Air pollution in Delhi-NCR is a regional airshed problem that needs regional governance. Critically examine how well the CAQM model works, with reference to recent technology-led steps like PAVAN-I3C.

Delhi's pollution has many sources that cross State borders, such as stubble burning in Punjab and Haryana, industry and dust. No single State can fix it. The CAQM Act, 2021 created a statutory regional regulator for this. It has exclusive jurisdiction over the NCR and the adjoining areas of four States [2]. CAQM is well designed, but its results are still mixed.

Strengths of the CAQM model

• Airshed-level authority: CAQM coordinates Delhi and four States and implements NCAP and NAAQS in the region. This replaces scattered action by separate SPCBs [2].
• Legal force: CAQM issues binding Statutory Directions. It has ordered 1,556 non-compliant units to close [5].
• PAVAN-I3C: This platform combines 30+ data streams in one place. These include 111 CAAQMS, OCEMS emission feeds from 2,300+ industries, 3,200+ construction sites, and satellite and camera data. It works on the principle of "Detect, Analyse, Act". Breaches now trigger automatic alerts instead of waiting for agencies to report them [1].
• Accountability: A State Action Plan module shows which actions are pending in each State and sector [1].

Limitations

• Coverage gap: CAQM has identified 3,551 units that must have OCEMS, but only about 2,300 are connected [1][5].
• Weak data: The CAG found that Delhi's monitoring stations were not placed as CPCB norms require. None of the 24 stations it checked produced the minimum 16 hours of data a day [4]. A faster dashboard only spreads weak data faster.
• Weak standards: The Standing Committee (2025) said the 2009 NAAQS are weaker than WHO guidance. It also flagged manual stations and uneven monitor coverage [3].
• Execution still depends on the States: Alerts go to SPCBs and municipal bodies that work under State governments. So problems are spotted faster, but not fixed faster.
• Still reactive: In 2025–26, GRAP stages were invoked, made stricter and revoked again and again [6].

Way forward

• Revise NAAQS, and plan and enforce at the airshed level [3].
• Treat an OCEMS feed that goes offline as a violation. Publish State-wise data on alerts raised and closures made.
• Measure success by a regional PM2.5 target, not by the number of data streams connected.

Overall, CAQM gives the NCR the right regional framework, and PAVAN-I3C gives it the tools to detect breaches. Both still need better data, stricter standards and faster action by the States. If these gaps are closed, the model can deliver the right to clean air under Article 21 and SDG 11.6, and could become a template for other airsheds.