India’s pledge to reach net-zero by 2070 is a landmark political commitment — but commitments are only as just as the pathways used to realise goals. The central question is not merely how to abate emissions, but who bears the social and economic cost of that transformation, and who appropriates the gains. A credible net-zero strategy for India must place labour markets, regional equity and fiscal realism at the centre of policymaking; otherwise, the transition may deepen structural inequalities and provoke distributive conflict.
The scale of the undertaking is formidable. According to the report Scenarios towards Viksit Bharat and Net Zero: Financing Needs by NITI Aayog, for the year 2026, India will require approximately US$22.7 trillion in cumulative investment to pursue a net-zero pathway by 2070, implying an incremental requirement of around US$ 8.1 trillion over a current-policy trajectory. This is not a sectoral adjustment; it constitutes a wholesale reconfiguration of capital allocation, infrastructure development and industrial strategy.
Within this aggregate, the electricity sector commands prominence. According to Scenarios towards Viksit Bharat and Net Zero-Sectoral Insights: Power, the power system will demand multi-trillion-dollar investments across renewable generation, battery storage, green hydrogen integration, transmission expansion and grid flexibility. Electricity demand is projected to grow substantially as transport, cooking and segments of industry electrify. The design of these investments will determine whether employment is geographically concentrated in already-advantaged regions or strategically deployed to coal-dependent districts in need of diversification.
The employment question is inherently dual. Decarbonisation destroys certain jobs even as it creates others. As per the report World Energy Employment 2024 by the International Energy Agency, in 2024, global energy employment reached approximately 67 million jobs, with clean energy sectors accounting for most of the net job growth. Solar photovoltaics, battery manufacturing and grid infrastructure have emerged as significant sources of labour demand. However, these aggregate gains conceal profound regional asymmetries. Without domestic manufacturing strategies and skill alignment, India risks importing equipment while exporting employment opportunities.
This tension is stark in coal-bearing states such as Jharkhand, Odisha and Chhattisgarh. Coal continues to serve not only as an energy source but as a fiscal and employment backbone. As per the Public Sector Undertakings chapter of the Annual Report 2025–26 by the Union Ministry of Coal, Coal India Limited alone employs 214,333 workers (including subsidiaries) as on January 1, 2026, with many more engaged indirectly through contract labour, transportation and ancillary services. Mining royalties and associated revenues underpin state finances. An unmanaged transition — marked by premature plant closures or abrupt procurement shifts — would risk precipitating localised economic distress, urban migration pressures and social unrest.
The concept of a “just transition” is therefore not a rhetorical flourish; it is an economic necessity. As per the report World Employment Social Outlook 2018: Greening with Jobs by the International Labour Organization (ILO), in 2018, climate mitigation policies, if accompanied by active labour market interventions and social protection, could result in net global job gains by 2030. The ILO underscores that reskilling, social dialogue and anticipatory planning are indispensable to avoid concentrated job losses in fossil-fuel-dependent regions.
For India, a just transition rests on three urgent pillars: anticipatory regional planning, domestic value-chain development and fiscal innovation. Coal-dependent districts need transparent roadmaps, labour audits and social protection frameworks that precede closures. Renewable expansion must be tied to domestic manufacturing — from green steel to batteries and grid equipment — so that climate ambition translates into employment generation. Finally, a dedicated Transition Stabilisation Fund, supported by carbon levies and climate finance, could finance reskilling, enterprise diversification and ecological restoration, ensuring decarbonisation strengthens rather than fractures regional economies.
India’s net-zero pathway demands honest reckoning with industrial trade-offs: expanding steel and infrastructure while locking in coal-based capacity risks stranded assets and fiscal strain, making climate-risk disclosure and binding transition plans imperative. With a young workforce and highly educated unemployment, the green transition could create quality jobs only if anchored in deliberate industrial strategy and skill alignment. Ultimately, net-zero must be judged by distributive justice — safeguarding affordability, reliability and employment — lest it harden existing inequalities rather than deliver inclusive transformation.
Purna Chandra Padhan teaches at the Xavier Labour Relations Institute (XLRI) in Jamshedpur, Jharkhand, India.
Sushanta Mahapatra teaches economics at ICFAI School of Social Sciences, IFHE, Hyderabad
Madan Meher teaches economics at Amity Business School, Amity University, Chhattisgarh
Views expressed are the authors’ own and don’t necessarily reflect those of Down To Earth