Sample Material of Our IAS Mains GS Online Coaching Programme

Subject: General Studies (Paper 4 - Ethics, Integrity, and Aptitude)

Topic: Systemic Reforms

Systemic Reforms

“A fallacy promoted by some in the field of anti-corruption and at times also by the international community is that one “fights corruption by fighting corruption” - through yet another anti-corruption campaign, the creation of more “commissions” and ethics agencies, and the incessant drafting of new laws, decrees, and codes of conduct. Overall, such initiatives appear to have little impact, and are often politically expedient ways of reacting to pressures to do something about corruption, substituting for the need for fundamental and systemic governance reforms”.

Monopoly + Discretion - Accountability = Corruption

Importance of Systemic Reforms

A holistic approach for combating corruption would require an optimum mix of punitive and preventive measures. Punitive measures act as a deterrent whereas preventive measures reduce opportunities for corruption by making systems transparent, increasing accountability, reducing discretion, rationalsing procedures etc. Better preventive measures act as ‘Systemic Reforms’ as they seek to improve systems and processes. Some of the initiatives taken in recent years in this direction are listed below:

• Railway Passenger Bookings (Indian Railways): The computerization of railway passenger bookings, including ‘on-line’ booking and e-ticketing has eliminated the middlemen, decongested booking offices and brought considerable transparency to the Railway reservations process.
• Common Entrance Test (Karnataka) : This seeks to ensure merit-based selection to professional colleges in a timely and transparent manner.
• Teachers Appointment Scheme (Karnataka): This unique effort provided for a fool-proof, objective and a transparent system for appointing teachers.
• Registration & Stamps (Maharashtra): The intention was devising more transparent property valuation tables, computerization of records, setting time limits for returning a registered document, use of digital cameras for photos and finger-printing, etc. The expedient of ‘valuation tables’ has virtually done away with arbitrary assessment of stamp duty and achieved the multiple objectives of minimizing corruption, ruling out harassment to purchasers of immoveable property and augmenting tax collection.
• Unit Area Scheme (Delhi): This provided a system for the payment of property tax and registration of property involving self assessment and normative basis of calculation .• e-Cops (Punjab): This seeks to ensure on-line registration of complaints and their systematic follow-up enabling complainants to ascertain the outcome and the higher police echelons to keep ‘real time’ watch over the manner the ‘cutting edge’ level functionaries act on complaints.
• e-Governance in Andhra Pradesh (E- Seva), and Kerala (FRIENDS standing for Fast, Reliable, Instant, Effective Network for Distribution of Services): These provide improved service delivery by simplifying transactions between government and citizens involving use of information technology for payment of utility bills or seeking different services on a single platform. Mention may also be made of the initiative ‘E-Choupals’ in Madhya Pradesh for the benefit of farmers selling their produce.
• Rural Kiosks, known as RSDP (Rural Service Delivery Points) in Andhra Pradesh: This ensures the reach of E-Seva through internet to facilitate payment of bills, information, downloading of forms, etc reducing public inconvenience and releasing employees to more ‘substantive’ public duties.

Such ‘best practices’ drive home the point that given a pragmatic approach to problem solving, proper leadership and planning; impressive results can be achieved in enhancing the quality of services and reducing corruption. But looking at the magnitude of existing corruption such initiatives are far too few. The lack of transparency that generally shrouds government operation and programmes is a fertile ground for corruption. The weakness of accountability mechanisms also provides opportunities for corruption. Bureaucratic complexity and procedures make it difficult for the ordinary citizen to navigate the system. What is required is large scale reform of both systems and procedures.

The range of activities undertaken by government is so vast that any meaningful systemic reform would require an in-depth study of each of these functions. However, certain general principles would apply to all functions of government at all levels and these are dealt with in this chapter.

Promoting Competition

Most public services in India are provided by government in a monopolistic setting. Such a situation by its very nature is conducive to arbitrariness, and complacence with a high probability of a section of functionaries taking advantage of the ‘departmental hegemony’ for corruption. Introduction of an element of competition in the provision of public services is thus a very useful tool to curb corruption. Tw o successful initiatives can be cited in this connection; first, the gradual de-monopolisation of the telecom sector; second, the growing role of private players in providing direct marketing services to farmers outside the government-controlled mandis in Madhya Pradesh.

The case of telecommunication is one of the most successful examples of curbing corruption through introduction of competition. Our telecommunication sector was, until recently, the exclusive preserve of government. Such monopolistic control lead to a high incidence of corruption. The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, stipulated that it was only the Department of Telecommunication, which could operate as the policy maker, service provider and the licensor in the field of telecommunications. As a result of policy reforms, which introduced competition, private players have been allowed in the international and national long distance sectors as well as in the form of private cellular services. Policymaking has thus been separated from provision of services. The result has been a drastic lowering in the cost of services and the universal recognition of a major decline in corrupt practices.

The Agricultural Produce Marketing Act, 1972, of Madhya Pradesh permitted only the traders in the officially designated mandis to buy the produce of the farmers. The officials of the Mandi Samitis and the traders formed a monopsonistic nexus to cheat the farmers by paying them less than the fair price of their produce. The Act was later amended and now farmers and traders are no longer obliged to transact business only in designated mandis. This reduced corruption in the regulated markets indulged in by traders and officials.

To Get Full Material Join General Studies - 4 Online Course

Click Here to Join Online Coaching for IAS Mains General Studies - I, II, III & IV (Combo)

Click Here to Buy IAS Mains General Studies Study Kit in Hard Copy

<<Go Back To Main Page