Solution
Statement I is correct: India did not sign the ‘Declaration on Climate and Health’ presented during COP28 in Dubai.
The Declaration aimed to place the health impacts of climate change at the centre of climate policies and promote more climate-resilient health systems.
It recognised the effects of climate change through extreme heat, air pollution, infectious diseases, food insecurity and damage to health infrastructure.
Statement II is incorrect: The COP28 Declaration on Climate and Health is not a legally binding treaty but a non-binding political commitment.
Signing the Declaration does not impose a legal obligation on a country to immediately and compulsorily decarbonise its entire health sector.
It encourages countries to work towards low-carbon, climate-resilient and environmentally sustainable health systems.
Each country may determine its actions according to its national resources, development requirements and health-system conditions.
Therefore, both the claims—‘binding’ and ‘mandatory’—in Statement II are incorrect.
Statement III is correct: India expressed concern that a commitment to rapidly decarbonise the health sector could affect the resilience and service capacity of its health system.
Hospitals require continuous electricity, cooling, vaccine and medicine cold chains, oxygen production and emergency services.
In a hot and climatically diverse country such as India, reliable cooling for hospitals and primary health centres can be a life-saving service.
Rapid withdrawal of fossil-fuel-based energy without sufficient clean energy, storage and backup arrangements may affect the reliability of healthcare services.
This risk may be greater in remote and underserved regions where energy availability is already limited.
India’s concern was not opposition to climate adaptation in the health sector but the need to balance emission reduction with reliable health services.
A well-planned decarbonisation of the health sector may include energy-efficient buildings, renewable energy, battery backup, clean transport and low-emission medical supply chains.
Such a planned process may strengthen health-system resilience in the long term; the concern primarily related to a rapid transition undertaken without adequate support.