Tell-All
We asked: Forests, fertile fields, villages, lakes and ponds are all falling prey to urban expansion due to the uncontrolled rise in population. Amidst hue and cry over curbing the population of stray and even certain wild animals, do you think the Indian government needs to seriously shift focus on controlling the human population now, even to the degree of implementing a one-child policy and dealing strictly with IVF centres with a focus on child adoption instead?
Once imagined as dystopian fiction, overcrowding is quietly becoming a reality. From shrinking cities to fragile mountains under strain, India’s environmental crises point to an uncomfortable truth: the Earth may be running out of space faster than we admit. In my childhood, I read a science fiction story that left a deep unease. The world it imagined was not destroyed by war or disease, but by people — too many of them. Farmland had become so scarce that governments froze urban expansion to protect what little remained for food production. Housing shortages were severe. Roads were built over rooftops. Buildings stood back to back, erasing light and air. People rented broom cupboards to live in. Space itself had become a luxury. I no longer remember the title of that story. What I remember is the suffocation it described — a civilisation that had crossed a threshold without realising it. At the time, it felt exaggerated and distant. Today, it feels less like fiction and more like a muted reflection of our present. Across India, forests are thinning, lakes are disappearing, fertile land is steadily converted into concrete, and villages are dissolving into expanding cities. This transformation is often described as development, but increasingly it resembles ecological exhaustion. India, now the world’s most populous nation, is quietly testing the limits of its land, water, air and governance. Overpopulation is frequently reduced to a debate about numbers, but its real impact is spatial and environmental. Every additional demand — for housing, roads, energy, and water — requires land, and that land is finite. Cities expand outward because planning inward has failed. Wetlands are filled, floodplains are built over, and green buffers are erased. When the monsoon arrives, the consequences are visible as floods, collapsed infrastructure and disrupted lives. Human–animal conflict, now a regular feature of headlines, is often treated as an issue of nuisance or safety. But animals do not intrude into cities by choice. Shrinking forests and broken corridors leave them with nowhere else to go. We manage animal populations aggressively, yet hesitate to examine the far larger force displacing them — human expansion. Nowhere is this imbalance more evident than in the Himalayas. These young, fragile mountains are under immense pressure from multilevel housing, road widening, tunnelling and construction carried out with dynamite and urgency. Population growth, tourism and the demand for connectivity have pushed development into landscapes that cannot absorb it safely. The signs are increasingly visible: landslides, subsiding towns, flash floods and destabilised slopes. These are not isolated disasters but symptoms of cumulative stress. What happens in the Himalayas does not remain confined to the mountains. Rivers, groundwater systems and ecosystems far downstream carry the consequences. When the mountains destabilise, so does the life they sustain. In India’s cities, population pressure reveals itself most tangibly in the air. Each winter, dense smog settles over urban centres, particularly in the north. While meteorological conditions play a role, the underlying causes are unmistakably human — rising numbers of vehicles, constant construction activity, industrial emissions and energy demand that exceeds sustainable limits. Clean air, like open land, is becoming scarce. Discussions around population remain deeply uncomfortable. The idea of control evokes fears of coercion and historical injustice. India must be cautious; authoritarian approaches elsewhere have left painful legacies. Yet avoiding the conversation altogether carries its own risks. What India needs is not coercion, but population responsibility — a collective recognition that choices made today shape the liveability of tomorrow. Evidence from across societies shows that when women are educated, economically independent and have access to reproductive healthcare, family sizes naturally decline. Stabilisation achieved through agency and awareness is both ethical and effective. Another sensitive dimension of this discussion lies in the rapid expansion of IVF centres. While assisted reproduction offers hope to many families, its unchecked commercialisation raises ethical questions in a country where millions of children remain orphaned or abandoned. This is not an argument against IVF, but for balance. Adoption in India remains burdened by bureaucracy and stigma, while IVF is often promoted aggressively. Simplifying adoption and presenting it as a valued choice could ease both social and ecological pressures. There is an uncomfortable contradiction in our priorities. We sterilise stray animals, relocate wildlife and debate culling, yet rarely question the scale of human growth that creates these conflicts. Animals are expected to adjust endlessly; ecosystems are expected to absorb endlessly. Humanity places itself outside the system, exempt from scrutiny. That science fiction story from my childhood was not really about the future. It was about delay — about societies that wait until humane choices disappear. India still has time to choose differently. Stabilising population growth through education, ethical reproductive choices, adoption and thoughtful development is not anti-human. It is an affirmation of life — human and non-human alike. Science fiction becomes truly unsettling not when it imagines impossible worlds, but when it quietly mirrors our own. The question is whether we will recognise ourselves in the reflection before space — on land, in air, and in conscience — finally runs out. -Shachi Rao, Social activist and entrepreneur, Lucknow
