GS Paper IV 2018 · Q5 (Section A)
2 parts · 10 marks and 150 words each Ethics in public administration X-Ray · Core #1Q5(a) 10 marks · 150 words · answered on its own
Suppose the Government of India is thinking of constructing a dam in a mountain valley bound by forests and inhabited by ethnic communities. What rational policy should it resort to in dealing with unforeseen contingencies?
Approach · directive: “what rational policy (for unforeseen contingencies)”
What it asks · Propose a rational, rights-respecting policy that prepares a dam project in a forested valley inhabited by ethnic communities for risks no one can fully foresee.
It asks 2 things — answer each
- Explain why contingencies are likely in a forested mountain valley inhabited by ethnic communities
- Propose a rational policy to prevent, prepare for and respond to them
Open with · Nehru hailed dams as temples of modern India, but in a forested valley home to ethnic communities many risks cannot be foreseen; a rational policy plans for that uncertainty through consent, precaution, staged construction and the capacity to adapt.
Cover
- A flowchart of the policy: consent and rights, precautionary appraisal, staged construction, rehabilitation first, independent monitoring.
- Consent before concrete: Gram Sabhas under PESA, 1996 and claims under the Forest Rights Act, 2006; Niyamgiri (2013), clearance to follow the Gram Sabha's decision.
- Precaution: Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum (1996), scientific uncertainty no reason to delay prevention and the onus on the developer; landslide, flood and seismic risks and smaller alternatives studied first.
- Staged and reversible: Narmada (2000), the dam to rise only pari passu with rehabilitation, after consulting grievance authorities; contingency fund, emergency plan, early warning.
- Rehabilitation and monitoring: no eviction till forest rights are verified (Section 4(5), Forest Rights Act); land and livelihood before submergence; an independent panel with community members.
Close with · Rawls's maximin reasoning as the final test: judge each option by the worst it could do to the worst-placed, and plan the dam around those who stand to lose most.
Add value (verified)
- Supreme Court, Orissa Mining Corporation v. MoEF (Niyamgiri, 18 April 2013): the Gram Sabha was to decide the community's claims, and the Environment Ministry's Stage II forest clearance had to follow the Gram Sabha's decisions.Orissa Mining Corporation Ltd v. Ministry of Environment & Forest, Supreme Court, 18 April 2013 — Indian Kanoon ↗“the Gram Sabha would take a decision on them within three months and communicate the same to the MOEF, through the State Government. On the conclusion of the proceeding before the Gram Sabha determining the claims submitted before it, the MoEF shall take a final decision on the grant of Stage II clearance for the Bauxite Mining Project in the light of the decisions of the Gram Sabha”
- Section 4(5) of the Forest Rights Act, 2006, as read by the Supreme Court in the Niyamgiri case: no forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribe or traditional forest dweller can be evicted till recognition and verification of rights is complete.Orissa Mining Corporation Ltd v. Ministry of Environment & Forest, Supreme Court, 18 April 2013 — Indian Kanoon ↗“Section 4(5) of the Act is very specific and provides that no member of a forest dwelling Scheduled Tribe or other traditional forest dwellers shall be evicted or removed from the forest land under his occupation till the recognition and verification procedure is complete.”
- Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India (Supreme Court, 28 August 1996): under the precautionary principle, where there are threats of serious and irreversible damage, lack of scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing preventive measures, and the onus of proof is on the developer to show that the action is environmentally benign.Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India, Supreme Court, 28 August 1996 — Indian Kanoon ↗“(ii) Where there are threats of serious and irreversible damage lack of scientific certainly should not be used as the reason for postponing, measures to prevent environmental depredation. (iii)The "Onus of proof" is on the actor or the developer/industrial to show that his action is environmentally benign.”
- Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India (Supreme Court, 18 October 2000): further raising of the dam's height only pari passu with relief and rehabilitation and on clearance by the Relief and Rehabilitation Sub-group, given after consulting the three Grievance Redressal Authorities.Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India, Supreme Court, 18 October 2000 — Indian Kanoon ↗“Further raising of the height will be only pari passu with the implementation of the relief and rehabilitation and on the clearance by the Relief and Rehabilitation Sub-group. The Relief and Rehabilitation Sub-Group will give clearance of further construction after consulting the three Grievances Redressal Authorities.”
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on John Rawls: Rawls argues that it is rational for the parties to use maximin reasoning, maximising the minimum level of primary goods that the citizens they represent might find themselves with.John Rawls — Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy ↗“Rawls argues that it is rational for the parties to use maximin reasoning: to maximize the minimum level of primary goods that the citizens they represent might find themselves with.”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2018, GS Paper IV — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 3 Oct 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer· 224words · Minimalist IAS
Nehru hailed dams as the 'temples of modern India', but in a forested valley home to ethnic communities many risks cannot be foreseen. A rational policy plans for that uncertainty through consent, precaution, staged construction and the capacity to adapt.
- Consent and rights
- Precautionary appraisal
- Staged construction
- Rehabilitation first
- Independent monitoring
- Consent before concrete: consult Gram Sabhas under PESA, 1996 and settle claims under the Forest Rights Act, 2006; in Niyamgiri (2013) the forest clearance had to follow the Gram Sabha's decision.
