This year’s winter vacation was spent in Kolkata. I have been working on the issue of air pollution for nearly eight years, but this was the first time that my parents and neighbors told me they were relieved to be away from Delhi’s toxic air. For the past few years, their concern has always been whether I would be able to withstand the harsh cold of Delhi’s winters. This year felt different, not only because the atmosphere was bad, but also because the crisis could not be ignored. Citizens of Delhi took to the streets demanding action for clean air, and social media was abuzz with videos and memes about pollution. Despite a decline in farm fires in December, It turned out Pollution may be more severe than in October or November.

In mid-December, when Delhi was facing severe pollution levels, a spokesperson for the Chinese embassy in India approached X (formerly Twitter) to offer assistance. share How China Cleaned Up Pollution. This in turn triggered a series of articles by Indian air pollution experts asking, “If China can clean the air, why can’t India?” Almost all of them point to the same set of measures adopted under China’s Air Pollution Prevention and Control Action Plan: coal regulations, factory closures, stricter vehicle emission standards, and scrapping of old vehicles. launched That’s natural. Since 2013, particulate pollution levels in China have mostly decreased 40%. We at the Atmospheric Quality of Life Index (AQLI) estimate that this improvement could help Chinese residents. live 2 years left. AQLI is an indexing and interactive data visualization platform developed by the Energy Policy Institute (EPIC) at the University of Chicago.

But the focus on China’s actions often obscures a more important question: How did those actions lead to reduced pollution? The real lesson for India lies not in the specific measures themselves, but in the principles that shaped these measures and made them effective.

Tracing the history of China’s air pollution control and broader environmental governance brings four such principles into sharper focus.

Mainstreaming the environment in growth issues

The first principle focused on mainstreaming environmental protection as a growth agenda. Since the mid-2000s, there has been an increased emphasis on environmental protection. expensive Within China’s policy priorities, it clearly signaled to local governments that the era of idiosyncratic GDP-centered growth is over. The sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission allowance is incorporated Already in 2005, it was introduced into the performance evaluation system of top-level bureaucrats, including mayors and party secretaries, and became a factor in promotion, sanctions, and dismissal.

In 2006, as a new growth indicator, green GDPwas introduced. This was lower than GDP, which is based purely on economic growth, because it takes into account the negative effects of environmental destruction. This early realignment was important because environmental outcomes became the formal responsibility of local governments long before China declared its “war on pollution” in 2013.

India’s vision “Vikshit” By 2047 (Development) Recognize climate change as an obstacle to sustainable development. We recognize that this issue needs to be addressed to ensure a better future for our people. But air pollution doesn’t receive as much recognition, especially with a growing body of research linking it directly to premature death and disease. AQLI estimates that the average Indian will suffer losses. 3 and a half years Shortened lifespan due to air pollution. A deeper recognition of these impacts could prompt more urgent policy responses.

Beyond particulate correction

Second, China treated particulate matter not as an independent pollutant but as part of a chemical system of complex pollutants. China’s air quality strategy is built on the understanding that PM2.5 is not a single pollutant, but the product of a complex chemical system resulting from the emissions of multiple pollutants, such as nitrous oxide, sulfur oxides, and ammonia. Well before the PM2.5 concentration target was introduced, China had already implemented binding emission reduction targets for SO₂ and NOₓ through the 11th Five-Year Plan (2005-10) and the 2011 Energy Conservation and Emission Reduction Plan. Initially driven by concerns about acid rain, these regulations later came to be recognized as a necessary precursor to particulate pollution.

The 2013 plan strengthens these emission limits, adds PM2.5 concentration targets, and strengthens the following three ideas: Particulate pollution cannot be addressed in isolation from its chemical precursors. Sustainable reductions require reducing emissions, not just managing ambient concentrations. Controlling precursors will also require changes in energy, industry, transportation, and fuel use, making sector-wide restructuring inevitable.

In contrast, India’s National Clean Air Program (NCAP), launched in 2019, focuses on particulate matter, especially PM10, as the main pollution problem, rather than treating air pollution as a chemical system that needs integrated management. This approach is evident in the repeated delays and uneven implementation of measures such as tightening emission standards for thermal power plants, scrapping old vehicles, and increasing inspections of vehicles already on the road.

As long as particulate matter is tackled in isolation from precursor gases such as NOₓ and SO₂, India risks spending time and resources on solutions such as smog guns and smog towers that are visible but do little to actually change the air people breathe.

Goals that can be enforced

Third, China has combined environmental concentration targets with binding commitments to reduce emissions.

A feature of China’s approach was that environmental concentration targets were layered on top of binding emission reduction targets for pollutants such as SO2 and NOx. Accountability focused on emissions directly related to policy efforts, rather than concentrations alone.

Air pollution levels depend on weather conditions and economic activity and are not always clearly attributable to policy measures. In contrast, emissions-based targets make it easier to identify and enforce responsibility. For example, thermal power plants and large industries emit SO2, some of which becomes part of particulate matter. Emission reductions at the industry level are therefore reflected in reduced particle concentrations.

On the other hand, India’s NCAP relies only on concentration-based targets for PM10, which weakens the link between policy efforts and air quality impacts. Initiatives such as the annual Clean Air Survey rankings seek to address this gap by evaluating sectoral activity and encouraging competition between cities. However, in the absence of binding emissions targets or frameworks linking sectoral actions to verified emissions reductions, they remain imperfect proxies for accountability.

What it takes for lasting change

The fourth pillar of China’s air quality strategy was the use of transparency and central oversight to strengthen accountability.

Even before the 2013 plan, China had invested heavily in environmental disclosure. In 2008, adopted The Open Environmental Information Measures require the public disclosure of air and water quality data, pollutant emissions, environmental impact assessment results, pollution fees and fines, and the identities of companies that violate environmental standards.

Civil society initiatives such as transparency of pollution information indexstrengthened these efforts by ranking cities based on the quality of their disclosures. It caused reputational pressure on local governments. Transparency goes beyond real-time air quality data. This made both officials and polluters visible to the public.

Accountability was further strengthened with the launch of the Central Environmental Inspection System in 2016, subjecting local governments to regular high-level inspections by the central authority. These tests were not a substitute for regulation. They made sure the existing rules were taken seriously.

India today also has much of the information released by China. However, it remains fragmented across platforms, of uneven quality, and often inaccessible. For example, although air quality index values ​​have been reported, access to physical data on pollutants remains difficult. It limits meaningful public engagement. Tools such as the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) air quality dashboard and prana portal It’s a step in the right direction. But without fuller disclosure of emissions data and clearer links between data, enforcement, and outcomes, transparency risks becoming uninspiring and informational.

In summary, China’s experience shows that sustained air quality improvements are not the result of a single policy. They emerge from a sequence that aligns political priorities, scientific evidence, legally enforceable goals, public oversight, and bureaucratic accountability. This set of policies was guided by a broader shift in how well-being is understood, going beyond economic growth to include the health costs of pollution.

India has articulated an ambitious vision for development and well-being. Air pollution continues threaten millions of people Lifestyles around the country. Building the foundations needed for sustained air quality improvements will take years, but this will not delay the urgency with which India tackles air pollution. As NCAP enters its eighth year and there is growing global evidence of what works, the challenge for India is no longer knowing what to do, but acting in time.

The author is director of the Air Quality Lifetime Index (AQLI) at the Energy Policy Institute (EPIC) at the University of Chicago.

Banner image: Citizens protest demanding action against air pollution in New Delhi in November 2025. (AP Photo/Manish Swarup)