UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

Statements A and C are correct because informal settlements are frequently located in environmentally risky areas and suffer from poor housing and inadequate services, increasing health risks. Statement B is incorrect as service provision in informal settlements is often inadequate or absent, not uniformly adequate. Statement D is wrong because urban poor communities can and do participate in planning processes when given opportunities. Thus, the combination containing A and C only represents the set of correct statements.

Option A:
Option A is correct because it includes both true statements (A and C) and excludes the false statements (B and D). It correctly captures exposure of informal settlements to hazards and higher environmental health risks due to poor housing and inadequate services.

Option B:
Option B is incorrect as it adds statement B to A and C, thereby treating B as true. In reality, B misrepresents the situation by suggesting that all informal settlements have adequate services, which contradicts evidence of widespread deficits in water, sanitation and waste management. Including this false statement invalidates the combination.

Option C:
Option C is incorrect because it selects B and D only. Both B and D are false: service access is not uniformly adequate, and communities can contribute meaningfully to environmental decision-making. By excluding the true statements A and C, this option is completely misaligned with the reality of urban poverty and environment linkages.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because it combines A, C and D. While A and C are true, D is false as it denies the agency and potential role of urban poor in planning. A correct combination must exclude statement D.

Statements A, B and C are correct: A notes the resource recovery potential, B highlights health risks from informal recycling and C explains the EPR approach. Statement D is incorrect because e-waste contains hazardous components that can contaminate air, soil and water, affecting health and environment. Option C, which includes B, C and D, wrongly accepts D and leaves out A, so it cannot be the correct answer. The correct combination must therefore be A, B and C only.

Option A:
Option A is correct because it combines all three true statements and excludes D. It recognises both the opportunity for material recovery and the risks of improper handling, while pointing to policy instruments such as EPR. This aligns well with the unit’s treatment of e-waste.

Option B:
Option B is incorrect as it omits C, thereby ignoring the important regulatory concept of Extended Producer Responsibility in e-waste management. Without C, the description is incomplete.

Option C:
Option C is incorrect because it includes D as a correct statement, which contradicts scientific evidence on the hazards of e-waste. The presence of this false claim makes the combination unacceptable.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect since it pairs A and C with D and leaves out B. It again treats D as correct and fails to acknowledge the serious health risks associated with informal recycling mentioned in B.

The 2022 Rules make producers responsible for ensuring that a specified proportion of the products they place on the market are collected and processed in an environmentally sound manner. Obligations are tracked through an online EPR portal where certificates are generated based on verified recycling. This shifts the system from ad-hoc municipal handling towards a more organised, producer-driven circular-economy model. It also aims to formalise recycling and reduce pollution from informal practices.

Option A:
This option is incorrect because a one-time municipal clean-up cannot sustainably manage the growing stream of e-waste. Producers must be involved over the full product life cycle.

Option B:
This option correctly identifies Extended Producer Responsibility and the role of the digital portal as the core of the new e-waste regime. It explains how collection and recycling targets are assigned and verified.

Option C:
A complete manufacturing ban is neither practical nor stated in the rules; instead, the focus is on responsible end-of-life management.

Option D:
Open burning of e-waste is precisely the kind of polluting practice that the rules seek to eliminate, not encourage.

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.

An environmental audit is a structured review of how an organisation’s activities impact the environment and how well it meets legal and internal standards. It checks for gaps in compliance, assesses management systems and points to options for reducing waste, emissions and resource use. Regular audits help organisations move towards continuous improvement rather than treating environmental issues as one-time concerns.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because audits do not claim that organisations never use natural resources; they examine how resources are used and how impacts are managed.

Option B:
Option B is correct because it combines the twin goals of compliance assessment and performance improvement, which are central to most environmental audit frameworks.

Option C:
Option C is incorrect because environmental audits complement, not replace, financial audits; both address different dimensions of organisational performance.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect as an audit does not grant permanent exemption from responsibilities; it is a diagnostic tool that should lead to ongoing corrective and preventive actions.

Watershed management treats the entire drainage area as a unit and uses measures like contour bunds, check dams and afforestation to slow runoff. This increases infiltration, improves groundwater recharge and reduces soil erosion, helping to stabilise water availability and protect land productivity.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because good watershed practices aim to decrease surface runoff and erosion, not increase them; high runoff tends to wash away fertile topsoil.

Option B:
Option B is correct as it highlights the twin environmental benefits of better groundwater recharge and reduced soil loss, which are core objectives of watershed programmes.

Option C:
Option C is incorrect since urban road construction is not the main focus of watershed management and can actually increase impervious surfaces and runoff if poorly planned.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because replacing vegetation with concrete would undermine infiltration, increase runoff and worsen land degradation—the opposite of watershed goals.

