‘Unscientific’: Centre rejects Environment Performance Index
The 2022 Environment Performance Index (EPI) ranked India at the absolute bottom of 180 countries.
The Union environment ministry has said the 2022 Environment Performance Index (EPI), an analysis by Yale and Columbia University researchers which ranked India at the bottom of 180 countries, is unscientific and biased in its methodology.
In a detailed rebuttal to the EPI analysis, the ministry said many indicators in the index were based on unfounded assumption “surmises, and unscientific methods.” Environmental and climate experts also said the methodology does not consider per capita emissions and different socio-economic conditions across countries. .
EPI which ranks 180 countries on 40 performance indicators including climate change, environmental public health, biodiversity etc ranked India at 180th claiming the country prioritised economic growth over environment. Denmark topped the ranking. “The lowest scores overall go to countries that are struggling with civil unrest or other crises, including Myanmar and Haiti, or nations that have prioritized economic growth over environmental sustainability, such as India, Vietnam, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. With markedly poor air quality and quickly rising greenhouse gas emissions, India, for the first time, comes in at the very bottom of country rankings. Poor air quality and rising GHG (green house gas) emissions continue to impact China’s EPI ranking, with the nation placing 160th out of 180 countries on the 2022 scorecard,” a statement by EPI said.
To buttress its case, the environment ministry pointed to a new indicator in the Climate Policy objective of EPI, Projected GHG Emissions levels in 2050. This is computed based on average rate of change in emissions of the previous 10 years instead of modelling that takes into account a longer time period, the extent of renewable energy capacity and use, additional carbon sinks, and the energy efficiency of respective countries, the environment ministry said. Both forests and wetlands of the country are crucial carbon sinks which have not been factored in while computing the projected GHG emissions trajectory up to 2050 by EPI 2022. The weightage of indictors in which India was performing well in previous years has been reduced and reasons for change in assignment of weights has not been explained in the report, the ministry added.
For example, the principle of equity has been given very low weightage in the form of indicators such as GHG emission per capita and GHG Emission intensity trend. The principle of common but differentiated responsibility (countries will take climate action as per their national circumstances) is also barely reflected in the composition of the index, the statement from the ministry said. India has already achieved the target of 40% of installed electricity capacity from non- fossil fuel based sources, 9 years in advance of its commitments . In 2015, as part of its nationally determined contributions under the Paris Agreement, India had committed to achieving 40% of its installed electricity capacity from non-fossil energy sources by 2030.
The Copernicus air pollutant concentration data have higher uncertainty in regions with less extensive monitoring networks and emissions inventories. This limitation reduces the chance of accurate assessment of air quality in India, the statement said, adding that the indicators on water quality, water use efficiency, waste generation per capita which are closely linked to sustainable consumption and production are not included in the Index.
“The index computes the extent of ecosystems but not their condition or productivity. Efforts must be made to include metrics that truly capture ecosystem productivity such that regulatory, provisioning as well as cultural services provided by various ecosystems like forests, wetlands, croplands are assessed and reflected in performance. Indicators like Agro biodiversity, soil health, food loss and waste are not included even though they are important for developing countries with large agrarian populations,” the statement added.
Several independent experts also said they did not agree the methodology of computing EPI.
“EPI has ranked India 165 out of 180 countries on climate change performance. But a few months back, India was ranked 10th out of 64 countries on Climate Change Performance Index (CCPI) by Germanwatch & CAN International @CANIntl. So, why such a significant difference? All these rankings are subjective. They use indicators to suit their worldview. For example, India will rank high if one uses per capita GHG emissions. But if one uses total GHG emissions, India will rank low. This is the difference between EPI and CCPI,” tweeted Chandra Bhushan, environmentalist and CEO of iForest Global.
“The EPI team has said that “India has prioritised economic growth over environmental sustainability”. I challenge the EPI team to name one country prioritizing environmental sustainability over its economy. I will wholeheartedly support their ranking if they can prove this,” Bhushan added.
“I do not agree with the EPI methodology. Of the 40 indicators, one-third of the weight is given to current and future emissions; only 1% weight to per capita emissions, so (there is) no scaling for country size at all,” said Ulka Kelkar, director of the Climate Program at World Resources Institute.