Q. Consider the following statements:

1. At the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28), India refrained from signing the Declaration on Climate and Health.
2. The COP28 Declaration on Climate and Health is a binding declaration; and if signed, it becomes mandatory to decarbonize the health sector.
3. If India's health sector is decarbonized, the resilience of its health-care system may be compromised.

Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements? (UPSC Prelims 2025)
Answer: Only one of the Statements 2 and 3 is correct and that explains Statement 1
Notes: The correct answer is [C] Only one of the Statements 2 and 3 is correct and that explains Statement 1. This question evaluates India's stance at COP28 and the specific constraints of the healthcare sector in developing nations.

• Statement 1 (Correct): At the COP28 summit held in Dubai (2023), India was among the few major economies that did not sign the "COP28 UAE Declaration on Climate and Health." While India supports the general link between climate and health, it opted out of this specific voluntary commitment.
• Statement 2 (Incorrect): The COP28 Declaration on Climate and Health is a non-binding, voluntary political declaration. It does not carry the weight of a legal mandate or treaty. However, India's concern was that the language regarding "reducing emissions" (decarbonization) in the health sector could eventually lead to mandatory cooling requirements or restricted use of certain medical gases.
• Statement 3 (Correct): This reflects India's official reasoning. In a developing country, the priority is universal health coverage and providing emergency services to a massive population. Decarbonizing the health sector—which relies heavily on energy-intensive cold chains for vaccines, 24/7 air conditioning for OTs, and specific anesthetic gases—could compromise the resilience and accessibility of healthcare if low-carbon alternatives are not yet affordable or available.

Explanation of the Link: Statement 3 directly explains Statement 1. India’s refusal to sign was primarily driven by the fear that focusing on aggressive carbon reduction in hospitals (decarbonization) would divert resources from expanding basic healthcare access and undermine the system's ability to handle climate-induced health crises. Since Statement 2 is factually incorrect (the declaration is non-binding), it cannot be a valid explanation for Statement 1.