UPSC Mains Current Affairs for 11 January 2026

by Vajiram & Ravi - 11 January 2026

Vajiram & Ravi provides Daily UPSC Mains Current Affairs for 11 January 2026, tailored for aspirants. We cover all relevant news and events crucial for the exam, ensuring you stay updated & well-prepared.

India’s Rice Export Surge after Lifting Curbs

January 11, 2026
India’s Rice Export Surge after Lifting Curbs

India’s Rice Exports Latest News

  • India, the world’s largest rice exporter, witnessed a sharp rebound in rice exports in 2025 after the Union government lifted all export restrictions imposed during 2022–23. 
  • The move has significant implications for global food prices, food security, agricultural trade policy, and India’s role in the Global South.

Key Developments

  • Sharp rise in rice exports:
    • India’s rice exports rose 19.4% in 2025 to 21.55 million metric tonnes, the second-highest on record. 
    • This is close to the 2022 peak of 22.3 million tonnes. Exports had stood at 18.05 million tonnes in 2024.
    • Increased Indian supply pushed Asian rice prices to their lowest level in nearly a decade.
    • This has also reduced shipments from Thailand and Vietnam, India’s key competitors.
  • Composition of exports:
    • Non-Basmati rice:
      • Exports surged 25% to 15.15 million tonnes. Major destinations are Bangladesh, Benin, Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Djibouti.
      • This indicates India’s role in food security for developing countries, especially Africa.
    • Basmati rice:
      • Exports increased 8% to a record 6.4 million tonnes. Key buyers are Iran, UAE, and the United Kingdom.
      • This reflects strong demand for premium agricultural exports.
  • India’s dominance in global rice trade:
    • India exports more rice than the combined exports of Thailand, Vietnam, and Pakistan.
    • This reinforces India’s position as a “food security provider” in the developing world.

Reasons for Export Rebound

  • Policy relaxation: The government lifted the last export curbs in March 2025, including bans and minimum export prices. These curbs were earlier imposed to control domestic inflation and food prices.
  • Record domestic production: Improved supplies due to record rice output, ensuring domestic availability.
  • Price competitiveness: Indian rice is priced lower than Thailand and Vietnam, helping India regain lost global market share.

Overview of India’s Rice Production and Exports

  • Production overview:
    • Leading producer: India is the top global rice producer, surpassing China, accounting for roughly 40% of global supply. 
    • Major producing states: Include Uttar Pradesh, Telangana, West Bengal, Punjab, and Chhattisgarh.
    • Record output: Production reached a record 137.8 million tonnes (LMT) in 2023-24, with forecasts for even higher output in 2025-26.
    • Success is attributed to: Favorable monsoons, increased planting area, technological advancements like the introduction of high-yielding dwarf varieties (e.g., IR-8, Jaya), and policy support. Though, India is facing scrutiny over water-intensive farming.
  • Export dominance:
    • Top exporter: India leads the world in rice exports, often exceeding the combined exports of the next three largest exporters.
    • Major destinations: Key markets include Bangladesh, Benin, Nepal, UAE, Iran, and European nations, with new markets emerging. 

Challenges and Way Ahead

  • Balancing domestic food security: With export competitiveness. Strengthen buffer stock management to avoid abrupt export bans.
  • Risk of price volatility: If exports surge during weak monsoon years. Adopt a predictable and transparent export policy to enhance farmer confidence.
  • Overdependence on rice exports: May discourage crop diversification. Use rice exports as a tool of food diplomacy, especially with Africa and South Asia. Encourage value-added rice products to increase export earnings.
  • Climate risks: Affecting future production consistency. Promote climate-resilient rice varieties and water-efficient practices.

Conclusion

  • India’s post-curb rice export surge underscores the country’s pivotal role in global agricultural markets and food security. 
  • While competitive pricing and policy relaxation have strengthened India’s export leadership, a calibrated approach balancing domestic food security, farmer welfare, and global responsibility will be crucial for sustainable agricultural trade governance.

Source: TH

India’s Rice Exports FAQs

Q1: How did the lifting of rice export curbs affect India’s position in the global rice market?

Ans: It led to a 19.4% rise in exports, helping India regain market share and reinforce its dominance as the world’s largest rice exporter.

Q2: What is the impact of India’s rice export rebound on global food prices and food security?