India’s landscapes, once a tapestry of lush forests, fertile fields and serene lakes, are vanishing under the relentless march of human expansion. Villages swallow ponds, cities devour farmlands and wildlife retreats in despair. This heartbreaking transformation stems from one root cause: unchecked human population growth. With over 1.4 billion people crammed into just 2.4% of the world’s land, India faces an environmental catastrophe that demands immediate, drastic intervention. It is time to shift focus from curbing stray animals to controlling our own numbers—perhaps even adopting a one-child policy—while prioritising adoption over the booming IVF industry. Failure to act is not just shortsighted; it is a betrayal of Mother Nature and future generations. Logically, population explosion fuels environmental degradation through a vicious cycle. As numbers swell, demand for resources skyrockets, leading to overexploitation. India’s population grew from 450 million in 1960 to 1.43 billion in 2023, a 216.5% surge, straining natural assets like water, land, and air. This overdependence has exhausted agricultural land, polluted rivers and driven biodiversity loss. Urban expansion, driven by this growth, has turned biodiversity hotspots into concrete jungles. In the western Himalayas, urban and cropland sprawl caused an 11% drop in forest cover between 1975 and 2015, shrinking natural habitats and water bodies by 8%. Uttarakhand, urbanising faster than any Himalayan state, saw an 11% decline in natural forests from 1991 to 2023 due to unplanned growth, depleting groundwater by 17% and biodiversity by 27%. Emotionally, it is devastating. This intrusion sparks tragic man-animal conflicts. Between 2019 and 2023, over 3,562 people died due to elephant, tiger and other animals’ attacks across 18 states. In Kerala alone, 1,527 human deaths occurred in the last 15 years, with elephants claiming 276 lives. Rapid industrialisation chokes rivers with toxins, while deforestation invites soil erosion and climate change. Heart-wrenching stories abound: farmers losing loved ones to straying leopards in Maharashtra, or elephants raiding crops in Wayanad, Kerala, where 450 incidents occurred last year. Animals are not villains; they are victims of our selfishness, pushed into desperation by habitat loss. Religions, in their quest for dominance, ignore this burden on nature. Competing to swell ranks, they promote larger families without considering ecological limits. In 2024, tropical forest loss hit record highs, with wildfires—often human-sparked for agriculture—destroying habitats at the rate of 18 football fields per minute. Plastic waste litters jungles, and roads carve through sanctuaries. Society’s obsession with bloodlines fuels this, turning reproduction into a cultural mandate. Yet, sex remains taboo, while the population explodes— a hypocritical paradox. The IVF market, valued at USD 1.06 billion in 2023 and projected to hit USD 1.82 billion by 2030, thrives on this, with a 7.8% CAGR. Billions pour into creating more lives artificially, while orphanages overflow. Adoption rates lag, stifled by DNA fixation. Logically, redirecting focus to adoption would ease population pressure and provide homes to existing children, fostering compassion over commerce. Politicians must transcend petty games. Do we have visionary leaders? Most lack basic civic sense, prioritising votes over sustainability. We need policies like China’s one-child norm, which averted 300 million births, slashing emissions by 1.8 billion tonnes annually. Though controversial, it curbed environmental strain; relaxing it now risks higher emissions, underscoring population control’s benefits. India should adapt this: enforce a one-child norm, regulate IVF strictly for medical needs and promote adoption incentives. Education is key to instil civic responsibility, sex education and respect for boundaries. Start young: teach empathy for strays and lions alike, viewing animals as cohabitants, not foes. We are on a ticking bomb. Water scarcity affects 600 million Indians, with per capita availability plummeting by 2030. Extreme heat threatens 76% of us, costing 35 million jobs and 4.5% GDP by 2030. It is late, but not too late. Wake up, India! Reject selfish proliferation, especially from those indifferent to the environment. Choose leaders who prioritise Earth over egos. Forests, fields, and wildlife plead for mercy—let us answer with action, before the bomb explodes. -Preeti Goswami, Para athlete (Para swimmer, Captain Wheelchair Basketball Team, Motorsports), social activist from Kumaon
