1.

Overview of India's Political Economy: The evolution of economic policy since

independence, from planning in the Nehru-Mahalanobis era to economic reform
and liberalization of the present times: the role of the state
2. Role of Media in Policy Making in India
Role of Media in Policy Making in India: A Critical Analysis
“मीडिया ना केवल समाज का आईना है, बल्कि नीतियों की दिशा और दशा भी तय
करता है।”
("The media is not just a mirror of society but also shapes the direction and destination of
policies.")
I. Introduction: Media as the Fourth Pillar of Democracy
In a democracy like India, media serves not just as a vehicle of information but as a
vigilant watchdog, a platform for dialogue, and a crucial player in the policy-making
arena. It does not merely report policies — it often creates the climate in which policies
are formed, challenged, or restructured. The press, in the Indian context, has evolved from
being a tool of resistance during the colonial period to becoming a key actor in modern
governance.
However, with the explosion of communication technologies and media platforms, media
has emerged not merely as a reporter of policy but as a formulator and influencer of
policy agendas, often determining what enters the political discourse and what fades into
silence.
In a democracy as vast and pluralistic as India, policy does not merely flow from
Parliament to the people. Instead, it often percolates upwards — from newsrooms,
digital trends, televised debates, and front-page headlines into legislative chambers.
The transformation from “watchdog” to “policy driver” marks a critical shift in how
democratic accountability and policy responsiveness function in India today.
Its role in policy making is not incidental but foundational — deeply rooted in Article
19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, which ensures freedom of speech and expression, and
by implication, freedom of the press.

II. The Mechanics of Media in Policy Making: Indian and Theoretical Contexts
Drawing from Guy Berger’s five models of media-policy relationships, we can see that
India, at different times, has oscillated across all of them:
1. Liberal Democratic Model – Media highlights public concerns; government
responds (e.g., Nirbhaya case → Criminal Law Amendment).
2. Muckraker Model – Media uncovers issues, prompting public outrage and
government action (e.g., Cobrapost and Tehelka exposés).
3. Bypassing Civil Society – Media becomes a proxy for real public opinion (e.g., over-
sensationalized TRP wars during policy crises).
4. Manipulation & Propaganda Models – State-engineered narratives using media to
shape public mood (e.g., demonetization narrative).
The interplay between agenda-setting theory (McCombs & Shaw) and paradigmatic
influence (framing theory) defines how media affects not what policies are made, but
what becomes policy-worthy.
III. Media Theories at Work in Policy Context
1. Agenda-Setting Theory (McCombs & Shaw):
“Media may not tell us what to think, but it tells us what to think about.”
In India, from rising unemployment to NEET exam leaks, media decides the urgency
index of policy issues.
2. Framing Theory:
How media presents an issue influences how policymakers react to it.
E.g., framing farmer protests as "terrorist-funded" vs "grassroots unrest" changes how
the law is justified or repealed.
3. Public Sphere Theory (Habermas):
Media creates a virtual Parliament, where public reasoning forces state response.

III. Evolution of Media’s Role in Policymaking

1. Colonial Period to Emergency (1975–77): Shaping Nationalist Policy
During the British Raj, the vernacular press, led by editors like Bal Gangadhar Tilak
(Kesari) and Annie Besant (New India), catalyzed nationalist sentiment and indirectly
influenced the Swadeshi policies, compelling the British Raj to bring the Vernacular
Press Act (1878) — an early indication of media influencing colonial “policies” of
suppression.
However, the Emergency period witnessed blanket censorship, reflecting the vulnerability
of media under authoritarian impulses. This era prompted legal and constitutional scrutiny
of media's independence.
2. Post-Emergency Awakening (1975-77)
The Emergency was a watershed moment, exposing media’s fragility and power. The
Press Council of India, though existing since 1966, found renewed significance post-1977
as a guardian of press ethics and autonomy. This phase reoriented media to question
policy, not just report it.
3. Post-Liberalization Era (1991 onwards):
With the entry of private players, media diversified and digitized. Economic policies were
no longer confined to Parliament; they were now debated on prime-time TV. Channels
like NDTV and Aaj Tak became platforms where government accountability was tested
live.
4. Present Day – Digital and Algorithmic Media:
Today’s media is algorithm-driven and information-saturated. WhatsApp forwards and
Twitter hashtags have the power to spark national debates and policy reversals, as evident
during the CAA–NRC protests.

