The Graded Response Action Plan (GRAP), activated every year between November and January, has once again become Delhi&rsquo;s primary instrument to combat worsening air quality. However, its repeated use has raised concerns about over-reliance on what was originally conceived as an emergency, short-term measure rather than a permanent solution to air pollution in the Delhi-National Capital Region (NCR).
Introduced in 2016, GRAP was designed to be triggered during extreme pollution episodes while long-term, systemic interventions were implemented to address the root causes of toxic air. Nearly a decade later, those structural fixes remain inadequate, forcing authorities to repeatedly cycle through GRAP stages 1 to 4. This dependence, critics argue, has created a false sense of action while allowing chronic pollution to persist, with serious consequences for public health and the economy.
The central question being raised is why such emergency measures are still required year after year. Instead of working towards conditions where GRAP becomes unnecessary, policymakers continue to treat it as a catch-all remedy, despite evidence that it fails to deliver sustained relief.
Experience over the past nine years has also exposed the social inequities embedded in the current approach. Wealthier sections of society are largely insulated from the harshest effects of pollution through air purifiers, private transport and controlled indoor environments. Their lifestyles continue with minimal disruption, even as large numbers of service workers and commuters remain exposed to hazardous air while travelling to support these activities.
This has prompted calls for a more stringent and equitable implementation of restrictions. Suggestions include banning all sporting and outdoor institutional activities from the first stage of GRAP, enforcing a broader social lockdown from stage two, and imposing a complete ban on diesel vehicles across all GRAP stages, alongside additional taxation on their use.
While such measures may be viewed as extreme, proponents argue that strict enforcement is necessary to ensure compliance and achieve meaningful reductions in pollution. They maintain that public adherence will follow if governance is firm and consistent.
Beyond emergency responses, there is growing emphasis on addressing landscape-level pollution through sustained policy action, infrastructure reform and environmental planning. Without these long-term interventions, GRAP risks remaining a recurring stopgap that manages crises temporarily but fails to secure clean air for the future.

Reliance on GRAP masks failures in long-term air pollution control efforts

GRAP a Stopgap, Not Solution to Air Crisis

Reliance on GRAP masks failures in long-term air pollution control efforts

December 15, 2025 | 17:18 IST