Governance Deficits & Digital Utopia in India

Of late, there has been a widespread belief that digital technology has an answer for all our difficulties. This is more so among public agencies and officials when it comes to delivery of basic services and promoting good governance. Prime Minister Modi has championed ‘Digital India’ during the past two years, and there is now a rush to invent some digital tool or ‘app’ to solve any and every problem of governance in everyday life.

It is widely recognised that India’s socio-economic performance has been well below its potential since the turn of the century largely because of several constraints in governance. It was believed that the new Prime Minister since 2014 will usher in structural and systemic reforms in governance under his proclamation of ‘maximum governance, minimum government’. From Jan-Dhan to BHIM, a wide range of digital platforms and solutions have been promoted over these three years. It has been assumed that such digital applications will address systemic constraints to good governance in the country. While much progress has been made towards transparency and accountability of public agencies and officials through such digital solutions, certain types of governance deficits are unlikely to be addressed merely through ‘digital apps’.

Three categories of governance deficits have been on the agenda for reforms since the turn of the century; these were further reinforced by the Second Administrative Reforms Commission in 2008.

First and most urgent category of reforms need to focus on design of appropriate modern public agencies and institutions necessary for performing governance functions. From panchayats & municipalities to District Planning Committees, district administration & inter-ministerial coordination, state and national level regulatory & statutory commissions---every type of public agency needs to be re-designed in light of current and future demands of governance from the whole, and its sub-parts. This re-design also needs to include rules and procedures for information and work flow for speedy, efficient and effective decision-making at all levels of governments.

Second category of reforms need to target building and nurturing capacity in public agencies at all levels and functions of government. While some aspects of capacity can be taken care of through reforms mentioned above, human capacity among public officials of all levels needs to be systematically and continuously upgraded for them to perform their roles effectively. There are more than 350 training and 150 research institutes in the government. They all have wonderful infrastructure, accountants and drivers. But, all lack technical & professional expertise to design and conduct appropriate learning programmes for different levels of public officials in an ongoing manner. In addition, there are nearly 1000 institutions of higher education (and about 40,000 post-secondary colleges) in the country; yet their contributions to the quality of learning for students, and support to public officials and agencies, have been minimalist. The main underlying cause of this phenomenon is arrogance of political leaders, as well as public officials, that they know it all any ways. Learning is considered a sign of weakness, not strength. Hence, capacity development institutions of the government are viewed as punishment postings.

Third category of reforms relate to changing the attitudes of public officials towards daily and honest performance of their roles and duties. Teachers, nurses and doctors do not visit schools, clinics or hospitals; district and state government secretariats operate for less than four hours a day; corporators, MLAs and MPs do not attend to their duties on time and regularly; few public functions and officials meet any commitment on time. This phenomenon has to do with a sense of privilege and immunity that a public official acquires even before joining the service. Non-performance of duty has not led to ‘dismissal’ of a single public official since 1950.

The above categories of governance reforms are unlikely to be addressed merely through an ‘app’. Design of institutions will require expertise, both external and at all levels of the government. Digital technology may be useful towards this effort, but IT can not tell what procedure and what level of decision-making is efficient in today’s context. Likewise, digital applications for capacity development can enable access to continuous learning. But, such ‘apps’ can only ‘take a horse to water, not make him drink’. How will learning be valued in public systems and officials? Much noise has been made lately about digital attendance tools in government offices as sign of performance. But attendance in office alone is no evidence of doing your job seriously, because you are being paid for it. Performance related recommendations from Finance Commissions have never been implemented by any government (including latest 14th one last year).

Most digital ‘apps’ have been focusing on improving the interface between citizens and the government. They are welcome. But, ease of doing business inside a public agency or government department needs to be targeted first. Basic record keeping and data management in each local public office and agency is woefully inadequate, making it impossible for effective performance to take place. Systems of internal accountability in the government have weakened, and performance culture is non-existent in all public agencies and offices. Unless internal functioning of each public agency, and entirety of the public system, is structurally reformed, mere ‘apps’ will not deliver good governance.

If good governance is not delivered soon, India will experience ‘demographic nightmares’ (not dividends) and its ranking in Human Development Index will continue to be above 100 for another decade.

Dr Rajesh Tandon 
Founder-President, PRIA 
New Delhi
April 17, 2017

You may be interested to read