Ans: Higher Indian supplies pushed Asian rice prices to a decade-low, easing food costs for import-dependent developing countries, especially in Africa.

Q3: What is the difference between trends in basmati and non-basmati rice exports?

Ans: Non-basmati exports rose sharply by 25% driven by developing country demand, while basmati exports grew 8% to a record level due to premium markets.

Q4: Why is India’s rice export policy significant for its agricultural trade and foreign relations?

Ans: It influences farmer incomes, domestic price stability, and enables India to exercise food diplomacy with the Global South.

Q5: What are the key challenges associated with India’s rising rice exports?

Ans: Challenges include domestic price volatility and climate risks, which can be managed through buffer stocks, predictable export policy, etc.

U.S. Climate Exit Explained: Impact of the U.S. Climate Exit on Global Action

January 11, 2026
U.S. Climate Exit - What It Means for Global Action

U.S. Climate Exit Latest News

  • U.S. President Donald Trump has signed a memorandum withdrawing the United States from 66 international organisations, including key climate bodies such as the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 
  • The move marks a sharp retreat from multilateral cooperation, weakens global climate governance, and raises concerns about funding gaps, leadership vacuums, and reduced coordination on climate science and policy.

U.S. Exit from the FCCC: What It Means

  • Climate Denial and Policy Shift - President Trump has repeatedly dismissed climate change as a hoax and is steering the U.S. away from global climate commitments, including withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.
  • Legal Basis for Withdrawal - An executive order issued in February 2025, directed a review of international commitments deemed contrary to U.S. interests. The exits from the FCCC and IPCC stem from this process.
  • Loss of Role in Global Climate Framework - Leaving the FCCC removes the U.S. from the central structure governing multilateral climate diplomacy, including emissions reporting, transparency mechanisms, and collective accountability.
  • Automatic Exit from the Paris Agreement - Under FCCC rules, withdrawal also applies to related protocols. This effectively confirms the U.S. exit from the Paris Agreement.
  • Marginalisation at Climate Negotiations - The U.S. will no longer be a formal party in COP negotiations. While it may attend as an observer, it loses legal standing to shape rules on carbon markets, finance, and climate governance.

Impact on Climate Finance After U.S. Exit

  • Reduced Influence Over Global Climate Funds - By leaving the FCCC, the U.S. loses its say in shaping climate finance institutions such as the Green Climate Fund and the Global Environment Facility, which are overseen by the COP.
  • Easier Withdrawal from Funding Commitments - Non-membership makes it politically simpler for U.S. administrations to justify withholding or cutting contributions to multilateral climate finance mechanisms.
  • Higher Costs for U.S. Businesses - The exit signals policy uncertainty, increasing risk premiums for U.S. firms and investors that operate in a world moving toward stricter climate rules and regulations.
  • Greater Trade and Investment Exposure - U.S. exporters may face tougher climate-linked trade measures abroad, such as carbon border taxes, with fewer diplomatic tools to negotiate exemptions.
  • Weaker Bargaining Power in Linked Negotiations - As climate cooperation is increasingly tied to energy, critical minerals, and development finance, partners may hesitate to strike deals with the U.S. amid doubts about the durability of its commitments.

Role of the IPCC

  • Assessing Climate Science - The IPCC reviews and synthesises global scientific research on climate change, its impacts, and possible response strategies, providing a common evidence base for policymakers worldwide.
  • Shaping Global Climate Negotiations - Its reports serve as shared scientific references that underpin international climate talks, targets, and policy decisions.
  • Impact of U.S. Withdrawal - If the U.S. exits the IPCC, its influence over the scientific framing of climate debates will weaken, as it may stop formally nominating experts to author teams.
  • Reduced Institutional Representation - Without government nominations, the pipeline for U.S.-based scientists to serve as IPCC authors could narrow, despite the country’s strong climate research capacity.
  • Continued, but Limited, Participation - U.S. scientists could still contribute as expert reviewers or be nominated through non-government observer organisations, but with less formal backing and visibility.

