Current Affairs

Decoding India’s Air Quality Policy: Why National Standards Differ from WHO Guidelines

Author: VisionIAS Editorial Team

Dec 12, 2025Current Affairs9 min read

Decoding India’s Air Quality Policy: Why National Standards Differ from WHO Guidelines

The government told Parliament that WHO air-quality guidelines are advisory, not legally binding.

In December 2025, India made a statement in Parliament regarding global air quality assessments. The Minister of Environment, Forest and Climate Change clarified that international rankings by organizations like IQ Air (World Air Quality Ranking), WHO (Global Air Quality Database), and Yale University (Environmental Performance Index) carry no official authority for Indian policymaking. Instead, India relies on its own National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and domestic assessment frameworks.

This position highlights how India approaches environmental governance. But what does this mean for air pollution management, and how do Indian standards compare with international benchmarks?

Table of Contents

Understanding Air Quality Index Globally

The air quality index (AQI) varies worldwide based on different measurement systems. The US EPA uses an AQI scale with categories from Good (0-50) to Hazardous (301-500), while India uses a similar system but adapted to its own standards and an extended scale that goes beyond 450 for hazardous conditions.

IQAir, a Swiss air quality technology company, publishes real-time data based on the US EPA standards. As a data aggregator using both government and private monitoring networks, IQAir provides granular, localized readings that capture pollution variations across different neighborhoods and regions.

It weighs recent hours more heavily to show immediate air quality rather than a 24-hour average as given by NAAQS.However, these readings do not distinguish between natural sources (such as dust storms) and anthropogenic sources (such as vehicle emissions or industrial activity) of pollution.

The WHO maintains a comprehensive database of air quality measurements from cities worldwide, providing valuable comparative data. While this global perspective helps contextualize India’s air quality challenges, Indian authorities maintain that such international databases should inform rather than dictate national policy, given the country’s unique geographical, climatic, and developmental conditions.

Comparing Global and Indian Air Quality Standards

The difference between WHO recommendations and Indian standards reveals the complexity of air quality management.

Key Pollutant Standards Comparison:

For PM2.5 (fine particles), the WHO recommends an annual average of 5 micrograms per cubic meter. NAAQS India sets this limit at 40 micrograms per cubic meter, eight times higher than the WHO guideline.
For PM10 (coarser particles), the WHO guideline is 15 micrograms per cubic meter annually, while India’s standard is 60 micrograms per cubic meter, four times the global recommendation.
For Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), the WHO recommends 10 micrograms per cubic meter annually, while India’s standard is 40 micrograms per cubic meter.

Why India Maintains Different Standards

Geographic and Environmental Factors

India’s geography contributes to air quality challenges. The Indo-Gangetic Plain experiences natural dust storms, and western regions have high crustal dust levels.

In many parts of India, the natural background level of particulate matter alone exceeds the WHO’s 5 micrograms per cubic meter limit. Adopting this standard would classify air as polluted even without human activity.

Measurement Methods: Ground Stations vs Satellites

A technical difference exists over how global air quality is measured. International indices primarily use satellite data (for example, Aerosol Optical Depth) to estimate pollution levels, especially in areas with limited ground monitoring.

However, satellite data is seen to have higher uncertainty in regions with natural dust and fewer monitoring stations. Thus, the Indian government prefers ground-based monitoring through the Continuous Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Stations (CAAQMS) network.

However, India’s ground monitoring network concentrates on urban centers like Delhi, which has over 40 stations. Rural areas and regions like the Northeast have minimal coverage, creating monitoring gaps.

Developmental Considerations

Indian standards also potentially account for socio-economic status and developmental needs. The country is still transitioning millions of households from biomass fuels to cleaner alternatives. Despite high energy demands, per capita energy consumption remains lower than developed nations.

In this scenario, adopting the strictest WHO standards immediately would require halting thermal power generation, banning diesel transport, and stopping construction activities. These measures would impact economic growth and development goals.

India’s Domestic Air Quality Framework

India has developed its own comprehensive domestic mechanisms to measure air quality.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

NAAQS India was notified by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) in 2009 based on the powers conferred on it by The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. It sets standards for 12 pollutants to protect public health. These standards form the legal basis for air quality regulation across the country. A review by IIT Kanpur to update these standards with new health research is in process.

National Clean Air Programme (NCAP)

Launched in 2019, NCAP is India’s primary vehicle for air quality improvement. The programme covers 131 cities that failed to meet NAAQS standards consistently.

Key features include:

Initial target of 20-30% reduction in particulate matter (PM) by 2024
Revised goal of 40% reduction by 2026
Funding of approximately ₹11,541 crores allocated to 130 cities from 2019-20 to January 2025

The programme focuses on multiple sectors including vehicular emissions, industrial pollution, road dust, construction activities, and biomass burning.

Swachh Vayu Survekshan: India’s Ranking System

India conducts the annual Swachh Vayu Survekshan (Clean Air Survey) to rank NCAP cities. Unlike global rankings that focus on pollution levels, this survey evaluates cities on comprehensive criteria.

Cities receive scores out of 200 based on:

Solid waste and biomass management (20%)
Road dust control (20%)
Vehicular emissions control (20%)
Industrial emissions management (20%)
Construction and demolition activities (5%)
Public awareness campaigns (2.5%)
Actual PM10 concentration improvement (2.5%)

In 2025, Indore topped the million-plus category, while cities like Amravati and Dewas led in their respective categories.

Way Forward

For India’s domestic framework to succeed, several improvements can strengthen the approach. Strengthening air-quality governance requires steps like shifting Swachh Vayu Survekshan’s focus toward measurable outcomes by raising the weightage for actual pollution reduction to 30–40%.

India should adopt an integrated monitoring system combining ground stations, low-cost sensors, and satellite data for comprehensive coverage. Establishing regional airshed authorities, especially across the Indo-Gangetic Plain, can address transboundary pollution. Revising national standards such as a PM2.5 based on rigorous research would signal gradual alignment with WHO norms.

Updated source-apportionment studies must guide targeted interventions. Finally, transparent, real-time public data and audited progress reports are essential for accountability and informed citizen action.

Conclusion

India’s position on global air quality rankings reflects recognition of unique geographic and developmental contexts. The country faces natural dust contributions and ongoing socio-economic transitions that justify adapted standards.

However, the technical gap between WHO air quality guidelines and NAAQS India is substantial. Bridging this gap through interim targets and progressive tightening would demonstrate commitment to public health while respecting developmental needs. Success requires transparent monitoring, outcome focused ranking, regional coordination, and continuous standard improvement.