Syllabus

• Prelims & Mains – CURRENT EVENT

Context: The UN recently said 2025 will be observed as the International Year of Quantum Science and Technology (IYQ).

Background:-

• Given the possibility of dual use, like many other emerging technologies, researchers are calling for responsible development and use of quantum technologies.

What is responsible quantum S&T?

• Quantum S&T are part of the ‘S&T plans’ of many governments and the subject of significant private sector investment.
• Among investments by countries, China leads with $10 billion in 2022, followed by the European Union and the U.S. India’s contribution is currently $730 million (Rs 6,100 crore).
• The value of quantum S&T is in transforming our abilities to transmit and make use of information across sectors. But they also carry the risk of misuse thanks to the technologies’ potential for dual use, like weakening digital security.
• Researchers and some governments have thus been calling for practising responsible quantum technologies to harness the value of quantum S&T while engendering public trust.
• For example, the U.K.’s ‘National Quantum Strategy’ states, “We will ensure that regulatory frameworks drive responsible innovation and the delivery of benefits for the UK, as well as protecting and growing the economy and the UK’s quantum capabilities.”

What is quantum governance?

• The World Economic Forum (WEF) was one of the first organisations to discuss quantum computing governance. Its ‘Quantum Governance’ framework for this is based on the principles of transparency, inclusiveness, accessibility, non-maleficence, equitability, accountability, and the common good.
• Members of the framework include those from national government agencies, academic institutions, and private sector leaders (including in India).
• The WEF’s objective here is to accelerate the development of responsible quantum computing by building trust in the technology during its development to preempt and mitigate potential risks.
• The framework’s virtue is that it addresses responsible development up front rather than as an afterthought.
• A white paper published by the University of Oxford cautioned against inflated expectations and overestimating our understanding of ethical issues. In particular, it called out the gaps between countries in terms of quantum S&T capacities and reasoned that lack of access to talent and technologies could widen the gaps further.
• From another perspective, a group of academics from the U.S., Canada and Europe recently proposed another framework for responsible quantum technologies. Here, the group has suggested 10 principles to guide the applications of quantum S&T aim together with their RRI values.
• ‘RRI’ stands for ‘responsible research and information’, a concept and practice endorsed by the European Commission. Many institutions worldwide, including funding agencies, have adopted it; it emphasises ‘anticipation’, ‘reflection’, ‘diversity’, and ‘inclusion’ while foregrounding public engagement and ethical considerations.
• These frameworks and initiatives have emerged largely from among researchers and are united in their focus on and intention to maintain openness. National policies on the other hand have preferred frameworks that confer greater and stronger protections of intellectual property rights vis-à-vis quantum technologies.
• Similarly, it may be naïve to expect the private sector — with its large investments and desire for patents and profits — will favour sharing and openness in the name of responsible quantum technologies. There may be exceptional circumstances but they won’t be the norm.
• What we need is responsible national or international efforts driven by governments but with active support and collaboration from private sector.

Source: Hindu

Syllabus

• Mains – GS 2 & GS 3

Context: French economist Gabriel Zucman has in a recent report commissioned by Brazil’s G-20 presidency recommended an annual 2% tax on individuals holding wealth exceeding $1 billion, a suggestion intended to serve as the starting point for a global discussion on ensuring under-taxed billionaires are made to contribute more to reduce inequality worldwide.

Background:

• Finance Ministers of the G-20 group are set to meet in Rio de Janeiro on July 25-26, and the proposal is expected to be discussed at the meeting.

What exactly is the proposal?

