This document summarizes the key points of the long document about India's sustainable development efforts. It discusses India's initiatives to reduce emissions and promote renewable energy like solar power. It outlines various national missions to enhance energy efficiency, develop sustainable habitats, manage water resources, sustain the Himalayan ecosystem, support sustainable agriculture, and build strategic knowledge about climate change. India has set a goal of reducing emission intensity by 20-25% from 2005 levels by 2020 through these programs and policies.

1. Sustainable Development
Sustainable development in this environment therefore, calls for cooperation of all countries both
industrialized and developing. That cooperation must be based on the foundation of the right to
development and the need for an equitable distribution of burden.
The need for equity is starkly reflected in the fact that the emissions per capita in industrialized
countries are ten to twelve times those of developing countries. The total emissions in the world must
decline. We must find a way of solving this problem in a way that does not deprive developing countries
of their right to develop.
Economic growth, social development and environment protection are the three pillars of Sustainable
development. Sustainability has different meanings for different contexts. For example, while
developed countries are grappling with lifestyle sustainability, the developing countries are tackling
issues of livelihood sustainability.
As a developing country in the frontlines of climate vulnerability, India has a vital stake in the evolution
of a successful, rule-based, equitable and multilateral response to issues relating to climate change.
The principles of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change provide the basis for creating a
workable framework along these lines.
India’s Sustainable Growth:
India is one of the mega bio-diverse countries of the world. Our traditional knowledge is both coded as
in our ancient texts on Indian systems of medicine, and non-coded, as in oral traditions. With four global
biodiversity hotspots, India ranks amongst the top ten species rich nations.
India was one of the first few countries to enact a comprehensive Biological Diversity Act in 2002 to
give effect to the provisions of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992. Yet India and the world
have miles to go before we can claim notable success in fulfilling the three objectives of the Convention
namely, conservation of biological diversity, and sustainable use of its components and the fair and
equitable sharing of the benefits.
India’s forest cover had increased by nearly 5% between 1997 and 2007 with a small decrease since
then. It hopes to see further accretion with the implementation of the Green India Mission which aims
to increase the forest and tree cover by 5 million hectares and improve forest cover on another 5 million
hectares.
Eventually these forests will act as a sink that could absorb 50-60 million tons of carbon dioxide
annually. This would offset about 6 percent of India’s annual emissions. The Government of India is
trying to put in place institutional arrangements and mechanisms to promote policy development and
stakeholder engagement on sustainable management of commons.
India has recently established a National Green Tribunal under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
The Tribunal provides for the effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental
protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources.
This includes the enforcement of any legal right relating to environment, including providing relief and
compensation for damages. The National Ganga River Basin Authority is yet another example where
the Govt is trying institutional innovation to protect the sacred River.

2. India’s faster gross domestic product (GDP) growth over the last two decades has been unprecedented;
but at the same time India’s rankings in terms of the human development index (HDI) as well as indices
measuring environmental sustainability are yet to fully reflect this growth.
However, it would be a mistake to downplay the enormous progress made, as India has followed a
much more conscious path of sustainable development with impressive results on the ground. The key
environmental challenges have become sharper in the past two decades.
Climate change is impacting the natural ecosystems and is expected to have substantial adverse effects
in India, mainly on agriculture on which around 58 per cent of the population depends for livelihood,
water storage in the Himalayan glaciers which are the source of major rivers and groundwater recharge,
sea-level rise, and threats to a long coastline and habitations.
Climate change will also cause increased frequency of extreme events such as storms, floods, and
droughts. These in turn will impact India’s food & water security problems. India also faces the critical
challenge of meeting its rapidly growing energy demands.
It currently depends on around 80 per cent imports for its crude oil requirements. A large section of
the rural population is still not connected to the grid or efficient modern cooking fuel sources, and
India’s per capita energy consumption of 439 kg of oil equivalent is far below the world average of 1688
kg (Planning Commission report in 2006).
India Initiated:
According to the latest Economic Survey, India has announced a domestic goal of reducing the emission
intensity of its GDP by 20-25 per cent (at the 2005 levels) by 2020. The following are the key enablers
of this vision as per the latest economic survey of the government:
National Solar Mission:
The program Seeks to deploy 20,000 MW of solar electricity capacity in the country by 2020. The first
phase (2010-12) is currently underway during which 1,000 MW is planned to be installed, and about
Rs. 4,337 crore will be spent on it.
National Mission for Enhanced Energy Efficiency:
This mission aims to create new institutional mechanisms to enable the development and Energy
Efficiency strengthening of energy efficiency markets. Various programmes initiated under it include
the PAT mechanism to promote efficiency in large industries, and the Super-Efficient Equipment
Programme (SEEP) to accelerate the introduction of deployment of super- efficient appliances. A total
of Rs. 425.35 crore will be spent on the first phase to be completed in 2012.
National Mission on Sustainable Habitat:
It has been envisioned to promote the introduction of sustainable transport, energy-efficient buildings,
sustainable Habitat and sustainable waste management in cities. About Rs. 1,000 crore would be
needed to realise these goals.
National Water Mission:
This mission is to promote the integrated management of water resources and increase water use
efficiency by 20 per cent, and a whopping Rs. 89,101 crore will be spent on it.
National Mission for Sustaining the Himalayan Eco-system:

