Market forces in the emerging market economy of India address only part of the development needs. And there are also domains where markets need facilitation for capabilities to emerge. Plus all sectors of market activity the role of regulation to ensure fair play is required.
In all these three zones, those uncovered by market economy, facilitation and regulation; the need for planning institutions is paramount for good governance.
The uncovered part includes poverty alleviation, national security and environment among others.
Infrastructure, new technology sectors, education, health are areas where facilitation is necessary.
Given the humongous size of the economic activities and implementation complexity, direct action by a planning body, as had been done to some extent by Planning Commission is perhaps counter productive. The intervention interface has to be design with care. The Corporate planning adage that planner does not do any planning could be relevant in certain situations.
There is tremendous scope for creative work, and given the vast talent pool India has, good work is certain to be done.
But if such planning activity is closely aligned to political authority, as Mr. Desai expects, it may undermine the planning process itself. Success perhaps lies in institutionalizing the planning function in an independent quasi-legal, above board mode to attract genuine talent from all over; and develop not one but several planning institutions for diverse roles.
Re: political proximity may lessen institutional legitimacy
by Ramesh on Aug 24, 2014 07:39 AM
However, it is difficult yet for genuine institutionalization process to be initiated by Indian government, since the second pole of polity has failed to evolve beyond its dynastic trappings to become a genuine political movement.
The personalization of planning process, as noted by Mr. Desai is probably a natural outcome of the dynastic control, and may be the reason why the planning structure failed to evolve per needs of the times.
Re: Re: political proximity may lessen institutional legitimacy
by Ramesh on Aug 24, 2014 08:48 AM
Since the new government has opted the route of consensus in policy making, genuine institutionalization is perhaps feasible.
we are very bad at planning. When PC Mohalanobis was there they resorted to Statistics to forecast. Now we have digitised almost everything but by parts. Integration of parts does not take place even if there is indian Economic Services. All Govt bodies have best brains to relax and resort to lathergy. they are only concerned about their APAR and transfer. they come from various NGOs only to park themselves and not to be martyr of Sr haggards who will write their APAR.
first PC then RTO. now it should be Building and Land Record offices.Everything should be e and CC nos. Civil Service exam should be discontinued. IPS/CDSE is ok. hanpicked person should be sent to consulates. EExchanges should be made alive. Governor should control the state with MLAs. MLAs should be entrusted with cases and all of them should be equally loaded. in place of castism , classism should prevail. CoI should be revisited/rewritten...applique work of changes are not ok.
If planning is made for making 'commission' then no need for planning commission. Influence of politicians is the biggest problem in this body. An alternate body with changes in line with the present needs should be made. It should work based on the needs of the people/states and not on the basis of political influence.
There is no denying, that planning commission can not be a different body outside elected govt. purview. However how can anybody move without a plan and there should be a body. NaMo thinks he is the most brilliant and going on undoing all created over so many years. An ideal manager swims with the stream first and then make suitable move. He from the very beginning started dismantling old and putting useless concept of taking suggestion from 100 crore public. It is not at all sensible and if he and his team have no vision, why did they promised so much?