Global Repercussions of the U.S. Exit

  • Erosion of Shared Responsibility - When a wealthy, high-emitting country withdraws from climate institutions, it weakens the norm that all major emitters must follow common rules, reducing trust in multilateral action.
  • Hardening Positions of Developing Countries - Many poorer countries already feel rich nations under-deliver on promises. The U.S. exit may reinforce this belief, making them less willing to accept new obligations.
  • Encouraging Climate Inaction Elsewhere - The move can give political cover to other hesitant governments to slow down, delay, or dilute their own climate commitments.
  • Complicating Climate Finance Negotiations - As climate finance targets rise from $100 billion to far higher levels, U.S. disengagement undermines confidence in burden-sharing and collective funding efforts.
  • Undermining New Funding Goals - With a $300 billion annual climate finance goal agreed for 2035, the absence of a major historical emitter weakens the credibility of global deals to mobilise these resources.

Source: TH

U.S. Climate Exit FAQs

Q1: What does the U.S. climate exit mean?

Ans: The U.S. climate exit refers to Washington withdrawing from UNFCCC and IPCC, ending formal participation in global climate negotiations and reporting systems.

Q2: How does the U.S. climate exit affect the Paris Agreement?

Ans: Under UNFCCC rules, the U.S. climate exit automatically applies to related protocols, confirming the U.S. exit from the Paris Agreement framework.

Q3: What is the impact of the U.S. climate exit on climate finance?

Ans: The U.S. climate exit weakens climate finance by reducing funding, undermining trust, and limiting influence over institutions like the Green Climate Fund.

Q4: How does the U.S. climate exit affect the IPCC?

Ans: The U.S. climate exit reduces American influence in shaping climate science assessments, narrowing official pathways for U.S. scientists in IPCC author teams.

Q5: Why does the U.S. climate exit matter globally?

Ans: The U.S. climate exit erodes shared responsibility, encourages climate inaction elsewhere, and complicates efforts to meet rising global climate finance targets.

EU–Mercosur Trade Deal Explained: What the Historic EU–Mercosur Trade Pact Means

January 11, 2026
EU–Mercosur Trade Pact Nears Finish Line Despite French Resistance

EU–Mercosur Trade Deal Latest News

  • The European Union and Mercosur are set to sign a long-pending free trade agreement in Asuncion, concluding negotiations dating back to 1999.
  • Although the agreement was formally concluded in December 2024 by Ursula von der Leyen, EU member state ambassadors approved it only recently. The signing is scheduled for January 17 in Paraguay.
  • The deal, however, remains contentious within Europe. France has led opposition, warning that reduced trade barriers with Mercosur countries could hurt domestic agriculture.

Mercosur: An Overview

  • Mercosur, or the Southern Common Market, is a major South American trade bloc created to promote economic integration through the free movement of goods, services, capital, and people among member states.
  • The official working languages of Mercosur are Spanish and Portuguese.

Founding and Membership

  • Established in 1991 by the Treaty of Asunción, Mercosur’s founding members are Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay. 
  • Bolivia later joined, while Venezuela is a full member whose membership is currently suspended. 
  • Several other South American countries participate as associate members.

Core Objectives

  • Mercosur aims to:
    • Create a common market
    • Eliminate internal trade barriers
    • Harmonise economic policies
    • Enable free movement of goods, services, capital, and people
    • Promote regional trade and cooperation

What the EU–Mercosur Trade Deal Includes

  • According to the European Commission, this is the EU’s largest free trade agreement by tariff cuts, eliminating over €4 billion in duties on EU exports. 
  • Mercosur currently imposes high tariffs on cars, dairy, and wine.
  • Current Trade Profile
    • Annual goods trade between the EU and Mercosur is about €111 billion.
    • EU exports: machinery, chemicals, transport equipment
    • EU imports: agricultural products, paper, minerals
  • Market Access Commitments
    • Mercosur will remove duties on 91% of EU exports over 15 years (from ~35% now).
    • EU will remove duties on 92% of Mercosur exports within 10 years.
  • Sensitive Products and Quotas
    • EU quotas maintained on poultry, pork, sugar, ethanol, rice, honey, maize, sweet corn.
    • Mercosur quotas on milk powders and infant formula.
    • Expanded quotas:
      • EU beef imports up to 99,000 tonnes
      • Duty-free 30,000-tonne cheese quota for EU exports
  • Geographical Indications (GIs)
    • About 350 EU food and drink products receive GI protection, safeguarding them from imitation in Mercosur markets.
  • Safeguards and Enforcement
    • The EU can suspend preferential access for sensitive farm imports if conditions are breached, alongside tighter controls on pesticide residues.
  • Support Measures
    • To address domestic concerns, the EU has set up a crisis fund, cut duties on fertiliser imports, fast-tracked €45 billion in farmer support, and strengthened import checks.

