From 2025, India’s National Clean Air Programme will link funding to how cities perform across five priority action areas.
But major pollution sources such as biomass and waste burning have been pushed to “need-based” categories requiring central approval.
A parallel ward-level assessment under NCAP gives these sources the highest weightage, exposing a policy disconnect.
Experts warn that uniform targets and misaligned incentives risk undermining real air quality gains.
From 2025 onwards, cities covered under India’s National Clean Air Programme (NCAP) are required to utilise allocated funds across five designated priority focus areas to improve air quality. According to the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) notification dated May 14, 2025, access to NCAP funds will be performance-linked, with cities evaluated on their implementation of activities within these focus areas.
Under the revised guidelines for the release and utilisation of NCAP funds, priority has been accorded to road dust mitigation, greening of open spaces and traffic corridors, vehicular emission control, pollution control at crematoriums, and public awareness initiatives. While these sectors are undoubtedly important contributors to urban air quality management, several major pollution sources, such as biomass burning, municipal solid waste (MSW) burning, and construction and demolition (C&D) waste, have been categorised as “additional” or “need-based” activities.
Addressing these sources now requires prior approval from the National Steering Committee, particularly when activities fall outside the scope of Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM) 2.0. As a result, cities have limited flexibility to address some of their most pressing local pollution challenges.
Biomass and municipal solid waste burning are major contributors to particulate matter pollution (PM₁₀ and PM₂.₅) in many Indian cities. Numerous studies have linked these sources to severe health impacts, especially in low-income and densely populated neighbourhoods.
Despite their significance, these pollution sources are not treated as core priorities under the revised NCAP funding framework. This disconnect raises questions about whether the programme’s funding priorities truly reflect on-ground pollution realities.
Interestingly, a parallel framework under NCAP — the Ward-Level Swachh Vayu Sarvekshan, proposed for implementation from 2025–26 onwards — takes a markedly different approach. Unlike the city-level NCAP guidelines, SVWS places strong emphasis on these overlooked pollution sources and focuses on local, community-level pollution, particularly biomass and municipal solid waste burning. In fact, these sources receive the highest weightage in the SVWS scoring framework.
Under the SVWS scoring framework, measures to abate biomass and MSW burning receive the highest weightage, followed by road dust mitigation, management of dust from C&D activities, abatement of emissions from other sources, and information, education, and communication (IEC) activities for public awareness.
This ward-level framework adopts a more localised and inclusive lens, recognising pollution sources that directly affect communities. While not perfect, it aligns far more closely with lived pollution realities than the current NCAP funding priorities. Its focus areas reflect on-ground conditions more accurately, although even this framework could further strengthen its treatment of certain combustion-related sources with serious health impacts.
The divergence between NCAP’s city-level funding priorities and SVWS’s ward-level assessments underscores the urgent need for a standardised, science-based evaluation framework. Such a framework should incorporate sector-specific action metrics, with appropriate weightage informed by emission inventories and source apportionment studies, and adopt a multi-pollutant assessment approach that tracks both PM₁₀ and PM₂.₅ to more accurately capture health impacts.
Equally important is clear alignment between funded interventions and evaluation criteria. Without this coherence, cities may be incentivised to focus on activities that score well on paper but deliver limited real-world air quality benefits.
Another critical limitation of the current NCAP framework lies in its uniform target-setting approach. All 130 non-attainment cities are assigned annual pollution reduction targets primarily based on population size and PM₁₀ concentration levels. This method often ignores key contextual factors such as geographic spread, topography, and local meteorological and climatic conditions, all of which play a significant role in determining pollution levels.
Indian cities experience widely varying climatic conditions that influence pollutant dispersion and accumulation. Delhi, for instance, faces frequent temperature inversions, low winter wind speeds, and high vehicular and industrial emissions, leading to severe particulate accumulation. In contrast, cities such as Dewas in Madhya Pradesh or Kala Amb in Himachal Pradesh have lower population densities, different terrain, and distinct weather patterns that naturally affect pollution levels. Coastal cities such as Chennai benefit from regular sea breezes that help disperse pollutants, while landlocked cities like Kanpur and Patna often suffer from stagnant air masses during winter.
Due to these variations, comparing all 130 non-attainment cities against the same pollution reduction targets creates an uneven playing field and can lead to distorted performance assessments. For instance, even if Delhi reduces its PM₁₀ levels from 178 µg/m³ in 2017–18 to 125 µg/m³ in 2024–25—a reduction of 53 µg/m³—it may still be classified as a low-performing city. Meanwhile, Dewas might reduce its PM₁₀ levels by just 22 µg/m³ over the same period but be considered a top performer, despite facing very different circumstances.
A more effective and equitable approach would involve categorising cities based on characteristics such as population density, urban structure, topography, and prevailing climatic conditions. Cities with similar profiles could then be grouped together and assessed against realistic, data-driven targets that reflect local challenges and capacities.
Differentiated target-setting would not only improve fairness in performance evaluation but also enable more strategic allocation of financial and technical resources. Cities facing greater structural or climatic constraints would receive appropriate flexibility and support, while progress would be measured in a manner that genuinely reflects on-ground improvements.
Going forward, integrating region-specific air quality modelling, detailed emission inventories, and climate data into NCAP’s target-setting and evaluation processes will be essential for strengthening the programme’s effectiveness and ensuring sustained improvements in air quality across India.
As NCAP enters its next phase, its success will hinge on how well policies are implemented on the ground. This means better alignment between how funds are allocated, how city performance is assessed, and the actual pollution challenges cities face. Bridging the gap between NCAP and the Ward-Level Swachh Vayu Sarvekshan is a crucial step in this direction. A more integrated approach would ensure that assessments capture local pollution sources and neighbourhood-level realities, rather than relying solely on broad, city-wide indicators.
Equally important is recognising that Indian cities are far from uniform. They differ widely in geography, climate, urban form, and pollution profiles, and targets must therefore be realistic, fair, and tailored to individual city contexts.
Finally, the future of NCAP must be grounded in science. Decisions on funding and performance should be based on robust evidence, including source apportionment studies, emission inventories, and air quality data—particularly for PM₂.₅, which poses the greatest health risks. By setting realistic, data-driven targets and prioritising real outcomes over procedural compliance, NCAP can become significantly more effective. If implemented well, these reforms could lead to cleaner air and healthier lives for millions of people across India’s cities.