3. The Himalayas, as grand they are, are also a relatively new ecosystem and too fragile at that. This
program, therefore, establishes an observational and monitoring network for Himalayan glaciers, and
looks forward to promote community- based management of ecosystems.
National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture:
The focus of this mission is on enhancing productivity and resilience of agriculture, in order to reduce
vulnerability to extremes of weather, long dry spells, flooding, and variable moisture availability. It will
invite a total investment of Rs. 108,000 crore.
National Mission on Strategic Knowledge for Climate Change:
This program would aim to identify challenges arising from climate change. It will also look into the
possibility of diffusion of knowledge in the areas of health, demography, migration and livelihood of
coastal communities.
Corporate Governance:
Corporate governance broadly refers to the mechanisms, processes and relations by which
corporations are controlled and directed.[1] Governance structures identify the distribution of rights
and responsibilities among different participants in the corporation (such as the board of directors,
managers, shareholders, creditors, auditors, regulators, and other stakeholders) and includes the rules
and procedures for making decisions in corporate affairs. Corporate governance includes the processes
through which corporations' objectives are set and pursued in the context of the social, regulatory and
market environment. Governance mechanisms include monitoring the actions, policies and decisions
of corporations and their agents. Corporate governance practices are affected by attempts to align the
interests of stakeholders.
It is not in dispute that good corporate governance is all about commitment of a company to run its
businesses in a legal, ethical and transparent manner, and that the tone must be set at the top.
But are companies in India convinced that good business is all about good corporate governance? Do
companies really believe that good corporate governance has got more to do with leadership?
Do companies feel that the codes of corporate governance are not all about compliance, but they have
an underlying purpose which lies beyond compliance?
These are important questions, and the leadership teams of companies must seriously come face to
face with these, irrespective of whether any "big brother" is watching. Company managements and
members of the Boards often do not have a basic understanding of what good corporate governance
is.
At a recent colloquium on Board leadership, the participants who were directors or belonged to senior
management of medium-sized companies were asked to write down anonymously on a piece of paper
what each one understood by corporate governance.