IV. Media’s Influence on Public Opinion and Policy Formation

Media does not directly make policy but acts as a catalyst through the following:

1. The CNG Policy Case – Media, Judiciary, and Civil Society (2001–2002)
As documented in the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) archives, media
highlighted Delhi’s pollution crisis, triggering public outcry. The Supreme Court
responded by mandating CNG for public transport. The policy, though scientific,
faced political hurdles — but was sustained due to persistent media spotlight,
especially during clashes between BJP (Centre) and Congress (State).

2. Agenda Setting Theory (McCombs and Shaw):

Media tells the public what to think about, indirectly telling policymakers what to act
upon.
3. Case Study – Nirbhaya Case (2012):
The 24*7 media coverage led to mass mobilization, which forced the Justice Verma
Committee to recommend amendments to criminal law, culminating in the Criminal
Law (Amendment) Act, 2013. It is a textbook case of policy-making fueled by media-
fueled public pressure.
Media Role: Created sustained public outrage → Policy urgency → Fast-track reform.
4. Farm Laws Protests (2020–21):
Initially backed by mainstream media, the protests found voice in digital and
international media after being labeled “anti-national.” Eventually, media pressure
and public opinion led to the rollback of the laws.
5. Swachh Bharat Abhiyan (2014):
A policy whose success was significantly media-propelled. Endorsements by
celebrities and constant coverage created a culture where sanitation became part of
daily discourse.
6. COVID-19 and Aarogya Setu App:
The government's push for this digital tracking policy was bolstered by a massive
media campaign — however, the lack of transparency also raised privacy concerns
that were highlighted by independent media like The Wire and Scroll. During the
second wave, media coverage of oxygen shortages and mass cremations forced policy
changes like oxygen audits, decentralised vaccine procurement, and improved data
reporting.

V. Media Failures in Policy Making: The Other Side

Media is not always a constructive policy agent. Sometimes, it contributes to policy
misdirection:
 Demonetization (2016): Early media glorification suppressed economic critiques.
The narrative of “surgical strike on black money” dominated, only for policy
downsides to emerge much later, once alternative voices surfaced via independent
media.
 Aadhaar Policy: The media initially underplayed privacy concerns, despite Supreme
Court scrutiny. Only after data leaks and the Puttaswamy judgment (2017) did
discourse mature.
 Farm Laws (2020–21): Mainstream media, initially hostile to protesting farmers,
eventually had to realign as independent platforms amplified farmer voices globally,
forcing the policy's repeal. However, as independent and international media started
covering farmer protests, public opinion shifted.
🔄 Result: Repeal of three farm laws in 2021 — a rare policy reversal under popular
and media pressure.
 Sensationalism & Misinformation:
In the rush to break news, facts are often compromised. Policies then respond to fear
or emotion, not evidence.
Example: COVID vaccine hesitancy in rural areas due to media-amplified rumors.
 Media Trial and Policy Pressure:
High-profile cases (e.g., Sushant Singh Rajput, Aryan Khan) saw policy authorities
act under public/media pressure, risking due process.
 TRP-Driven Policy Hype:
Schemes like “Love Jihad Laws” got media oxygen, leading to state-level
ordinances despite little empirical evidence.

VI. Media as a Double-Edged Sword: Propaganda vs Policy Debate

1. Media as a Policy Tool: Under the Modi Government
Under the Modi regime, the relationship between media and policymaking has grown
both strategic and scrutinized:
 Policies like Swachh Bharat, Ujjwala Yojana, Digital India were marketed through
media campaigns — a modern form of policy branding.
 The Mann Ki Baat platform itself is an instrument of direct-to-public policy
communication, bypassing traditional media filters.
 Yet, this era also saw concerns over press freedom. India’s ranking in the World
Press Freedom Index (150 in 2024) and sedition FIRs against journalists (e.g., for
covering farmers’ protests) suggest an overlap of media regulation with policy
coercion.
“निंदा में भी नीति पलती है, बशर्ते मीडिया ईमानदार हो।”
Polarization and Political Bias:
Media, especially television, has been accused of aligning with political ideologies. Terms
like “Godi Media” have emerged to criticize pro-establishment narratives. Channels
were seen diverting attention from economic concerns to emotionally charged issues like
religious identity or nationalism.
Example:
While the Rafale Deal warranted deeper economic and policy scrutiny, some sections of
the media chose political mudslinging over investigative journalism.
2. Case Law – Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras (1950):
The Supreme Court held that freedom of the press is essential for the functioning of
democracy and the formation of public opinion.