- Precaution over optimism: Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum (1996) holds that where damage may be serious and irreversible, scientific uncertainty is no reason to delay prevention, and the onus lies on the developer; so study landslide, flood and seismic risks and smaller alternatives first.
- Staged and reversible: in the Narmada case (2000) the Supreme Court let the dam rise only pari passu with rehabilitation, each stage cleared after consulting grievance authorities; add a contingency fund, an emergency plan and early warning.
- Rehabilitation and monitoring: no eviction till forest rights are recognised and verified (Section 4(5), Forest Rights Act); land and livelihood before submergence; an independent panel, with community members, that can pause work.
Rawls's maximin reasoning supplies the final test: judge each option by the worst it could do to the worst-placed, and plan the dam around those who stand to lose most.
Prepared by Minimalist IAS to the answer standard of Shivam Singh (mentor, 7 years) · facts checked against official sources (how we verify) · updated 3 Oct 2026. UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.
Q5(b) 10 marks · 150 words · answered on its own
Explain the process of resolving ethical dilemmas in Public Administration.
Approach · directive: “explain (the process)”
What it asks · Explain, step by step, how a public administrator works through a conflict between two legitimate duties to a decision that is lawful, fair and defensible.
It asks 2 things — answer each
- Explain what an ethical dilemma in public administration is
- Explain the step-by-step process of resolving it, with an example
Open with · An ethical dilemma defined as two legitimate duties in conflict, so that honouring one sacrifices part of the other: rules against compassion, loyalty to a superior against the public interest; Santa Clara University's Markkula Center offers a method that suits administration.
Cover
- A flowchart of the process: identify the issue, get the facts and law, weigh options through lenses, choose and test, then act, record and review.
- Identify whether it is a true choice between two goods or two bads, or merely a temptation; get the facts, since Herbert Simon showed decision-makers lack knowledge of the total consequences of their decisions, and check law and conduct rules.
- Weigh options through the lenses of rights, justice, utility, the common good, virtue and care, seeking a creative third option.
- Choose and test by the publicity test; act at the competent level, record reasons and learn from the outcome.
- Example: a widow lacking one document for her pension; verification from panchayat records and a recorded relaxation from the competent authority.
Close with · Tagore's prayer that the clear stream of reason not lose its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit: a method keeps an administrator's judgement alive.
Add value (verified)
- Markkula Center's Framework for Ethical Decision Making: identifying the ethical issue includes asking whether the choice lies between a good and a bad alternative, or between two goods or two bads, and whether it goes beyond what is legal or most efficient.A Framework for Ethical Decision Making — Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, Santa Clara University ↗“Does this decision involve a choice between a good and bad alternative, or perhaps between two “goods” or between two “bads”? Is this issue about more than solely what is legal or what is most efficient?”
- Nobel economics prize 1978 (Herbert Simon): decision-makers' capacity for rational action is limited by a lack of knowledge about the total consequences of their decisions.Herbert Simon, Prize in Economic Sciences 1978: press release — NobelPrize.org ↗“He replaces this entrepreneur by a number of cooperating decision-makers, whose capacities for rational action are limited, both by a lack of knowledge about the total consequences of their decisions, and by personal and social ties.”
- The framework evaluates options through six lenses (rights, justice, utilitarian, common good, virtue and care ethics), then asks the decision-maker to choose an option and test it: what would someone they respect, or a public audience, say about it?A Framework for Ethical Decision Making — Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, Santa Clara University ↗“(The Virtue Lens) Which option appropriately takes into account the relationships, concerns, and feelings of all stakeholders? (The Care Ethics Lens) Choose an Option for Action and Test It After an evaluation using all of these lenses, which option best addresses the situation? If I told someone I respect (or a public audience) which option I have chosen, what would they say?”
- Rabindranath Tagore, Gitanjali, poem 35: where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit.Rabindranath Tagore, Gitanjali (Song Offerings), poem 35 — Project Gutenberg e-text ↗“Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection; Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2018, GS Paper IV — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 3 Oct 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer· 224words · Minimalist IAS
An ethical dilemma arises when two legitimate duties conflict, so that honouring one sacrifices part of the other: rules against compassion, loyalty to a superior against the public interest. Santa Clara University's Markkula Center offers a method that suits administration.
- Identify the issue
- Facts and law
- Weigh options
- Choose and test
- Act, record, review
- Identify the issue: is it a true choice between two 'goods' or two 'bads', or a temptation to do wrong?
- Get the facts and law: Herbert Simon showed that decision-makers lack knowledge of 'the total consequences' of their decisions; hear stakeholders and check the Constitution, laws and conduct rules, which dissolve many false dilemmas.
- Weigh the options: test each through the lenses of rights, justice, utility, the common good, virtue and care; seek a creative third option.
- Choose and test: the publicity test asks what someone I respect, or a public audience, would say of my choice.
- Act, record, review: decide at the competent level, record reasons, learn from the outcome.
- Example: a widow lacks one document for her pension. Rejecting her is lawful but harsh; ignoring the rule, kind but irregular. The third path: verify her claim from panchayat records and seek the competent authority's recorded relaxation.
Such a method keeps an administrator's reason, in Tagore's words, from losing 'its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit'.
Prepared by Minimalist IAS to the answer standard of Shivam Singh (mentor, 7 years) · facts checked against official sources (how we verify) · updated 3 Oct 2026. UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.