We have all heard that there are two sides to a coin. In this case, one is the authoritarian control over other species to be “mindful” of the ecological footprint, emissions, etc. The other side is the one we refuse to see, no matter how many times we flip the coin, the side that shows us the mirror, that the cause of the burden on resources is solely our doing and our undoing as well. Every species on this earth is involved in an intricate and complex food web with one another, except humans. They all contribute as much as they consume, sometimes giving back much more than they take. Human activities are centred around pure consumption in different shades. The burden is caused by us, yet we will do everything in our power to make others bend over backwards. We will not learn ourselves because it is hard. It takes active participation to change and contribute most simply, but alas, this consumerism has made us too passive to even think without a product urging us to do so. The question of birth control and the one-child policy will have people standing on roads with slogans advocating for individual rights and privacy, and reproductive rights. Some issues are indeed genuine, encompassing the basic need of every organism to reproduce. The right of a woman to give birth, the right of a married couple or two people to have/want a child, and the very idea that all individuals will retain a level of liberty from the arbitrary action of the state. But then we are an “intellectual and intelligent” species, so working towards a higher goal that could benefit generations to come and that might save us from destroying ourselves should not be that difficult. The understanding of humans with other living beings and with this earth has been deluded, the ties cut so much so that we don’t even find that smile when we see a dog in the street or hear the chirp of the sparrow. We have imposed our sole ownership of the skies and grounds, but we are the kind of owners who keep filling the cracks till everything collapses. It would be a shame to scrap an idea which would benefit us in the long term, in a truly sustainable way, which, for once, allows us to be at the forefront of our future, not the government, executives, organisations, etc, but people. Finding a point that doesn’t repel people but brings them together is essential. Birth control had already been tried before in our country and was unpromising because of improper implementation and citizens’ aversion to the idea. Any alternative needs to keep in mind that most Indians are still traditional, rural and conservative to a point. The common man is more likely to take part in a discussion at a tea stall than make an informed decision about who to vote. The common man is also simple and often misinformed. The vast culture and demography are major factors that need to be handled by the ground-level executives in a direct engagement to discourage the dissemination of false information and keep political sentiments separate. The alternatives range from informed voluntary family planning, promotion of adoption and education. Education not only encompasses educating women to be contributing members of society and financially independent but also includes sex education. Educating women means empowering them to be independent and well-informed when making an important decision. Sex education is crucial at the school level to help understand, learn and be responsible individuals as physical intimacy is a part of being adults. It would not only prevent unplanned pregnancies but also ensure good reproductive health and prevent diseases. Voluntary family planning would involve increasing the use of contraceptives, reducing the taboo against contraceptives and understanding the primary role of the couple in decision-making without any pressure. This alternative is unfortunately not something we can push through policies and seminars, but requires active and enthusiastic community involvement, as the family is a social unit. The third alternative is promotion of adoption. I assume everyone has seen videos of animals adopting or caring for others’ babies, regardless of species. The clips and much other evidence all over the world show us that motherhood is not bound by blood, not defined by the umbilical cord or confined to the restraints of DNA. It transcends culture, species and boundaries. A mother would not be able to differentiate between a child of her own genetics and one without it. Adoption is a valid option and a worthy contender. Imagine a policy where you adopt one child and have a biological one. A child gets a parent, and a couple gets to become parents. The major roadblock in these alternatives is the social and community taboos and dissent. Although we adore Yashoda Maa and Krishna’s childhood stories, we are opposed to adoption. We were the engines of science, culture and philosophy, but we are opposed to information. Kamasutra and Arthashatra and many more texts talk about sex education and romantic relationships, but of course, it is a taboo to even talk openly about contraceptives. Any alternative or birth control policy requires people to be at the forefront and the drivers for a sustainable future, which begs us the question – are we intellectual and wise and compassionate enough to finally get up and work for our sustainable and healthy future on the only planet that has sustained us for eras? -Yashwant Dadhwadia, Director and Country Head – India, Riverrecycle Ltd, Finland
The pressure of population growth on India’s natural and rural landscapes is undeniably severe. The ‘concrete jungle’ is steadily consuming forests, wetlands and fertile fields, leading to significant biodiversity loss and a breakdown of the ‘ecological lungs’ that sustain our cities. However, the question of whether a one-child policy or a strict IVF ban is the right solution is a subject of intense debate among demographers, ethicists and policymakers. It is a common misconception that India’s population is still exploding uncontrollably. In reality, India’s Total Fertility Rate (TFR) has already fallen to 2.0, which is below the replacement level of 2.1. This means, on average, Indian couples are already having fewer than two children. Even though the birth rate has slowed, the population continues to grow because of ‘population momentum’—the large number of young people currently in their reproductive years. This growth is expected to stabilise and begin declining naturally around 2050–2060. However, China’s experience with the one-child