The Social Media Era: Policy in Hashtags

 #MeTooIndia → Reinforced implementation of POSH guidelines across institutions.
 #JusticeForSSR → Questioned credibility of investigating agencies.
 #CAA_NRC → Shifted international and diplomatic pressure; halted NRC
expansion.
Digital platforms have democratized media’s reach but also fragmented public consensus,
leading to policy gridlocks.

VII. Public Opinion: Media as a Mediator and Manufacturer

Public opinion is not static — it is manufactured, shaped, and shifted through media
narratives. As theorized in Gerbner’s Cultivation Theory, prolonged exposure to
particular ideas (nationalism, security threats, minority representation) molds public
psychology, which in turn, pressures policy choices.
Opinion polls, panel shows, viral videos — all simulate a public mood which
policymakers read as public mandate.
But as Berger says, “public opinion is often a fiction — a mirror reflecting media’s own
biases.”
VII. Key Indian Policies on Media and Their Impacts
1. Press Council of India Act (1978):
Statutory body to preserve the freedom of the press and maintain its standards.
However, it lacks punitive powers, making it largely toothless.
2. Information Technology Act, 2000 (especially Section 69A):
Used to block content that may affect “sovereignty and integrity.” Critics allege
misuse to silence dissent (e.g., Twitter takedowns).
3. Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995:
Enforces program codes but often criticized for vague terms like “morality” and
“good taste.” Codes for news content.
4. Draft Broadcasting Regulation Bill (2023):
Proposes to bring OTTs and digital media under regulatory scrutiny, raising alarms
about overregulation and censorship.
5. Swachh Bharat 6. Celebrities, TV campaigns, and regular coverage
Abhiyan created cultural behavior change

8. Triggered by coverage of sexual harassment cases post-

7. POSH Act, 2013
Nirbhaya

9. Right to Education 10. Media reports on child labor and dropout rates helped
Act, 2009 galvanize support

12. Intense debate and policy analysis on digital platforms

11. NEP 2020
shaped public response and reforms
13.

VIII. International Lens: Media and Policy Across the Globe

1. United States – Watergate Scandal:
Investigative journalism by The Washington Post led to President Nixon’s resignation.
Media held the highest office accountable, influencing institutional reform on
surveillance.
2. UK – Grenfell Tower Fire (2017):
Media coverage exposed the negligence in housing policies, forcing rapid legislative
response on part of Home Office to revise the immigration policies. (Uphaar Cinema
Tragedy- Fire Safety policy in India)
3. Tunisia and the Arab Spring (2011):
Social-media catalyzed revolutions across the Middle East, demonstrating the policy-
changing power of citizen journalism. (Anti-CAA protests through
Instagram/Twitter)
4. Sweden’s Press/Media Ombudsman Model:
Ensures ethical journalism through self-regulation — a concept India can adopt for
balancing freedom and accountability. (Largely missing in INDIA)

IX. Role of Media Personalities and Political Parties in India

 Ravish Kumar (NDTV): Known for questioning the government’s silence on
unemployment and health, his coverage forced debates in the Parliament.
 Arnab Goswami (Republic TV): Accused of sensationalism but also pushed
government narratives with unmatched reach.
 BJP & IT Cell: Mastered the use of digital media to propagate schemes like Digital
India and Ujjwala Yojana.
 Congress's NYAY Scheme (2019): Media debates around feasibility led to voter
skepticism, showcasing media’s power to influence electoral outcomes.

