Critical Analysis Approach- Illustrated through Land Acquisition Bill 2015

Sir, what would be a good way to approach studying about the land bill issues? And any specific position that we should adopt in your answer? I'm asking since this primarily is the foundation for both agriculture and infrastructure. And there's a potential conflict of interest with either side.

Any issue of such nature...your first aim is to weed out the hype, motivated opinions...and look at it objectively. Try to compile and understand the crux of the bill. Then compile opinions from both the end of the spectrum.

When u face a question in mains...its always safe to put forth your case in the words of others who have placed their opinion. That is...u say those in favour put forth these points...those who oppose these....its also nice to mark some prominent names.... when u read their article..note down 3-4 points..the crux..and their names....u can use them in your answers.. As the issue gets more and more controversial its more safer to use others names instead of telling them as your opinions... your main focus will be to provide an objective analysis .This is not to say u ll be indecisive about everything...and will not have an opinion of your own. You ll just put forth the arguments as the basis of your conclusion.

Lets take this bill itself

You ll not argue whether u need agriculture or not....nor will u say we need industries or not...its a given that we need both.. You ll argue as to how the objective is met by the processes specified by the bill... You ll list down the arguments and say as these amendments bear more credibility and reason , the bill might serve a better purpose if these additions are made... If u feel too much regulation and delay is uncalled for then u ll say that. You r free to choose

What i am telling u is just how you present it...list them as arguments....use it as a base for the conclusion that you arrive at... an informed objective analysis or criticism is very well received...

Hmm, thank you Sir. However I have a follow up - at some point we might have to take a subjective position, on a matter like 'social consent' for e.g. It's quite difficult, in my view to find a right balance between 50% or 70% consent. In that case, we would have to choose, an ideological option. Does the UPSC have a specific preference in these cases?

No vivek...ideology is a guide to look at things..its a frame of reference...the choice as to whether social consent is to be sought or not may be ideological...but if u think the process specified will not give desired outcomes u can say so...its not ideological...its only objective... Avoid sticking on to ideologies for the sake of it....go for a rational analysis to the extent possible... thats all...this is why i told you to use others opinions when there is a clear polarisation… more than the information your capacity to make an objective analysis is important

Okay, understand. So as long as I have a structured, rational argument, the final recommendation can be any point of view. But in case of a controversial topic, better to quote an expert in my summary?

Bulls eye