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) is a dedicated body set up under the NGT Act,2010 to handle cases related to environmental protection and conservation of forests and natural resources. It is empowered to provide relief and compensation for environmental damage. The stem clearly refers to a specialised judicial body for speedy disposal of environmental disputes,which describes the NGT. Therefore National Green Tribunal is the correct option.

Option A:
The Central Pollution Control Board is a technical and advisory body responsible for monitoring and controlling pollution. It does not adjudicate disputes in a judicial capacity. Hence it is not the institution described in the question.

Option B:
The National Green Tribunal functions with expert and judicial members and follows relatively simple procedures to make environmental justice more accessible. Its mandate covers a wide range of environmental laws. These features align well with the explanation in the stem.

Option C:
The Ministry of Environment,Forest and Climate Change is the apex administrative body for policy making and implementation. While it frames rules and notifications,it is not a tribunal that hears and decides disputes,so it is not the right answer.

Option D:
The Forest Advisory Committee evaluates proposals for diversion of forest land for non forest use under the Forest Conservation Act. It has a specific advisory role and is not a general environmental dispute resolution body. Thus it does not match the stem.

Large-scale deforestation reduces canopy interception and evapotranspiration, so more rainfall becomes quick surface runoff, increasing erosion and altering streamflow patterns.

Option A:
Incorrect; removal of forests typically decreases infiltration because soils become compacted and less protected by roots and litter.

Option B:
Incorrect; deforestation generally increases, rather than eliminates, the risk of floods by speeding runoff.

Option C:
Correct; it summarises the common pattern of higher surface runoff, reduced evapotranspiration and greater soil erosion after deforestation.

Option D:
Incorrect; significant forest loss almost always changes the hydrological balance, so claiming no change is unrealistic.

Population stabilisation occurs when the overall size of a population remains relatively constant over time. This happens when births and immigrants together balance deaths and emigrants. The stem describes exactly this balance,so stabilisation is the appropriate term.

Option A:
Population explosion denotes a rapid and often uncontrolled increase in population. It implies that births greatly exceed deaths and migration balance. Therefore it does not fit the equilibrium condition stated in the question.

Option B:
Population stabilisation emphasises a dynamic balance rather than zero births or deaths. Even with ongoing demographic processes,the total population can remain steady when inflows and outflows offset each other. This logic matches the stem’s description.

Option C:
Population decline would involve deaths and emigration exceeding births and immigration,leading to shrinking population size. The question does not describe this scenario,so decline is not correct.

Option D:
Population transition refers to the broader process of shifts in birth and death rates over time,as captured in the demographic transition model. While stabilisation may be an outcome,transition does not specifically denote a balanced situation.

Traditional stoves often burn solid biomass incompletely, producing high levels of smoke, particulate matter and toxic gases. Poor ventilation traps these pollutants inside the house, exposing women and children to harmful concentrations for long periods. This leads to respiratory illnesses, eye irritation and other health problems. Therefore, such cooking practices are a major source of indoor air pollution.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because LPG burns more cleanly and, in a ventilated setting, emits far less smoke and particulates.

Option B:
Option B is correct since it identifies both the polluting fuels and the inefficient stoves and ventilation conditions that create hazardous indoor air.

Option C:
Option C is incorrect; solar cookers, when usable, do not emit smoke at the point of use.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because electric induction cooktops produce almost no direct indoor emissions, though electricity generation may cause outdoor pollution elsewhere.

Mission documents highlight that by 2030 the green hydrogen ecosystem is expected to attract investments of several lakh crore rupees and create hundreds of thousands of jobs. By substituting green hydrogen for imported fossil fuels such as LNG and ammonia, the mission can lower import bills and enhance energy security. It is also projected to avoid around 50 MMT of annual CO₂ emissions, contributing to India’s mitigation goals. These co-benefits make the mission central to a green industrial transition rather than a narrow export-only strategy. (hareda.gov.in)

Option A:
This option is incorrect because official estimates anticipate large investments and substantial job creation, not minimal impacts. The mission is designed precisely to unlock new economic opportunities.

Option B:
Increased fossil fuel imports and higher emissions would contradict the mission’s purpose. The strategy is to replace fossil-based feedstocks and fuels, thereby reducing import dependence and emissions.

Option C:
While exports are an important opportunity, the mission also focuses on domestic decarbonisation in sectors such as fertilisers, refining and steel. Limiting the benefits only to exports ignores this key aspect.

Option D:
This option correctly summarises the anticipated economic and environmental co-benefits of the mission. It reflects policy estimates regarding investment, jobs, import reduction and emission abatement, showing how climate action can support development.

Statements A, C and D are correct and together describe the major steps and principles guiding environmental risk assessment and management. Hazard identification and exposure assessment are core elements, risk management legitimately includes broader social and economic considerations and precautionary measures are accepted when there is uncertainty about serious harm. Statements B and E are incorrect because risk assessment involves assumptions and value choices, and it is applied not only to chemicals but also to other hazards such as radiation and physical infrastructure risks. Therefore, the combination A, C and D only is the correct answer.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because it omits D, which is an important statement about the role of the precautionary approach in situations of scientific uncertainty. Without D, the answer does not fully reflect contemporary environmental risk governance.