Why Some EU Countries Oppose the EU–Mercosur Trade Deal

  • Countries Leading the Opposition - France, Poland, Austria, Hungary and Ireland voted against the agreement, while Belgium abstained. Italy dropped its earlier veto, allowing the deal to move forward despite dissent.
  • Concerns Over Agricultural Competition - Opposing countries fear that cheaper farm imports from Mercosur will undercut European farmers. Irish farmers, in particular, worry about the 99,000 tonnes of additional beef entering the EU market.
  • Environmental and Climate Safeguards - Critics argue that agricultural imports may not meet the European Union’s strict environmental and animal welfare standards. 
    • They have demanded binding and enforceable safeguards on climate protection and biodiversity.
  • Deforestation and Sustainability Fears - Environmental groups and some governments say the deal lacks strong enforcement mechanisms to prevent deforestation, especially in sensitive regions such as the Amazon. They warn it could accelerate resource extraction and forest loss in South America.
  • Standards and Fair Competition - Farmers’ groups stress that without equal environmental and production standards, EU producers face unfair competition from lower-cost imports that operate under looser regulations.

Why the EU–Mercosur Deal Matters Now

  • Strategic Trade Diversification - The agreement reflects the European Union’s push to diversify trade ties beyond traditional partners at a time of global economic uncertainty and rising protectionism.
  • Countering China’s Growing Influence - Supporters argue the deal will deepen Europe’s engagement with the Global South and act as a counterweight to expanding Chinese economic influence in Latin America.
  • Boosting Mercosur’s Global Standing - For Mercosur, the pact strengthens its credibility as a serious trading partner despite internal political and economic divisions within the bloc.
  • Economic Gains for Both Sides - According to Bloomberg Economics, the agreement could raise Mercosur’s GDP by 0.7% and Europe’s by 0.1%, offering modest but meaningful growth.
  • Shield Against Trade Disruptions - In the wake of renewed tariff shocks following Donald Trump’s return to the White House, EU members see the deal as a way to offset trade losses caused by US protectionist policies.
  • Reducing Dependence on China for Critical Minerals - The pact could help Europe diversify supply chains away from China. Brazil holds major reserves of graphite, nickel, manganese, rare earths and niobium, while Argentina is a leading global producer of lithium—both vital for clean energy and advanced manufacturing.

Source: IE | AC

EU–Mercosur Trade Deal FAQs

Q1: What is the EU–Mercosur trade deal?

Ans: The EU–Mercosur trade deal is a free trade agreement between the EU and Mercosur bloc to reduce tariffs, expand market access, and deepen economic integration across regions.

Q2: Why is the EU–Mercosur trade deal considered historic?

Ans: The EU–Mercosur trade deal is the EU’s largest tariff-reduction pact, concluding negotiations that began in 1999 and covering trade worth over €111 billion annually.

Q3: Why do some EU countries oppose the EU–Mercosur trade deal?

Ans: Opposition to the EU–Mercosur trade deal comes mainly from France and others fearing cheap agricultural imports, weak environmental safeguards, and deforestation risks.

Q4: What sectors benefit most from the EU–Mercosur trade deal?

Ans: The EU–Mercosur trade deal benefits EU machinery, chemicals, and automobiles, while Mercosur gains greater access for beef, poultry, sugar, and agricultural exports.

Q5: Why does the EU–Mercosur trade deal matter now?

Ans: The EU–Mercosur trade deal helps the EU diversify trade amid U.S. tariffs, reduce dependence on China for critical minerals, and strengthen engagement with the Global South.

Pesticides Management Bill, 2025 – Explained

January 11, 2026
Pesticides Management Bill, 2025 - Explained

Pesticides Management Latest News

  • The Union government has released a revised draft of the Pesticides Management Bill, 2025 and invited public feedback to modernise India’s pesticide regulation regime.