4. Clearly, corporate governance meant different things to different people. Less than half the class
believed that corporate governance meant leadership; several referred to Clause 49 as "imposed" by
Sebi and several others were honest enough to proclaim their belief that business was all about money,
control and power.
The codes of ethics and business conduct of companies and their impact on the firms' businesses can
be referred to for answers to some of the questions mentioned in the foregoing paragraphs. These
codes of most companies are approved by their Boards, and should be clearly reflective of the "tone at
the top".
Often the codes vaunt lofty idealism, are written with great éclat and announced with dazzling élan.
Others are simple and written in a matter-of-fact language, shorn of any linguistic fervour. The codes
that belong to the former ilk often ring hollow.
The code of a company like GE is a case study in itself. Its Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, known
very symbolically as "The Spirit and Letter", has a tag line, "unyielding integrity", which is a musing of
what GE has been standing for 125 years.
The Code expresses GE's commitment to perform with integrity "Everywhere", "Everyday" and for
"Everyone". The Code expects all employees "to obey applicable laws and regulations governing their
worldwide business conduct; to be honest, fair and trustworthy in all their GE activities and
relationships; to avoid all conflicts of interest between work and personal affairs; to foster fair
employment practices, to strive to create a safe workplace and to protect the environment and through
leadership at all levels, sustain a culture where ethical conduct is recognised, valued and exemplified
by all employees".
The Tatas have an elaborate Code of Conduct predicated on the concept of "Humata, Hukta,
Huvarashta" from which flows the five Tata core values of integrity, understanding, excellence, unity
and responsibility.
This code provides the guidelines by which the group conducts its businesses. Infosys has a detailed
code based on core values C-LIFE: Customer delight, leadership by example, integrity and transparency,
fairness and pursuit of excellence. These are noble thoughts couched in beautiful words.
These companies believe in these principles, live by them, and conduct businesses. It is evident that not
only the tone has been set on top, but it has permeated through the organisation, and has been imbibed
in everyday business of these companies.
On the other hand, take Enron with the crooked E. Its 1996 Statement of Human Rights emphasised
respect, integrity, communication and excellence, and all employees, including Jeff Skilling and Andrew
Fastow, signed it.
These core values were embossed on the company's T-shirts, its intranet, pamphlets and paperweights.
It even emblazoned on a giant banner that hung from the ceiling inside the lobby at Enron headquarters
in Houston.
The Satyam Computers, which is now being remembered mostly for the lightning speed of systemic
response to save the company rather than the enormity of the corporate misconduct, also had an
elaborate Code of Conduct and Ethics on its website.
It was based on "four core values which Satyam stood for" - belief in people, entrepreneurship,
customer orientation, pursuit of excellence.

5. The Code, among other things, required the Board of directors and associates to conduct their duties
legally, honestly and ethically, when acting on behalf of the company or in connection with the
company's business or operations.
It required them to fulfil their fiduciary duties towards the stakeholders of Satyam; to act honestly,
fairly, ethically, with integrity and loyalty; to conduct themselves in a professional, courteous and
respectful manner; to act in good faith, with responsibility, due care, competence, diligence and
independence and to avoid any activity or association that creates or appears to create a conflict
between the personal interests of the directors and associates and the company's business interests.
Examples of codes of business conduct and ethics are numerous. But the questions are: How do the
codes of conduct appear in retrospect?
Were the core values of Enron or Satyam questionable? Were these less noble than what GE or the
Tatas or Infosys proclaim? Were these not approved by the Boards of Enron or Satyam? If yes, then
why were these profaned by the same people who approved them?
Why is it that some companies are able to put to practice what they state in eloquent terms, while
others are content with having their codes remain gilded in beautiful English?
The answers to these questions lie in the fundamental belief of a company that if it "runs its business
in a legal, ethical and transparent manner", that is following principles of good governance, it would
also mean good business.
If it is accepted that companies are normally set up to make profits and not to incur losses, it stands to
reason that it would be futile to expect that companies will seriously take up activities that will not
contribute to this objective.
But companies are also set up in long-term interest and not for winding up after a fixed period of time,
unless compelled to do so on account of business failure leading to bankruptcy.
Pursuing this twin line of argument can lead to the conclusion that companies should be looking at long-
term sustainable profit-making, which will result in sustainable business growth.
Hence, only such activities will be beneficial to companies and pursued by them that are in their long-
term interests. Some companies believe in this, while others do not. The agnostics look at Clause 49 or
other similar codes or regulations of governance only through the lens of compliance, and as an undue
imposition on business.
For the believers, governance is a necessary requisite for long-term sustainable growth, and they feel
that there is a compelling need to run businesses in "fair, transparent, legal and ethical manner" with
unyielding integrity.
They believe that one can progress by doing good. They look beyond compliance and are able to make
good governance their competitive advantage.
Milton Friedman articulates this view in his popular 1970 essay, The social responsibility of business is
to increase its profits. In this, he says that the social responsibility of business is to maximise profit for
the company, but subject to "the limits of law" and the "rules of the game" that ensure "open and free
competition without deception or fraud".
The author is a former Executive Director of the Securities and Exchange Board of India and is currently
associated with the Global Corporate Governance Forum of the International Finance Corporation and
the World Bank. Views expressed are personal.