policy provides a cautionary tale that many experts believe India should not replicate. The suggestion to restrict IVF (In-Vitro Fertilisation) to encourage adoption is a perspective that prioritises social utility over individual reproductive choice. For many, the desire for a biological child is deeply personal. Restricting IVF could be seen as an overreach of the state into the private lives of citizens. While there are many children in need, the adoption process in India is notoriously slow and complex. Simply closing IVF centres would not automatically place children in homes. The legal and administrative infrastructure for adoption would need a massive overhaul first. Historically, the most effective ‘population control’ in India has been the education and economic empowerment of women, which naturally leads to smaller, healthier families. -Manoj Kumar Chaturvedi, Bank officer and animal activist, Lucknow, UP
Forests, fertile fields, villages, lakes and ponds across India are steadily giving way to urban expansion. We see it every day, new layouts where fields once existed, water bodies shrinking behind compound walls and villages dissolving into city edges. In response, public debate often turns toward controlling stray animals or managing wildlife populations. Yet when the conversation shifts to human population growth, it suddenly becomes uncomfortable. This discomfort is understandable. Population is deeply personal. But as someone who looks at land, space and cities for a living, I find it hard to ignore the simple spatial reality: land is finite, but our patterns of growth are not. The question posed, whether the Indian government should shift focus to controlling human population, even though measures like a one-child policy or stricter regulation of IVF, deserves careful thought, not because it has an easy answer, but because the consequences of avoiding the discussion are already visible on the ground. That said, ignoring population trends entirely would also be irresponsible. Resources such as water, soil and biodiversity do have limits. The challenge is deciding how to respond. History shows that strict, coercive population policies may control numbers but often leave behind social imbalances, ageing populations, gender disparities and long-term demographic stress. India’s social and cultural diversity makes such blanket policies especially risky. A more grounded approach is to ask why population growth remains high in certain contexts. The answers are rarely ideological. They are tied to education, healthcare access, economic security and social safety nets. Where these systems are strong, family sizes naturally stabilise. Where they are weak, limiting family size feels like a risk rather than a responsible choice. The discussion around IVF centres and adoption also needs thought. IVF represents hope for many families and cannot be reduced to a number debate. At the same time, adoption in India remains. Protests take place, but they struggle for attention in a world driven by screens and instant gratification. The silence that follows is not indifference; it is exhaustion and distraction. Yet the land remembers every decision we make. From where I stand, the real shift India needs is not simply toward controlling population, but toward controlling how we plan and build. Architects, planners, landscape architects and ecologists are trained to see connections between land and water, density and infrastructure, growth and consequence. These perspectives are not luxuries. They are necessities in a country where every planning decision has long-term ecological impact. If we design cities that grow inward instead of outward, protect agricultural and ecological zones, and treat land as a living system rather than a commodity, population pressure becomes far more manageable. Without this spatial thinking, even the strictest population policies will only delay the problem, not solve it. In the end, the question is not whether India should control its population, but whether it is willing to take responsibility for how human presence reshapes the land. Sustainability will not come from fear-based limits alone, but from thoughtful planning, ethical governance and informed choices because the future of our forests, fields, and water bodies does not depend solely on how many people we are, but on how wisely we choose to live together on the land we share. -Ar. Anand PJ, Architect, sustainable design enthusiast
Forests, fertile agricultural land, villages, lakes and ponds are slowly disappearing under the pressure of rapid urban expansion. The main reason behind this crisis is the uncontrolled growth of the human population. While there is constant debate about controlling the population of stray animals or managing wildlife conflicts, very little serious discussion is held about controlling the human population. In my view, the time has come for the Indian government to shift its focus towards responsible population control. India is one of the most densely populated countries in the world. Every year, millions of people are added to the population, putting enormous pressure on land, water, food, housing, health services and employment. Cities are expanding without proper planning, swallowing nearby villages, farmlands, forests and water bodies. This expansion not only destroys nature but also affects climate balance, food security and the quality of life for future generations. It is a globally known fact that the uncontrolled human population is one of the primary reasons behind all the global warming and climate change that we are facing, followed by the extinction of resources as well as key species. This was observed and predicted by our ancestors long ago, and still, we