Daily Editorial Analysis 6 November 2026

The Ecological Fallout of Israel’s War in Gaza

Context

• They devastate ecosystems, deplete natural resources, contaminate water bodies and destroy agricultural land, creating consequences that may persist for generations.
• Recognising this concern, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) designated November 6 as the International Day for Preventing the Exploitation of the Environment in War and Armed Conflict in 2001.
• The environmental crisis in Gaza raises serious questions about international humanitarian law, environmental justice, state responsibility and the rights of occupied populations.

The Devastation in Gaza

• Destruction of Agricultural Resources

  • The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), in its September 23, 2025 report, Environmental Impact of the Conflict in the Gaza Strip, documented unprecedented ecological destruction resulting from prolonged hostilities.
  • The findings reveal that Gaza has lost 97% of its tree crops, 95% of its shrubland and 82% of its annual crops since 2023.
  • This destruction has severely undermined agricultural production, threatened livelihoods and intensified food insecurity.

• Contamination of Water and Marine Ecosystems

  • Freshwater resources have become critically scarce, with much of the remaining supply contaminated.
  • The destruction of sewage treatment facilities and piped water systems has aggravated pollution of underground aquifers.
  • Marine and coastal ecosystems are also likely to have suffered contamination.
  • These developments threaten public health and weaken the ecological foundations necessary for sustainable recovery.

• Destruction of Infrastructure and Soil Degradation

  • Approximately 78% of Gaza’s buildings have been damaged or destroyed, generating nearly 61 million tonnes of debris.
  • The destruction of vegetation and soil compaction caused by military activities reduce water absorption, increase flood risks and restrict groundwater recharge.
  • These environmental consequences will complicate reconstruction and affect future generations.

Violations of Environmental Obligations

• International Legal Framework under PERAC

  • The ILC adopted 27 draft principles in 2022 under its report, Protection of the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflicts.
  • The UNGA formally took note of these principles on December 7, 2022.
  • The first principle establishes that environmental protection obligations apply before, during and after armed conflicts, including situations of occupation.
  • Environmental protection is therefore a continuing responsibility rather than merely a wartime obligation.

• Responsibilities of an Occupying Power

  • Under international law, an occupying power must administer and utilise natural resources for the benefit of the occupied population while ensuring environmental protection.
  • It must also integrate environmental considerations into the administration of occupied territory.
  • The ICJ’s July 19, 2024 advisory opinion concerning Israel’s policies and practices in the Palestinian Territory addressed the legal consequences of prolonged occupation, including resource-related practices.

International Responsibility and Reparation

• Principle 9 of PERAC establishes that a state committing an internationally wrongful act connected with armed conflict, resulting in environmental damage, bears international responsibility and must provide full reparation.
• Reparation must include damage to the environment itself.
• In Gaza, restoration would require rehabilitating agricultural land, rebuilding water and sanitation infrastructure, removing hazardous debris, addressing soil contamination and reviving damaged ecosystems.
• The ICJ’s 2024 advisory opinion provides an important legal foundation for assessing the consequences of Israel’s policies in the occupied territory.
• Accountability and environmental restoration are essential to preventing ecological destruction from becoming permanent.

Conclusion

• The environmental devastation in Gaza demonstrates that armed conflicts have consequences extending far beyond immediate military operations.
• The destruction of agricultural land, freshwater resources, sanitation systems and ecosystems threatens public health, human survival and sustainable development.
• The PERAC principles, international humanitarian law and ICJ jurisprudence provide important foundations for establishing state responsibility and securing reparation.
• However, effective implementation, independent environmental assessments and accountability remain essential.

The Ecological Fallout of Israel’s War in Gaza FAQs

Q1. When is the International Day for Preventing the Exploitation of the Environment in War and Armed Conflict observed?

Ans. It is observed on November 6 every year.

Q2. What is the PERAC framework?

Ans. PERAC is a set of 27 principles adopted by the International Law Commission in 2022 to protect the environment in relation to armed conflicts.

Q3. What percentage of Gaza’s annual crops has been lost since 2023?

Ans. Gaza has lost 82% of its annual crops since 2023.

Q4. What does Principle 9 of PERAC establish?

Ans. Principle 9 establishes that states responsible for internationally wrongful acts causing environmental damage must provide full reparation.

Q5. What are the major environmental consequences of the conflict in Gaza?

Ans. The conflict has caused agricultural destruction, water contamination, soil degradation, ecosystem damage and massive infrastructure destruction.

Source: The Hindu

Science Should Move Past ‘Top 2%’ Label

Context

• Scientific research advances knowledge, addresses societal challenges and strengthens national development.
• Indian scientists deserve recognition for their contributions, and international visibility is one form of appreciation.
• However, the growing presence of Indian researchers in the top 2% scientists’ database should not become the ultimate measure of scientific excellence.
• The real value of research lies in its originality, quality, innovation and societal impact. Treating rankings as definitive indicators risks overlooking meaningful scientific contributions.