Background: Pesticide Regulation in India

  • India’s pesticide regulation is currently governed by the Insecticides Act, 1968 and its accompanying rules, framed over five decades ago. 
  • This framework was designed at a time when chemical pest control was central to agricultural productivity, with limited awareness of environmental and health externalities. Over time, concerns have emerged regarding:
    • Rising incidents of spurious and substandard pesticides
    • Human health impacts, including farmer exposure and poisoning
    • Environmental damage, especially contamination of soil and water bodies
    • Weak enforcement and outdated regulatory mechanisms
  • Recognising these challenges, successive governments have attempted to introduce comprehensive legislation to replace the Insecticides Act. 
  • Draft Bills were introduced in 2008, 2018, and 2020, but none could be enacted into law.

Overview of the Pesticides Management Bill, 2025

  • The Pesticides Management Bill, 2025, is the latest attempt to overhaul India’s pesticide governance framework. 
  • It aims to regulate the manufacture, import, export, storage, sale, distribution, and use of pesticides in the country. Key stated objectives of the Bill include:
    • Minimising risks to human beings, animals, and the environment
    • Ensuring safe and effective use of pesticides
    • Promoting transparency, traceability, and accountability
    • Improving service delivery to farmers and enhancing ease of living
  • The Bill proposes to repeal the Insecticides Act, 1968, thereby consolidating pesticide regulation under a modern legislative framework.

Institutional Architecture Under the Bill

  • Registration Committee
    • The Bill provides for a committee constituted by the Union government. It includes representatives from:
    • This Committee is responsible for the registration of pesticides, reviewing safety concerns and examining temporary bans imposed by States
  • Central Pesticides Board
    • A Central Pesticides Board is also envisaged to:
      • Recommend pesticides for inclusion under the law
      • Prescribe good manufacturing practices
      • Frame protocols for pesticide recall
      • Develop standard operating procedures for poisoning cases
      • Lay down guidelines for the safe disposal of pesticides and packaging

Role of State Governments

  • Under the proposed Bill, State governments have limited regulatory powers. They may:
    • Temporarily prohibit the sale, distribution, or use of a pesticide or a specific batch
    • Impose such a prohibition for a maximum period of one year
  • However, any such notification must be reviewed by the Registration Committee, and States do not have independent long-term prohibition or punitive powers. 
  • This aspect has attracted criticism from experts and civil society groups.

Key Gaps and Concerns in the 2025 Draft

  • Despite being labelled as a revised version, the 2025 draft introduces limited substantive changes compared to the 2020 draft. Major concerns include:
    • Weakened legislative language: The Bill states it will “strive to minimise risk” instead of committing to “minimise risk”.
    • Absence of criminal liability provisions: There are no clear provisions fixing criminal liability on manufacturers or distributors in cases of misuse, poisoning, or environmental damage.
    • Limited State enforcement powers: States cannot permanently ban hazardous pesticides.
    • No price regulation mechanism: The Bill does not address high pesticide pricing or farmer affordability.
    • Weak grievance redressal framework: Clear compensation and liability mechanisms for affected farmers are missing.
  • Experts argue that without strong enforcement and accountability, regulatory effectiveness may remain limited.

Consultation Process and Way Forward

  • The government has invited public comments and stakeholder feedback on the draft Bill until February 2, 2026. 
  • This consultation phase is crucial given the Bill’s long legislative history and the persistent concerns raised by farmer groups, public health experts, and environmental organisations.
  • The Bill also aligns with broader policy goals such as:
    • Encouraging biological and traditional pest control methods
    • Reducing dependence on hazardous chemical pesticides
    • Strengthening farmer confidence through regulatory transparency

Source: TH | Down to Earth

Pesticide Management FAQs

Q1: What law will the Pesticides Management Bill, 2025 replace?

Ans: It will replace the Insecticides Act, 1968.

Q2: What is the primary objective of the Bill?

Ans: To regulate pesticides while minimising risks to humans, animals, and the environment.

Q3: Do State governments have full powers to ban pesticides under the Bill?

Ans: No, States can impose only temporary bans for up to one year.

Q4: Which bodies oversee pesticide regulation under the Bill?

Ans: The Registration Committee and the Central Pesticides Board.

Q5: Why has the Bill attracted criticism?

Ans: Due to weak enforcement provisions, lack of criminal liability, and limited State powers.

Enquire Now