UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

The Economic Survey notes that adaptation-related expenditure has grown as a share of GDP between FY16 and FY22. This rise from about 3.7% to 5.6% indicates that resilience-building investments are gaining prominence in India’s development strategy. It underscores that adaptation is seen not as an optional add-on but as integral to inclusive, sustainable growth in a climate-vulnerable country. These figures also support India’s argument that it is already investing heavily from its own resources in climate resilience.

Option A:
This option is incorrect because the evidence shows an increase, not a disappearance, of adaptation spending. Treating it as near zero would underplay the seriousness with which adaptation is being pursued.

Option B:
This option correctly reports the trend described in the Economic Survey and links it to growing policy emphasis on adaptation. It recognises that higher adaptation expenditure is part of mainstream development planning.

Option C:
A jump from 20% to 40% of GDP is unrealistic and not mentioned in official documents. Such figures would imply adaptation dominates all public spending, which is not the case.

Option D:
There is no legal requirement fixing adaptation spending at 1% of GDP. The observed percentages emerge from expenditure analysis, not from statutory caps.

The Survey notes that while adaptation is crucial for vulnerable countries, global finance flows remain inadequate and largely mitigation-centric. This leaves India and other developing nations to shoulder a large part of adaptation costs from their own budgets. Such a pattern raises concerns about climate justice, because those least responsible for emissions face both high impacts and high self-financed adaptation burdens. (VISION IAS)

Option A:
This option is incorrect; multiple reports show that adaptation finance is far below estimated needs and that countries still demand more concessional support.

Option B:
This option is incorrect because global climate finance flows are in fact skewed towards mitigation, not adaptation, so the statement reverses the actual pattern described in the Survey.

Option C:
This option rightly captures the Survey’s emphasis that adaptation finance lags behind and that mitigation receives a larger share of global climate funds. It also explains why India calls for parity between mitigation and adaptation finance in climate negotiations.

Option D:
This option is wrong because there is no automatic guarantee that all adaptation costs will be met by international funds; countries must mobilise domestic resources as well.