Understanding the Top 2% Scientists’ Database

• Purpose and Methodology

  • Developed by John Ioannidis and his collaborators, the database uses publication and citation records from Scopus to identify influential researchers across scientific disciplines.
  • However, its creators caution against treating inclusion as conclusive evidence of research excellence.

• Limitations of the Database

  • First, it relies on publication and citation records without independently verifying research originality.
  • Second, inaccuracies in author profiles and disciplinary classification can affect rankings. Third, research published in regional languages remains inadequately represented.
  • Its impact scores also depend partly on authorship positions in multi-author publications, although authorship conventions differ across disciplines.
  • Moreover, citation counts cannot establish whether a research paper is appreciated, criticised or merely mentioned.
  • An analysis by John Philip in 2023 found that 12 of 71 Physics Nobel laureates and two of 66 Chemistry Nobel laureates from 1998–2022 were missing from the database.
  • This demonstrates that exclusion does not necessarily indicate a lack of scientific merit.

Implications for Research

• Distinguishing Scientific Research from Scientific Communication

  • A 2026 study published in Scientometrics identified science journalists Clare Dyer and Jacqui Wise in the 2025 database.
  • Although science journalism deserves recognition, its contribution differs from original scientific investigation.
  • The same study identified an author associated with 217 retracted papers in the database.
  • These examples raise concerns about the database’s ability to distinguish research quality, scientific communication and research integrity.

• Pressure on Young Researchers

  • Excessive emphasis on rankings could influence research priorities in India.
  • Young scientists may prefer popular subjects that attract citations rather than pursue intellectually challenging questions aligned with their interests.
  • Fundamental research requires patience, sustained investment and long-term commitment, as discoveries often take years to produce measurable results.
  • Similarly, applied research requires prolonged experimentation and technological development.
  • Prioritising immediate recognition could discourage innovative and unconventional research.

The Way Forward: Towards a Comprehensive Research Assessment Framework

• Balancing Fundamental and Applied Research

  • India needs both fundamental research and applied scientific innovation.
  • Fundamental research expands knowledge and lays the foundation for future discoveries, while applied research converts scientific understanding into practical solutions.
  • Therefore, research assessment must recognise different objectives and timelines instead of rewarding publications and citations alone.
  • Making database inclusion a primary target could undermine meaningful scientific progress.

• Learning from International Practices

  • International research assessment initiatives are increasingly moving away from excessive dependence on quantitative indicators.
  • For instance, the Swiss National Science Foundation asks applicants not to include citation counts, journal rankings or institutional rankings in their CVs.
  • This approach encourages evaluators to assess the actual quality and significance of research.
  • India should adopt a similar framework incorporating originality, scientific integrity, innovation, collaboration and societal relevance.
  • Peer evaluation and qualitative assessment must complement quantitative indicators.

• Recognising Diverse Scientific Contributions

  • India’s scientific achievements demonstrate why excellence must be recognised beyond individual rankings.
    • Chandrayaan-3: Its successful landing near the Moon’s south polar region demonstrated collective scientific expertise, advanced engineering and technological capabilities.
    • SHAKTI microprocessors: Developed at IIT Madras, they represent progress towards indigenous semiconductor technology.
    • NexCAR19 cancer therapy: Developed through collaboration involving IIT Bombay, Tata Memorial Centre and ImmunoACT, it demonstrates India’s capabilities in advanced cancer treatment.
    • Indigenous 4G technology stack: It reflects domestic innovation and technological self-reliance.
    • CERVAVAC vaccine: Developed by the Serum Institute, it represents an important contribution to affordable healthcare.
  • These achievements highlight the importance of teamwork, interdisciplinary collaboration and indigenous innovation.
  • Scientists, engineers, technicians and institutions deserve recognition irrespective of their inclusion in international databases.

Conclusion

• India needs a scientific recognition system that values genuine contributions rather than numerical rankings.
• International databases can provide useful information about research visibility but should remain supplementary assessment tools.
• A strong scientific ecosystem must recognise those who discover, innovate, develop technologies, communicate knowledge and enable scientific progress.
• Encouraging intellectual independence, long-term research and socially relevant innovation will strengthen India’s scientific capabilities.
• Ultimately, the true measure of scientific excellence is the advancement of knowledge and its contribution to humanity, not inclusion in a global ranking.

Science Should Move Past ‘Top 2%’ Label FAQs

Q1. What is the top 2% scientists’ database?

Ans. It is a database developed by John Ioannidis and his collaborators using Scopus publication and citation records to identify influential researchers.

Q2. What are the major limitations of the database?

Ans. It does not adequately verify research originality, regional-language publications, author profiles or disciplinary differences.

Q3. How can rankings affect young researchers?

Ans. They may encourage young researchers to choose popular, highly cited topics instead of pursuing meaningful research.

Q4. What approach does the Swiss National Science Foundation follow?

Ans. It evaluates research quality without requiring citation counts, journal rankings or institutional rankings in applicants’ CVs.

Q5. What should be the true measure of scientific excellence?

Ans. Scientific excellence should be measured by originality, innovation, advancement of knowledge and contributions to society.

Source: The Hindu

‹ ›