Bringing down pollution levels in Delhi was never going to be easy. Yet the Rekha Gupta government, perhaps under sustained pressure from social media “bullying” by the ousted Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), chose to take on the challenge of cleaning the capital’s air within less than a year of assuming office. Such ambition may sound reassuring, but air pollution is not a problem that lends itself to quick fixes or political timelines.
Delhi’s deteriorating civic environment, including its toxic air, is the aggregate outcome of policy neglect over the past decade. The AAP government focused overwhelmingly on electoral populism, pitching “freebies” as governance, while ignoring the critical tasks of urban management. When scarce public funds are diverted towards sustaining electoral subsidies rather than strengthening municipal infrastructure, environmental regulation and enforcement inevitably suffer.
The fight against air pollution must be understood as a multi-faceted and long-term battle, not a seasonal crisis to be addressed through “Band-Aid” measures every winter. Unfortunately, Delhi’s response thus far has been largely reactive without addressing structural causes. Pollution can only be eliminated through institutional capacity, political will, and scientific rigour.
One of the most critical pillars of any effective anti-pollution strategy is reliable data. An ailment can only be treated accurately when it is properly diagnosed. On this count, Delhi’s approach has been deeply flawed. A recent report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science & Technology, Environment, Forests and Climate Change has raised serious concerns about how air quality data is being collected and interpreted in the country’s national capital.
As reported by this newspaper, the Committee flagged that most air quality monitoring stations are concentrated in central and southern Delhi, areas that are relatively greener, less densely populated, and socio-economically more affluent. This lop-sided distribution produces a distorted and non-representative dataset, effectively excluding densely inhabited localities in north-east, outer west, and trans-Yamuna Delhi.
The implications are serious. Policy decisions based on incomplete data lead to misplaced priorities, misallocation of resources, and ineffective interventions. Cleaning Delhi’s air therefore begins not with grand announcements, but with expanding and rationalising the monitoring network to reflect the city’s demographic and industrial realities.
The government also needs to exercise caution while responding to pressures from its core political constituency. Recent pleas before the Supreme Court seeking a stay on the phasing out of end-of-life vehicles and allowing broader exemptions on firecracker use may have been politically expedient, but they have had perceptible environmental consequences.
Environmental governance cannot be selective. If restrictions apply, they must be applied uniformly, transparently, and backed by credible alternatives. Otherwise, policy vacillation only erodes public trust.
The way forward lies in moving beyond episodic crisis management towards sustained structural reform. First, Delhi needs a scientifically designed, geographically balanced air quality monitoring system that captures real-time data across all zones, particularly in high-density and industrial areas. This data must be publicly accessible.
Second, pollution control must be regional, not confined to Delhi’s administrative boundaries. Third, urban planning must be brought back into the pollution discourse. Unregulated construction, shrinking green cover, poorly designed transport corridors, and inadequate waste management all feed into Delhi’s toxic air.
Pollution does not recognise party lines or electoral mandates. Cleaning city air is not about winning social media debates. Delhi’s air crisis is the consequence of long-term neglect, and its resolution will demand patience, consistency, and honesty.