• Zucman, an economist who has extensively researched the accumulation, distribution and taxation of global income and wealth, has proposed the adoption of an internationally coordinated minimum tax standard for ensuring effective taxation of ultra-high-net-worth individuals.
• At the minimum, he recommends that individuals possessing more than $1 billion in total wealth (assets, equity shares in both listed and unlisted companies, other ownership structures that enable participating in companies’ ownership, etc.) would be required to pay a minimum amount of tax annually that would be equal to 2% of their wealth.
• Such a minimum tax on billionaires could potentially raise $200-$250 billion a year globally from about 3,000 individuals, and were it to be extended to cover those with a net worth exceeding $100 million, would add $100-$140 billion annually in global tax revenue.

What is the rationale for such a tax?

• As per a key finding of theGlobal Tax Evasion Report 2024, prepared by the EU Tax Observatory, global billionaires benefit from very low effective tax rates, which range between 0% and 0.5% of their wealth.
• When expressed as a fraction of income and considering all taxes paid at all levels of government (including corporate taxes, consumption taxes, payroll taxes, etc.), the effective tax rates of billionaires appear significantly lower than those of all other groups of the population.
• Zucman in his report posits that the wealth of the top 0.0001% households, expressed as a fraction of world GDP, has surged more than fourfold since the mid-1980s.
• In 1987, the top 0.0001% owned the equivalent of 3% of world GDP in wealth. This wealth gradually rose to 8% of world GDP on the eve of the global financial crisis of 2008-2009. It briefly fell during the crisis, and then rose fast to exceed 13% of world GDP in 2024.The average annual growth rate of this population group’s wealth is 7.1% net of inflation.
• In contrast, over the same almost four-decade period, the average income of an adult grew annually by 1.3% net of inflation, and average wealth increased by 3.2% a year.
• As long as ultra-high-net-worth individuals keep having higher net-of-tax returns than the rest of the population, their share of global wealth will keep rising — an unsustainable path.
• Emphasising that “progressive taxation is a key pillar of democratic societies” that helps strengthen social cohesion and trust in governments to work for the common good, the French economist stresses that it is needed to help fund public goods and services. Better tax revenues are also crucial to meet the investments required to address the climate crisis.

Why moot such a tax now?

• Research shows that contemporary tax systems worldwide are not effectively taxing the wealthiest individuals. As a result ultra-high-net-worth individuals tend to pay less in tax relative to their income than other social groups, regardless of the specific tax design choices and enforcement practices of countries.
• Income taxes, which in principle constitute the main instrument of progressive taxation, fail to effectively tax ultra-high-net-worth individuals. This in turn deprives governments of substantial tax revenues and contributes to concentrating the gains of globalisation into relatively few hands, undermining the social sustainability of economic globalisation.
• Also, the global social and political environment, and in some ways the regulatory climate too, are more conducive now to successfully implement such a proposal. Mr. Zucman cites the progress made in curtailing bank secrecy over the last 15 years through increased information exchange between countries, which has led to a decline in offshore tax evasion.
• The other major enabling factor is the ‘historic decision’ in 2021, when more than 130 countries and territoriesagreed to a common minimum corporate tax of 15% for large multinational companies (MNCs). The willingness on the part of countries worldwide to tax MNCs in a manner so as to prevent them from seeking to operate out of low or zero tax jurisdictions is, a template that can be built upon now for taxing billionaires.

Source: Hindu

Syllabus

• Prelims – CURRENT EVENT

Context: The Department of Telecommunications (DoT) on July 4 released draft rules to operationalise the Digital Bharat Nidhi, in a fresh attempt by the central government at increasing telecom connectivity in rural areas.

Background:

• With the Centre notifying parts of the Telecom Act last month, it has also proposed additional rules for the final makeover of the Universal Service Obligation Fund (USOF) as the Digital Bharat Nidhi (DBN) – which would have a relatively wider scope than the USOF.

About Digital Bharat Nidhi

• Digital Bharat Nidhi would replace the erstwhile Universal Service Obligation Fund (USOF), which is a pool of funds generated by a 5 per cent Universal Service Levy charged upon all the telecom fund operators on their Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR). Since its establishment in 2003, a common criticism of the USOF has been its relative underutilisation.
• The idea is that this money would be used to fund the expansion of telecom networks in remote and rural areas, where private companies may otherwise resist offering their services due to them not being revenue-generating markets.