could not accept and address it so as to be able to bring about control or balance. Today, we are at the receiving end of our own mistakes, but are still not accepting and addressing the real issues, which are only taking us towards further destruction. The whole planet, including our forests, lakes, fertile fields, open spaces, atmosphere and even the sea, is falling prey to our uncontrolled population and the uncontrolled and never-ending needs as a single species. The solutions are right in front of us, but the biggest problem is that we are not fully implementing them as required, but doing it as per our convenience. We are rightly focusing on controlling the population of stray animals and, to an extent, even wildlife, but we also need to include humans in this scientific approach to address the situation and head towards implementing the solution. The root cause behind almost every problem that mankind and the planet are facing today is the exploding human population. But we are trying all other things rather than addressing our own population growth as a species. Controlling the human population is one of the most important things today, as whatever we have exploited or are exploiting or will be exploiting will only be to meet the needs of our growing population as a species. Right from air, water and land resources to everything directly and indirectly associated with the problem-causing and solution-finding revolves around it, and we need to accept and act accordingly. We should also not forget to understand the fact that all possible solutions that we work towards should be of a type that is nearest to easy implementation and not something which may look good or sound well on paper and in meetings inside offices. The one-child policy is something that should have been adopted long back; however, it is never a bad idea to opt for and adopt what is necessary, and it is still doable. However, we also need to think about the no child policy, and it should actually be seen as a policy and not just as a decision, so that it can be regulated as well as implemented wherever necessary and possible. Similarly, adoption can be promoted, but this also in most cases it remains a matter of choice. However, things have to start somewhere, and there can be no other time better than now to start with the attempt to bring the change that we need and look forward to for our own well-being and survival as a species.- Adv Pawan Sharma, Founder & President – RAWW (Resqink Association for Wildlife Welfare), Mumbai
Forests, fertile agricultural land, villages, lakes, and ponds are slowly disappearing under the pressure of rapid urban expansion. The main reason behind this crisis is the uncontrolled growth of the human population. While there is constant debate about controlling the population of stray animals or managing wildlife conflicts, very little serious discussion is held about controlling the human population. In my view, the time has come for the Indian government to shift its focus toward responsible population control. India is one of the most densely populated countries in the world. Every year, millions of people are added to the population, putting enormous pressure on land, water, food, housing, health services, and employment. Cities are expanding without proper planning, swallowing up nearby villages, farmlands, forests, and water bodies. This expansion not only destroys nature but also affects climate balance, food security, and the quality of life for future generations. Ironically, when wild animals enter human settlements due to the loss of forests, they are blamed or even killed. When stray animals increase in number, calls are raised for strict population control measures. But when it comes to humans, the same seriousness is missing. Humans are the only species that consume far more than what nature can regenerate. Therefore, population control is not anti-human; it is pro-nature and pro-future. India once took a positive step by promoting the “Hum Do, Hamare Do” (We two, our two) policy. This helped in spreading awareness about small families. However, with time, the message weakened. Today, incentives for having fewer children are limited, and enforcement is almost absent. In such a situation, the government must consider stronger and more effective population control measures. The idea of a one-child policy is controversial, but it should not be dismissed without discussion. A carefully designed policy, suited to Indian social realities, can help stabilise population growth. This does not mean harsh punishment or force. Instead, it can involve incentives for families who choose to have one child, such as better education support, healthcare benefits, tax relief, and priority in government schemes. At the same time, repeated violations without valid reasons may invite restrictions on certain benefits. Another important area that needs attention is the rapidly growing IVF (In Vitro Fertilisation) industry. While IVF is a blessing for couples facing medical infertility, it is increasingly being used as a lifestyle choice rather than a medical necessity. This raises ethical and social concerns in an already overpopulated country. Strict regulation of IVF centres is necessary to ensure that these technologies are used responsibly and only for genuine medical reasons. At the same time, the government should actively promote child adoption. India has thousands of orphaned, abandoned, and neglected children who need loving homes. Encouraging adoption not only provides a better life to these children but also reduces the pressure of adding to more population. Adoption should be made simpler, faster, transparent, and socially acceptable through awareness campaigns and legal reforms.
