EIGHT MANTRAS FOR GOOD GOVERNANCE
Gujarat model is a template that can be replicated everywhere with minor tweaks
Debates about the Gujarat model get fixated on numbers, about gross state domestic product (GSDP) growth or agricultural growth being this percentage or that. They also confuse absolute levels of an indicator (say infant mortality or drop-out rates in education) with incremental improvements. The Gujarat model is more about principles. Here are examples.
The government cannot, and need not, provide everything. Even if the government needs to finance and cross-subsidise, it need not deliver a service. There are physical and staff constraints in sub-centres, primary health centres and community health centres. But there is no shortage of private doctors. Why not introduce Chiranjeevi Yojana, in PPP mode? Let the government bear child-delivery costs, regardless of whether expectant mothers go to government centres or empanelled private doctors.
Can one use incentives to achieve objectives? In Samras Yojana, a village gets additional development assistance if panchayat elections are consensual and if women are elected. In Pavan Gram/Tirth Gram schemes, a village gets additional development assistance if there have been no FIRs (a measure of conflict) in the village.
Can one use information technology (IT) and reduce human interface to curb certain types of corruption? Contractual teachers have been appointed without interviews (interviews were subject to abuse). Automated toll booths have been used at state borders. Other than e-procurement, there has been self-certification for boiler inspections.
Use IT to devise a grievance redres- sal system for citizens (the SWAGAT or State Wide Attention on Grievances by Application of Technology) scheme. This has to be spliced with the e-governance network known as GSWAN (Gujarat State Wide Area Network) and connectivity of 18,000 villages.
Use GIS systems in development planning. It is worth reading up about Bhaskaracharya Institute For Space Applications and Geo-Informatics (BISAG) and its funding pattern. Stated simply, BISAG doesn’t receive a ‘subsidy’ from government, and its detailed maps (agriculture, land, water resources, wasteland, forestry, disaster management) are used for planning, but government departments pay for this service.
Take government down to people, instead of people coming to government. Garib Kalyan Melas, where the government eliminates middlemen in distributing welfare measures to the poor, and Krishi Mahotsavs to educate farmers about soil testing and drip irrigation are notable instances. In the former, citizens get to know about their entitlements and are granted those. In the latter, extension services are taken down to people. Gunotsav, where ministers and senior bureaucrats rate government schools, is a slightly different example. Kanya Kelavani/Shala Praveshotsav for school enrolment and female enrolment is another.
Decentralise planning. ATVT (Apno Taluko, Vibrant Taluko) is a good example of this, where planning is taken down to the sub-district or taluka level. There was a remarkable idea of 41 senior bureaucrats being given personal responsibility for development and planning of 41 backward talukas. Vanbandhu Kalyan Yojana (for tribal areas) is another instance of decentralisation, where separate funds are allocated to districts for projects relevant for them. Decentralised, community-managed and demand-driven management originated with earthquake rehabilitation. Even poor people are prepared to pay, pro-
GUJARAT WAS INDIA’S MOST ATTRACTIVE STATE FOR INVESTMENT IN 2012, GARNERING 22.2% OF ALL PROJECT PROPOSALS VALUED AT RS 5.7 LAKH CRORE.
vided service quality improves, though they needn’t pay full user charges. These principles exist in Jyotigram (electricity), user charges through Water and Sanitation Management Organisation (WASMO) and charging tribal families for more than two buffaloes (two are free).
If you distil this, as principles, you have a dependence on private initiative and private sector (several examples from skill development), decentralisation, transparency and accountability in governance, use of price signals, use of technology, dependence on markets and charging the poor. At one level, one can pick roads, water, electricity and law and order and argue that if the government ensures this, and plugs market failures in social sectors (education, health), economic empowerment improves and somewhere down the line, human development outcomes also improve. For the rural sector in Gujarat, there is a story about agricultural and rural development based on roads, water and electricity. That story has often been told. But I don’t think the principles I have mentioned have been articulated, at least, not quite in these terms.
Is this a template that can be replicated elsewhere? The answer depends on what one means by replication. At a generic level, the ‘Gujarat model’ and template, coupled with fiscal space to start statelevel schemes that fill gaps in centrally-sponsored schemes, is a governance template that should be implemented everywhere.
However, Gujarat has a mindset kinder towards private sector, not just corporate private sector, than many states. Conversely, there is scepticism about what government is expected to deliver. It has a healthy tradition of Panchayati Raj that goes back to the 1960s. This makes decentralised planning easier. It faces less serious land acquisition problems than many states. It is favourably placed, not only because of ports, but also because of the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor and the Dedicated Freight Corridor. Inter-state ranking of bureaucracy is difficult and subjective. With that caveat, Gujarat’s bureaucracy is better than most. While Gujarat does have difficult geographical terrain in some of its 18,000 villages, there are states with tougher hurdles.
Therefore, replication doesn’t mean that the Gujarat template can be exactly reproduced, without tweaking and modifications. Having said that, those principles are ones capable of universal acceptance, as long as one’s mindset is not one of giving doles (to citizens) and receiving doles (from the Union government in Delhi). That’s probably the critical difference.