How the Digital Bharat Nidhi will work

• As per the Telecom Act, contributions made by telecom companies towards the Digital Bharat Nidhi will first be credited to the Consolidated Fund of India (CFI). The Centre will deposit the collected funds to the DBN from time to time.
• Funds collected under the DBN will be used to support universal service through promoting access to and delivery of telecommunication services in underserved rural, remote and urban areas; fund research and development of telecommunication services, technologies, and products; support pilot projects, consultancy assistance and advisory support for improving connectivity; and for the introduction of telecommunication services, technologies, and products.

For Your Information: 

• On June 26, multiple sections of the Telecommunications Act, 2023 came into effect, giving way to the first piece of the larger technology legislative puzzle to fall into place. This is among the three key laws the Centre wants to put together as a comprehensive legal framework for the country’s burgeoning tech sector.

Source: Indian Express

Syllabus

• Prelims & Mains – ENVIRONMENT

Context: Smoke from raging wildfires has once again darkened the skies over the Arctic. It is the third time in the past five years that high intensity fires have erupted in the region, Europe’s Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) said.

Background:

• A majority of fires are in Sakha, Russia, where more than 160 wildfires charred nearly 460,000 hectares of land up until June 24, according to Russia state news agency Tass.

Key Takeaways

• Wildfires have been a natural part of the Arctic’s boreal forest or snow forest and tundra (treeless regions) ecosystems. However, in recent years, their frequency and scale in the regions have increased, primarily due to global warming. More worryingly, these blazing wildfires are fueling the climate crisis.

Why have Arctic wildfires become worse?

• The Arctic has been warming roughly four times as fast as the world. While the global average temperature has increased by at least 1.1 degree Celsius above the pre-industrial levels, the Arctic has become on average around 3 degree warmer than it was in 1980.
• This fast paced warming has led to more frequent lightning in the Arctic, which has further increased the likelihood of wildfires — lightning-sparked fires have more than doubled in Alaska and the Northwest Territories since 1975.
• Soaring temperatures have also slowed down the polar jet stream — responsible for circulating air between the mid- and northern latitudes — due to less of a temperature difference between the Arctic and lower latitudes. As a result, the polar jet stream often gets “stuck” in one place, bringing unseasonably warm weather to the region. It also blocks out low-pressure systems, which bring clouds and rainfall, possibly leading to intense heatwaves, which can cause more wildfires.
• All three factors — rising temperatures, more frequent lightning and heatwaves — will most likely worsen in the coming years, thereby causing more wildfires in the Arctic.

How Arctic wildfires can exacerbate global warming?

• When wildfires ignite, they burn vegetation and organic matter, releasing the heat trapping greenhouse gases (GHGs) such as carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere. That is why the rising frequency of wildfires around the globe is a matter of concern as they contribute to climate change.
• However, in the case of Arctic wildfires, such GHG emissions are not the biggest worry. It is rather the carbon stored underneath the region’s permafrost — any ground that stays frozen for at least two years straight.
• Scientists estimate that Arctic permafrost holds around 1,700 billion metric tons of carbon, including methane and CO2. That’s roughly 51 times the amount of carbon the world released as fossil fuel emissions in 2019.
• Wildfires make permafrost more vulnerable to thawing as they destroy upper insulating layers of vegetation and soil. This can cause ancient organic materials such as dead animals and plants to decompose and release carbon into the atmosphere. In case a large-scale thawing of Arctic permafrost is triggered, it would be impossible to stop the release of carbon.
• This would mean that the world will not be able to limit global warming within the 1.5 degree Celsius threshold. Breaching the limit will result in catastrophic and irreversible consequences for the planet.
• What happens in the Arctic doesn’t stay there — Arctic change amplifies risks globally for all of us. These fires are a warning cry for urgent action.

