Cash is King. Or, in the context of our government's benefits structure "cash is leaking". We have known about this for a while: I vividly recall having dissected the ills of India's subsidy framework as part of Economics curriculum in College in the 90s; and it was a well-worn fact then. Commentary focused on flaws in the mechanism and mushrooming of vested interests that were mooching off it. Indeed, the latter had gotten so well entrenched, and critical voices so muted, that the infirmities had became part of the accepted, expected ways of working of mai-baap sarkaar.
Little wonder then that, far from being shown the door, the framework has continued to prosper to this day. Sample this: the GoI spends an estimated INR 3.65 for every Rupee of benefit to reach its intended target. The resultant fiscal burden across the 3F's (subsidy categories: food, fuel and fertilizer) is clearly unsustainably high already. Yet, there is every indication from our government, reeling under the influence of NAC-chhaap Welfare State model, that the economic cost shall escalate further.
Before casting our eye to the future, it may be instructive to take a look at the design and delivery challenges that plague our mechanism today. First, the design is inherently faulty. For instance, food subsidies are run via PDS, pivoted around identiication of BPL (below-poverty-line) needy. This tagging has been a corruption magnet. Inability to pay bribes for BPL ration cards means large swathes of true beneficiaries remain denied benefits, while the subsidy bill for the government continues to grow.
Next, lets talk about delivery. Staying with the food example, there is little control over diversion of subsidised grain (meant for BPL households) to open market by ration shopowners wanting to make a quick buck off the price differential. Likewise, practices like adulteration, false BPL cards, or stockpiling lead to leakages. Upstream too, we have distribtion losses in acquistion, storage and transport due to substandard quality and potential for corruption. Finally, the government spends a packet in administrative expenses to keep this massive rig afloat.
Now, the mammaries of our welfare state are expected to grow (the GoI seems serious about the Food Security bill). This makes the case to entirely overhaul the benefit distribution process even more compelling. Simply put, the need of the hour is to replace the corrupt and convoluted PDS with direct cash transfers to the target population. Life changes dramatically at the consumption end, with a pronise to empower the needy; bid goodbye to the ration-wallah's corruption and coercive power; and incentivize quality supply. Likewise, the government's unproductive (administrative) subsidy burden gets a haircut from dismantled PDS, reduced sourcing & storage expenses and tech-enabled planning & monitoring.
One cannot, of course, expected it to be a walk in the park. The most critical element is target identification. UID is trying to solve this tagging problem multi-dimensionally (technolgy, process, controls, change management). Helmed by Nandan Nilekani since last year, one should expect a good outcome here. Next, the farmer lobby would need to be managed: anything that is seen as encroaching on MSP and government's grain offtake, is a political hot potato. It remains to be seen how much will UPA-2 has to tackle this. At another level, the availability of cash (and presumably an increased amount) in lump sum has been called out as a cultural problem. Fears are that menfolk would drink this 'windfall' away. Not only for this reason, but as broader social empowerment or financial inclusion move, the GoI would do well to contemplate transfers to the Lakshmi, the woman of the house instead. And so on.
Cash, in any event, is likely to see a return, if only in a new avatar. Even if not perfect (and we don't know all the questions yet, far to speak of all answers) it cannot be but an improvement from the mess we have today. Much of this will be played at the level of policy, even more in execution; we have seen UPA botch up both umpteen times. Yet, for the high stakes here, let us remain hopeful.
Little wonder then that, far from being shown the door, the framework has continued to prosper to this day. Sample this: the GoI spends an estimated INR 3.65 for every Rupee of benefit to reach its intended target. The resultant fiscal burden across the 3F's (subsidy categories: food, fuel and fertilizer) is clearly unsustainably high already. Yet, there is every indication from our government, reeling under the influence of NAC-chhaap Welfare State model, that the economic cost shall escalate further.
Before casting our eye to the future, it may be instructive to take a look at the design and delivery challenges that plague our mechanism today. First, the design is inherently faulty. For instance, food subsidies are run via PDS, pivoted around identiication of BPL (below-poverty-line) needy. This tagging has been a corruption magnet. Inability to pay bribes for BPL ration cards means large swathes of true beneficiaries remain denied benefits, while the subsidy bill for the government continues to grow.
Next, lets talk about delivery. Staying with the food example, there is little control over diversion of subsidised grain (meant for BPL households) to open market by ration shopowners wanting to make a quick buck off the price differential. Likewise, practices like adulteration, false BPL cards, or stockpiling lead to leakages. Upstream too, we have distribtion losses in acquistion, storage and transport due to substandard quality and potential for corruption. Finally, the government spends a packet in administrative expenses to keep this massive rig afloat.
Now, the mammaries of our welfare state are expected to grow (the GoI seems serious about the Food Security bill). This makes the case to entirely overhaul the benefit distribution process even more compelling. Simply put, the need of the hour is to replace the corrupt and convoluted PDS with direct cash transfers to the target population. Life changes dramatically at the consumption end, with a pronise to empower the needy; bid goodbye to the ration-wallah's corruption and coercive power; and incentivize quality supply. Likewise, the government's unproductive (administrative) subsidy burden gets a haircut from dismantled PDS, reduced sourcing & storage expenses and tech-enabled planning & monitoring.
One cannot, of course, expected it to be a walk in the park. The most critical element is target identification. UID is trying to solve this tagging problem multi-dimensionally (technolgy, process, controls, change management). Helmed by Nandan Nilekani since last year, one should expect a good outcome here. Next, the farmer lobby would need to be managed: anything that is seen as encroaching on MSP and government's grain offtake, is a political hot potato. It remains to be seen how much will UPA-2 has to tackle this. At another level, the availability of cash (and presumably an increased amount) in lump sum has been called out as a cultural problem. Fears are that menfolk would drink this 'windfall' away. Not only for this reason, but as broader social empowerment or financial inclusion move, the GoI would do well to contemplate transfers to the Lakshmi, the woman of the house instead. And so on.
Cash, in any event, is likely to see a return, if only in a new avatar. Even if not perfect (and we don't know all the questions yet, far to speak of all answers) it cannot be but an improvement from the mess we have today. Much of this will be played at the level of policy, even more in execution; we have seen UPA botch up both umpteen times. Yet, for the high stakes here, let us remain hopeful.
Posts
