When Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman presented Budget 2025-26, it was couched in grand ambitions – a vision of “prosperity that is sustainable, inclusive and resilient”. The rhetoric placed climate resilience, agriculture and rural livelihoods at the core of India’s development narrative. But a year on, the delivery tells a very different story, exposing a yawning gap between promise and performance.
The government’s own Status of Implementation of Budget Announcements 2025-26 reveals that while climate and agriculture dominate the language of the budget speech, they have yet to meaningfully shape on-ground outcomes. Across farming, rural employment, and the energy transition, implementation remains slow and fragmented – skewed toward infrastructure development and manufacturing rather than tangible climate adaptation, income security or ecological repair.
Consider agriculture. At the heart of the rural push was the Prime Minister Dhan-Dhaanya Krishi Yojana, aimed at revitalising 100 agrarian districts. The scheme was launched with much fanfare in October 2025 to benefit millions of farmers. But most district action plans are still under review, and implementation is barely visible in many regions. Despite seed distribution and planning, ground action has lagged.
Similarly, the Rural Prosperity and Resilience Programme (RPRP) – envisioned as a multi-sectoral response to rural under-employment is largely stuck in Phase 1, confined to planning and consultation. Job creation, which was its central goal, remains distant, a reminder that conceptual frameworks are no substitute for execution.
Where delivery has materialised, it often reflects an infrastructure bias rather than livelihood security. The Mission for Aatmanirbharta in Pulses – an Rs 11,440-crore programme has operationalised procurement of pulses, but critics highlight that this replicates a price support model without accompanying ecological safeguards or diversification incentives.
The most striking contrast emerges in the energy transition. Budget 2025-26 outlined clean tech manufacturing – solar PV, EV batteries, electrolysers and grid storage as pillars of climate action. These manufacturing and export-oriented initiatives have seen clear progress, with significant awards under production-linked incentive schemes and advances in wind equipment and green hydrogen. Yet, this “energy transition” remains focused on industrial competitiveness, not on connecting renewable growth to rural energy access or community benefits.
What is absent is a just transition framework for coal-dependent regions, land and water safeguards in renewable expansion, and policy linkages that tie clean energy gains to rural livelihood improvements. The expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure, such as an Rs 10,600-crore urea plant in Assam, further muddies the narrative of a transition that is both green and equitable.
Across sectors, the implementation report reads like a ledger of committees formed, memoranda signed and draft blueprints circulated but little progress on metrics that matter: reduced climate risk, sustained rural incomes, or climate-resilient livelihoods.
Budgets are statements of intent, but implementation is the real test of governance. As the government said it would lay the foundation for a “Viksit Bharat”, the evidence suggests that India is still better at promising transformation than delivering it.