Source: Indian Express

Syllabus

• Prelims – CURRENT EVENT

Context: The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) has selected two out of its four trained Gaganyaan astronauts to participate in the Axiom-4 mission.

Background:

• Only one of the shortlisted astronauts will go on the mission which is supposed to take place “no earlier than October 2024,” according to the information available on NASA website.

About AXIOM-4 :

• The Axiom-4 mission is a private spaceflight to the International Space Station (ISS) conducted by Axiom Space in collaboration with NASA.
• It will be the fourth private astronaut mission to the ISS.
• The mission will last for fourteen days.

Spacecraft:

• The spacecraft used for the Axiom-4 mission is a SpaceX Crew Dragon.

Indian Involvement:

• The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) has shortlisted two of its four trained Gaganyaan astronauts to participate in the mission.
• These Indian astronauts will receive training from NASA, international partners, and SpaceX.

Objectives:

• The mission aims to facilitate commercial activities in space, including scientific research, technological development, and space tourism.
• It will demonstrate the viability of commercial space stations as platforms for business and innovation.

Diverse Crew:

• The Axiom-4 mission will carry a diverse crew of astronauts from different countries.

Scientific Experiments:

• During the mission, various scientific experiments and technological tests will be conducted in the unique microgravity environment of space.

Gaganyaan Mission

• The Gaganyaan Mission is India’s ongoing project to send a 3-day manned mission to the Low Earth Orbit (LEO) of 400 km with a crew of 3 members and bring them safely back to Earth.
• The objective of the program is to demonstrate India’s human spaceflight capabilities.
• As part of this program, two unmanned missions and one manned mission are approved by the Government of India.
• Upon its completion, India will become the fourth nation, after the US, Russia, and China, to undertake a manned spaceflight mission.

Source: Indian Express

Syllabus

• Prelims – ENVIRONMENT

Context: The recent floods in Assam’s Kaziranga National Park have been tragic for the wildlife.

Background:

• The park is experiencing its worst-ever deluge in recent years, surpassing the large-scale devastation seen in 2017 when over 350 animals died due to floods and vehicle hits while migrating through animal corridors to the highlands.

About  Kaziranga National Park :

• Kaziranga National Park is located in the Golaghat, Karbi Anglong, and Nagaon districts of the state of Assam, India.
• It sits on the southern banks of the Brahmaputra River.
• This park hosts two-thirds of the world’s Indian rhinoceroses and is recognized as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
• The park’s rich biodiversity includes large breeding populations of elephants, wild water buffalo, and swamp deer.

Source: Business Standard

Q1.) Digital Bharath Nidhi, recently heard in news, will replace the erstwhile

1. Universal Service Obligation Fund
2. Universal Service Updation Fund
3. Universal Service Extension Fund
4. None of the above

Q2.) With reference to the Kaziranga National Park, consider the following statements:

1. Kaziranga National Park sits on the southern banks of the Brahmaputra River.
2. This park hosts two-thirds of the world’s Indian rhinoceroses.
3. It is recognized as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

1. 1 only
2. 1 and 2 only
3. 1 and 3 only
4. 1,2 and 3

Q3.) Consider the following statements:

Statement-I:

The Axiom-4 mission is a private spaceflight to the International Space Station conducted by Axiom Space in collaboration with ISRO.

Statement-II:

The Axiom-4 mission aims to facilitate commercial activities in space, including scientific research, technological development, and space tourism.

Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

1. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II is the correct explanation for Statement-I
2. Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II is not the correct explanation for Statement-I
3. Statement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect
4. Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-II is correct

Comment the answers to the above questions in the comment section below!!

ANSWERS FOR ’  9th July 2024 – Daily Practice MCQs’ will be updated along with tomorrow’s Daily Current Affairs.st

Q.1) –  a

Q.2) – b

Q.3) – c