Browse all documents

Indian case study on 'Integrating Natural Capital into Government Post-COVID Economic Decision-Making and Economic Recovery'

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

This case study evaluates the integration of natural capital into India's post-COVID economic recovery, specifically analyzing the 'Atmanirbhar Bharat Package' (2020) and the Union Budget 2021-22. The analysis focuses on five priority sectors: agriculture and allied, MSME, power, mining, and the social sector. The study finds that while the Union Budget 2021-22 showed a higher proportion of natural capital positive schemes compared to the recovery package, significant gaps remain, including a lack of capital expenditure for green infrastructure and a heavy reliance on monetary policies over fiscal instruments to incentivize green practices.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The 'Atmanirbhar Bharat Package' (COVID recovery package) announced in 2020 amounted to INR 20,97,053 Crores, which is approximately 260 Billion USD and equivalent to 10% of India's GDP.
  • In the COVID recovery budget, only 18% of aggregate budgetary allocations across five priority sectors had the potential for a positive impact on natural capital, while 24% clearly indicated a negative impact and 39% were ambiguous due to insufficient information.
  • The agricultural and allied sector showed a shift toward more positive natural capital impacts in the Union Budget 2021-22, where 53% of allocations were positive (with 66% of those being high impact), compared to only 25% in the COVID recovery package.
  • The MSME sector's COVID recovery budget consisted entirely of schemes with ambiguous natural capital impacts, as they primarily involved monetary injections without specific green incentives. In contrast, 76% of MSME schemes in the Union Budget 2021-22 had a positive impact, largely due to initiatives like the Solar Charkha Mission.
  • The mining sector consistently demonstrated negative natural capital impacts across both budgets. The COVID recovery budget included a coal evacuation scheme that is categorized as an adverse driver due to its contribution to soil erosion, biodiversity loss, and water contamination.
  • In the social sector, the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) was identified as the only scheme in both the COVID recovery package and the Union Budget 2021-22 with a positive influence on natural capital, specifically through the creation of rural assets like afforestation and water body renovation.
  • A critical policy gap identified is the lack of capital expenditure in the Union Budget 2021-22 for several natural capital positive schemes, such as water resource management and agricultural infrastructure, limiting the ability to create substantial long-term impacts.
  • The study recommends the implementation of fiscal instruments, such as subsidies or tax reductions for green inputs (e.g., organic fertilizers and indigenous seeds) and the removal of subsidies for polluters, to make the adoption of green practices economically viable.

Cite the original document

APA
Datta, D. S., Goswami, M. G., & Dutta, M. M. (2021). Indian case study on 'Integrating Natural Capital into Government Post-COVID Economic Decision-Making and Economic Recovery'. Green Economy Coalition. https://www.greeneconomycoalition.org/assets/reports/GEC-Reports/GR-Country-reports/Indian_case_study_on_Integrating_Natural_Capital_into_Government_Post_COVID.pdf
Chicago
Datta, Dr. Satabdi, Ms. Gitika Goswami, and Ms. Madhubanti Dutta. Indian case study on 'Integrating Natural Capital into Government Post-COVID Economic Decision-Making and Economic Recovery'. Green Economy Coalition, 2021. https://www.greeneconomycoalition.org/assets/reports/GEC-Reports/GR-Country-reports/Indian_case_study_on_Integrating_Natural_Capital_into_Government_Post_COVID.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=Datta |first1=Dr. Satabdi |last2=Goswami |first2=Ms. Gitika |last3=Dutta |first3=Ms. Madhubanti |title=Indian case study on 'Integrating Natural Capital into Government Post-COVID Economic Decision-Making and Economic Recovery' |publisher=Green Economy Coalition |date=October 2021 |url=https://www.greeneconomycoalition.org/assets/reports/GEC-Reports/GR-Country-reports/Indian_case_study_on_Integrating_Natural_Capital_into_Government_Post_COVID.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{datta2021indian, author = {Datta, Dr. Satabdi and Goswami, Ms. Gitika and Dutta, Ms. Madhubanti}, title = {{Indian case study on 'Integrating Natural Capital into Government Post-COVID Economic Decision-Making and Economic Recovery'}}, institution = {Green Economy Coalition}, year = {2021}, month = oct, url = {https://www.greeneconomycoalition.org/assets/reports/GEC-Reports/GR-Country-reports/Indian_case_study_on_Integrating_Natural_Capital_into_Government_Post_COVID.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated