World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision

World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision
On 21st June, 2017, the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat issued World Population Prospects Report: The 2017 Revision.
According to the results of the 2017 Revision, the world’s population numbered nearly 7.6 billion as of mid-2017.
The reports shows that the world’s population is projected to increase by slightly more than one billion people over the next 13 years, and will reach 8.6 billion in 2030, and to increase further to 9.8 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion by 2100.
Currently, the population of China is approximately 1.41 billion compared with 1.34 billion in India that is 19 percent and 18 percent of the world’s population respectively.
India’s population is projected to continue growing for several decades to around 1.5 billion in 2030 while the population of China is expected to remain stable until the 2030s, after which it may begin a slow decline.
In this way India will be the world’s most populous country by 2024-2030.
According to repots data, ten countries are expected to account collectively for more than half of the world’s projected population increase over the period 2017-2050.
These ten countries are India, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Pakistan, Ethiopia, the United Republic of Tanzania, the United States of America, Uganda, Indonesia and Egypt.
Nigeria’s population, currently the seventh largest in the world, is growing most rapidly.
The population of Nigeria is projected to surpass that of the United States shortly before 2050, at which point it would become the third largest country in the world.
According to the report in 2017, an estimated 50.4 per cent of the world’s population was male and 49.6 per cent female.
Current estimates indicate that roughly 83 million people are being added to the world’s population every year.

UKPCS-2016 full length test

UKPCS-2016 full length test

STARTING :9TH JULY.
FEES : Rs 3500/
English / hindi medium
online / offline both
Practice is key for writing better answer in mains exam.

India have topped the medal tally for first time in the history of Asian Athletics Championships.

India have topped the medal tally for first time in the history of Asian Athletics Championships.
In a stunning show of dominance on the fourth and final day of competitions in Bhubaneshwar today, India clinched five gold, 1 silver and 3 bronze.
With that, the hosts ended the championships on top with a haul of 29 medals which included 12 gold, 5 silver and 12 bronze.

Needed: A mutual restraint pact with China

Needed: A mutual restraint pact with China
The 2015 India-China statement on ‘respect and sensitivity to each other’s concerns’ should be narrowed down to primary concerns and core interests
During Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Beijing in May 2015, India and China issued a well-considered joint statement. The first section of the document, subtitled “Strengthening Political Dialogue And Strategic Communication”, stated: “Full use will be made of the opportunities provided by the presence of their leaders at various multilateral fora to hold consultations on bilateral relations and issues of regional and global importance.”

Yet when such an opportunity was presented last week in the G20 summit, both sides went out of their way to insist that they had not sought a meeting. Against the backdrop of a serious stand-off along the border, there could be no starker proof of the fraying of India-China ties over the past two years.

MORE FROM LIVEMINT »
Pakistan loses its veto vote on India’s bilateral relations
Sikkim standoff: India not entitled to make claims on behalf of Bhutan, says Chinese media
Stand-off with China back in focus after PM Modi’s return from foreign trip
To consider why things have come to this pass, it is important to understand how this difficult relationship was managed over the past 25 years. The Border Peace and Tranquility Agreement of 1993 was a decisive break from the pattern of Sino-Indian relations since the 1962 war. The agreement formalized the two sides’ commitment to maintaining status quo on the border until they arrived at a negotiated settlement. The agreement also enabled them to bracket the boundary issue and allow the bilateral relationship to develop in other areas.

The agreement was enabled by a particular domestic and international conjuncture. Having embarked on major economic reforms, prime minister P.V. Narasimha Rao was keen to ensure a stable relationship with China. This would help check defence expenditure and allow India to focus on its internal transformation.

In the wake of the Tiananmen massacre and the ensuing international opprobrium, China too was keen to avoid confrontation with its adversaries and create a suitable external environment to spur its economic growth. Both China and India were also reconciled to the fact of American unipolarity and sought to leverage it for their own power and purposes.

The peace and tranquillity agreements of 1993 and 1996 delivered their core promise. When certain aspects of them, such as clarification of the Line of Actual Control, proved difficult, the two sides responded not by restricting cooperation but expanding it. Think of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s bold decision in 2003 to embark on political negotiations on the border. Over the following decade, the common refrain was: “There is enough room for the growth of both China and India”.

The strategic and political context today is rather different. Having gained an upper hand on border infrastructure, the Chinese are keen to prevent India from catching up. Hence, the new forms of Chinese military activity along the border over the past five years.

More broadly, China’s relative power in the international system has risen since the global financial crisis. Not surprisingly, China’s definition of its core interests and its willingness to pursue them has also increased. India’s interests too have expanded with its growing power. Not only is it prepared to adopt a more assertive posture on the border, but it also harbours concerns about South China Sea and China’s rising footprint along India’s periphery.

Even as New Delhi attempts to resolve the current stand-off, it should think ahead. We now need a restraining pact with China. Diplomatic history is replete, as historian Paul Schroeder reminds us, with such examples of managing antagonistic relations by associative means—also known as pacta de contrahendo.

The Holy Alliance after the Napoleonic Wars stabilized Russia’s relations with Austria and Prussia—countries that had been its enemies recently and that continued to compete with Russia along its periphery. The Entente Cordiale, similarly, helped stabilize Britain’s ties with its historic enemy, France. Contrary to popular wisdom, the entente was aimed not at a rising Germany but at managing Britain’s rivalry with France over colonial possessions.

What could be the elements of an agreement on mutual restraint with China?

The 2015 statement spoke of “respect and sensitivity to each other’s concerns, interests and aspirations”. This should be narrowed down to primary concerns and core interests. For instance, Chinese military activism along the border is a primary concern for India. Not so the political cover they provide in the UN to Pakistan’s sponsorship of terrorism. Yet India should make it clear that Pakistani terrorism jeopardizes regional security—especially in the context of Chinese projects in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.

Both sides should also set aside aspirational or status goals: be it India’s desire for Chinese support on Nuclear Suppliers Group membership, or China’s desire for Indian support on the Belt and Road Initiative and China’s leadership more generally.

As for the border, both sides could build on previous agreements. Former national security adviser Shivshankar Menon has observed that neither side has explored the reference in the 1993 agreement (and subsequent statements) to the need for “mutual and equal security” and for agreement on force levels. An accord based on these principles could help arrest the downward slide on the border and assure both sides of their core interests pending a boundary settlement.

It is easy to naysay the possibility of such a restraining pact. However, diplomacy is not about pessimism but realism—especially if the alternative is heading to hell in a handcart.

Ahmedabad takes giant leap, becomes India's first World Heritage City

Ahmedabad takes giant leap, becomes India's first World Heritage City
The historic city Ahmedabad has been declared as a World Heritage City at the 41st session of Unesco's world heritage committee meet in Karkow in Poland on Saturday. This day (July 8, 2017) will be remembered in history as for the first time an Indian city was declared a world heritage property.
The nomination of Ahmedabad was supported by close to 20 countries, including Turkey, Lebanon, Tunisia, Portugal, Peru, Kazakhistan, Vietnam, Finland, Azerbaijan, Jmaica, Croatia,Zimbabwe, Tanzania, South Korea, Croatia, Angolam, Cuba, and the host country of the Unesco session, Poland.
The countries unanimously supported Ahmedabad citing a secular co-existence of Islamic, Hindu and Jain communities along with exemplary architecture of intricately carved wooden havelis dating back hundreds of years. The countries also recognized that the city was a cradle for India's non-violent freedom struggle led by Mahatma Gandhi.

The walled city has 26 ASI-protected structures, hundreds of 'pols' that capture the essence of community living and numerous sites associated with Mahatma Gandhi who lived here from 1915 to 1930.
It will now join the likes of Paris, Cairo and Edinburgh. Of the 287 world heritage cities across the globe, there were only two cities in the Indian subcontinent-- Bhaktpur in Nepal and Galle in Sri Lanka. The Unesco tag will add immense value to the city and boost tourism.

ukpcs mains :test series running.make out of it by doing writting practice. lower pcs mains batch from 22nd july.

ukpcs mains :test series running.make out of it by doing writting practice.
lower pcs mains batch from 22nd july.
12 candidates out of 16 had qualified ukpcs mains 2012.

NGT declares 100m from edge of Ganga river as ‘no-development zone’

NGT declares 100m from edge of Ganga river as ‘no-development zone’
National Green Tribunal (NGT) also prohibits dumping of waste within 500 metres of Ganga river, declares Rs50,000 fine on anyone found doing so
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Thursday passed a slew of directions to rejuvenate the Ganga river, declaring a “No-Development Zone” 100 metres from the edge of the river between Haridwar and Unnao and prohibiting dumping of waste within 500 metres from the river.

A bench headed by NGT chairperson Swatanter Kumar also declared that an environment compensation of Rs50,000 will be imposed on anyone who dumps waste in the Ganga river.

The apex environment regulator directed all authorities concerned to complete various projects including setting up of a sewage treatment plant and cleaning drains within two years. It also said the Uttar Pradesh government should be “duty-bound” to shift tanneries within six weeks, from Jajmau in Kanpur to leather parks in Unnao or any other place it considers appropriate.

The NGT also directed the Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand governments to formulate guidelines for religious activities on the ghats of Ganga or its tributaries. The tribunal also appointed a supervisory committee, headed by the secretary of the water resources ministry and comprising IIT professors and officials from UP government to oversee implementation of the directions passed in its 543- page verdict. It also asked the committee to submit reports at regular intervals.

The NGT said the concept of zero liquid discharge and online monitoring of affluents should not be applied to industrial units. It said that all industrial units falling in the catchment area of the Ganga river should be stopped from indiscriminate extraction of groundwater.

The tribunal had heard the arguments of the Centre, the Uttar Pradesh government, pollution control boards and various other stakeholders for almost 18 months before reserving the judgement on 31 May.

The green panel has divided the work of cleaning the river in different segments—Gomukh to Haridwar (Phase-I), Haridwar to Unnao (termed as segment B of Phase-I), Unnao to border of Uttar Pradesh, border of Uttar Pradesh to border of Jharkhand and border of Jharkhand to Bay of Bengal. It has already delivered the verdict in December 2015 with regard to first phase between Gomukh to Haridwar. The verdict came on a 1985 PIL of noted environment activist M.C. Mehta which was transferred to the NGT from the Supreme Court in 2014.