Population control should also focus on education, especially of girls and women. Studies worldwide show that educated women tend to marry later and have fewer, healthier children. Access to contraception, reproductive health services, and honest family planning information must be available to all, especially in rural and economically weaker areas. Some argue that the population is an asset and that a young population supports economic growth. While this is partly true, uncontrolled population growth without adequate jobs, education, and resources turns this advantage into a burden. Unemployment, poverty, slums, crime, and environmental degradation are direct results of population pressure. Population control is not about denying life but about ensuring a dignified and sustainable life for everyone. If forests continue to vanish, water sources dry up, and food-producing land is lost, even a large population will not survive comfortably. Future generations will pay the price for our inaction today. In conclusion, India urgently needs a serious, balanced, and humane population policy. The government must courageously address human population growth with the same urgency shown toward animal population control. A combination of awareness, incentives, regulation of fertility services, promotion of adoption, and women’s education can help India move toward a sustainable future. Ignoring this issue any longer will only deepen the environmental and social crisis we are already facing. -HN Singh (Lions International Faculty, SPHEEHA Member, Naturalist, HAM Radio Licensee, Trekker & Mountaineer)
भारतीय सरकार का जनसंख्या नियंत्रण पर ध्यान देना एक अत्यावश्यक मामला है, देश की तेजी से बढ़ती जनसंख्या और इसके संसाधनों, बुनियादी ढांचे और पर्यावरण पर पड़ने वाले प्रभाव को देखते हुए। हालांकि एक बच्चे की नीति को लागू करना एक कठोर उपाय हो सकता है, लेकिन ऐसी नीति के फायदे और नुकसान पर विचार करना आवश्यक है। एक तरफ, जनसंख्या वृद्धि को नियंत्रित करने से पानी, भोजन और ऊर्जा जैसे संसाधनों पर दबाव कम हो सकता है, और आवास, परिवहन और स्वास्थ्य देखभाल जैसे बुनियादी ढांचे पर दबाव कम हो सकता है। इसके अलावा, यह वनों और जैव विविधता के संरक्षण जैसे सकारात्मक पर्यावरणीय प्रभाव भी डाल सकता है। हालांकि, जनसंख्या नियंत्रण एक संवेदनशील विषय है और किसी भी नीति को व्यक्तिगत अधिकारों और राष्ट्रीय हितों के बीच संतुलन बनाना होगा। एक बच्चे की नीति भारत की विविध आजादी और सांस्कृतिक संदर्भ को देखते हुए सबसे अच्छा तरीका नहीं हो सकता है। इसके बजाय, सरकार शिक्षा और परिवार नियोजन संसाधनों तक पहुंच में सुधार, महिलाओं को सशक्त बनाने और आर्थिक अवसरों को बढ़ावा देने, साथ ही साथ स्थायी प्रथाओं और पर्यावरणीय जागरूकता को प्रोत्साहित करने पर ध्यान केंद्रित कर सकती है। सरकार गोद लेने को बढ़ावा दे सकती है और आई.वी.एफ. केंद्रों को नियंत्रित कर सकती है ताकि वे अधिक जनसंख्या में योगदान न दें। अधिक जनसंख्या के मूल कारणों जैसे गरीबी, शिक्षा की कमी और स्वास्थ्य देखभाल तक सीमित पहुंच को संबोधित करना एक अधिक प्रभावी तरीका हो सकता है। इन मूलभूत मुद्दों को संबोधित करके, सरकार सभी के लिए एक अधिक स्थायी और समान समाज बना सकती है। आखिरकार, जनसंख्या नियंत्रण एक जटिल समस्या है जिसके लिए एक बहुस्तरीय दृष्टिकोण की आवश्यकता है। सरकार को भारत के लिए एक बेहतर भविष्य बनाने के लिए शिक्षा, परिवार नियोजन और स्थायी विकास को प्राथमिकता देनी चाहिए। -डॉ. मोनिका रघुवंशी, राष्ट्रीय कार्यक्रम संयोजक(एन. वाई. पी. बी), अधिकारी (एन. आर.जे.क.एस.एस.)
Topic of the month: Topic of the month: Responsible and mindful consumption can go a long way to help conserve our remaining natural resources. What do you think are the 'wants' we should stop the demand for to help nature and biodiversity? Send your replies in not more than 800 words, either in Hindi or English, to [email protected] along with your recent photo and designation.
Leave a comment