Option B:
Option B is incorrect as it adds E, which wrongly restricts risk assessment to chemical hazards. Modern practice applies risk assessment frameworks across multiple hazard types, so including E makes the combination factually wrong.

Option C:
Option C is incorrect since it includes statement B, which claims risk assessment is entirely objective and free from value judgements. In reality, choices about endpoints, safety factors and acceptable risk levels involve normative judgments, so accepting B contradicts academic and policy discussions.

Option D:
Option D is correct because it brings together A, C and D, the three statements that align with accepted risk assessment and management practices, and excludes the two clearly false statements. It acknowledges both the technical and value-laden aspects of environmental risk governance.

Option E is incorrect as it includes B, D and E, of which only D is correct. B and E each misrepresent important aspects of risk assessment’s scope and nature, so the combination cannot be accepted.

Option F is incorrect because it groups C, D and E, again including E, which narrows risk assessment to chemicals only. Even though C and D are correct, the presence of E makes this option inconsistent with the broader view of environmental risk assessment.

COP28 opened with an agreement to make the Loss and Damage Fund operational and to start capitalising it with initial pledges. This fund is meant to assist vulnerable countries facing severe climate impacts that go beyond adaptation, such as devastating floods or sea-level rise. Its launch was framed as a milestone for climate justice because it recognises historical responsibility and the need for support to those who contributed least to emissions. The decision signalled that implementation of past promises is as important as announcing new targets. (UNFCCC)

Option A:
This option imagines an overnight abolition treaty for all fossil fuels, which did not happen at COP28. While the conference did move towards language on “transitioning away” from fossil fuels, it was framed as a gradual process with caveats. The unrealistic immediacy and extremity in this option make it factually incorrect for current affairs.

Option B:
This option correctly captures the central headline from day one of COP28: operationalising the Loss and Damage Fund with concrete financial commitments. It reflects both the institutional decision (setting up the fund and its governance) and the political significance of initial pledges for vulnerable countries. Because it matches reported outcomes and media framing of a “historic” step, it is the best answer.

Option C:
Dissolving the UNFCCC and replacing it with a new body was never on the formal agenda. The UNFCCC remains the main treaty framework under which COP meetings take place, including COP28. This option therefore misrepresents the institutional continuity of climate governance.

Option D:
The location of future COPs is decided separately, and no such blanket decision was taken to move all future conferences permanently to Geneva. COP29, for example, was held in Baku, Azerbaijan, showing that host countries continue to rotate. Thus, this statement does not reflect actual COP28 outcomes.

Statements A, C and D are correct because toxic exposures in childhood affect development, indoor smoke increases respiratory disease and policy interventions can create healthier environments. Statement B is incorrect; children are actually more, not less, vulnerable due to developing organs and higher exposure per unit body weight. Hence, the combination that includes A, C and D and excludes B is the correct answer.

Option A:
Option A is correct since it recognises all the true statements and leaves out B, which misrepresents children’s vulnerability. It captures both biomedical evidence and the role of preventive policies.

Option B:
Option B is incomplete because it excludes D, which rightly points to the importance of policies targeting homes, schools and neighbourhoods. Without D, the policy dimension is missing.

Option C:
Option C is incorrect as it includes B, which is a false statement about children’s comparative vulnerability. Even though C and D are true, accepting B makes the combination unacceptable.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because it claims that all four statements are correct, thereby endorsing B along with the others. This contradicts basic environmental health understanding.

Statements A, B, D and F are correct because economic instruments, information tools, public procurement and policy links to climate and resource efficiency are all recognised elements of sustainable consumption strategies. Statement C is wrong because sustainable consumption stresses the whole 3R hierarchy of reduce, reuse and recycle, not recycling alone. Statement E is also wrong, as social norms and lifestyle changes are central to shifting patterns of demand. The only option that includes all and only the true statements is A, B, D and F.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because it lists only A and B and omits D and F. While green taxes and eco-labels are important, public procurement and broader policy linkages also contribute significantly to sustainable consumption. By excluding D and F, this option presents only a partial view of policy instruments.

Option B:
Option B is correct since it combines the four statements that accurately describe how governments and institutions promote sustainable consumption. It excludes C and E, which either narrow the agenda to recycling or dismiss the importance of social norms, thereby aligning well with contemporary policy approaches.

Option C:
Option C is incorrect as it adds C, which falsely asserts that sustainable consumption ignores reduction and reuse. Including C turns the combination into a mixture of true and false statements, so it cannot be the correct answer.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because it includes E, which wrongly claims that changes in norms and lifestyles are irrelevant. Sustainable consumption literature consistently emphasises behaviour and cultural change, so any option accepting E does not match the conceptual understanding.