X. Creative Metaphors: Hindi Proverbs for the Indian Media

 "जो देखे वो बिके, जो बिके वही दिखे!" (What sells is shown; what is shown,
sells!) – on the TRP-driven nature of Indian media.
 "मीडिया अगर चौथा स्तंभ है, तो आज वह कभी कभार झुके नहीं, बल्कि बिके
हुए लगते हैं।"

XI. Challenges and Reforms: The Way Ahead

Challenges:
 Sensationalism and misinformation
 Corporate-political nexus
 Paid news and advertisement bias
 Weak regulatory framework
Reforms:
1. Statutory Strengthening of Press Council of India
2. Strengthen RTI frameworks to encourage investigate journalism.
3. Enactment of a Media Ombudsman with autonomy.
4. Promotion of Public Service Broadcasting through funding models like BBC
5. Algorithmic Transparency in Digital Platforms
6. Media Literacy in Curriculum – to empower the citizen, not just the journalist

XII. Conclusion: Policy and Perception – An Intertwined Future

The Indian media, when ethical, fearless, and fact-driven, has the power to transform not
just policy but the very consciousness of a nation. However, when compromised, it may
distort public opinion and derail democratic processes. As India strides forward in the
digital age, its media must evolve into a participatory force — “na keval darpan, balki
disha dikhane wala deepak” (not just a mirror, but a guiding lamp).

3. Contradictions of Indian Democracy in Policy Making

4. Poverty and Policy Making in India
 5. Unemployment and Policy Making in India

CLASS NOTES

Role of Media in Policymaking in India

1. Constitutional Backing
 Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech & expression includes freedom of press.
 Acts as a watchdog in democracy—informs, questions, critiques policy decisions.
2. Evolution of Media's Role
 Pre-1991 (Doordarshan era):
o Govt-controlled broadcasting, no private media.
o News delayed (e.g., NewsTrack cassettes) – limited influence on immediate
policymaking.
 Post-1991 (Liberalization):
o Growth of private media → faster news cycles, wider reach.
o Enabled real-time policy debates.
3. Shift from Passive to Active Player
 Media moved from reporting policies to shaping them.
 Investigative journalism reveals ground realities (e.g., BPL surveys, RTI use).
 Case studies influence court judgments and policy drafts.
4. Key Functions in Policymaking
 Agenda Setting: Highlights key issues → govt compelled to act.
 Public Mobilization: Builds opinion → strengthens democratic participation.
 Watchdog Role: Checks corruption and misuse of power.
5. Challenges in Contemporary Media
 Polarisation of journalism → biased narratives, loss of credibility.
 Misinformation/Disinformation → weakens informed public debates.
 Commercialization & TRP race → focus on sensationalism over real issues.
 Marginalized voices ignored → lack of inclusive policymaking.
6. Noteworthy Quote
 Amartya Sen: “No substantial famine has ever occurred in any independent and
democratic country with a relatively free press.”
 o Highlights how media prevents policy failure by ensuring accountability.
7. Conclusion
 Media today is not a silent spectator but a crucial stakeholder in policymaking.
 Its impact is visible from flagging issues to shaping public discourse and influencing
governmental action.
 Needs ethical revival to serve democracy and policy interests effectively.

2. Unemployment and Policy Making in India

Introduction
Unemployment has been a persistent challenge in India's socio-economic landscape,
influencing policy decisions and shaping political narratives since independence. Addressing
this multifaceted issue requires an in-depth exploration of historical contexts, policy
evolutions, political commitments, and international comparisons. This analysis delves into
these dimensions, highlighting key policies, political manifestos, committee
recommendations, and the roles of various leaders and parties in tackling unemployment.
Constitutional Provisions and Early Perspectives
The framers of the Indian Constitution recognized the gravity of unemployment. During the
Constituent Assembly debates, there were discussions emphasizing the state's responsibility
to ensure employment opportunities for its citizens. For instance, on April 29, 1947, Sardar
Vallabhbhai Patel, in his capacity as Chairman of the Advisory Committee on
Minorities, Fundamental Rights, etc., submitted a report to the President of the Constituent
Assembly, highlighting the importance of addressing unemployment as a fundamental
concern.
This vision was encapsulated in Article 41 of the Directive Principles of State Policy, which
states that the state shall, within its economic capacity, make effective provisions for securing
the right to work. However, being part of the Directive Principles, this article is non-
justiciable, serving more as a guiding principle than an enforceable right .
Evolution of Employment Policies and Schemes
Post-independence, India adopted a socialist-inspired economic model, emphasizing state-led
industrialization and planning. The Five-Year Plans were central to this approach:
 First Five-Year Plan (1951-1956): Focused on agrarian reforms and community
development, aiming to absorb the surplus rural labor.
 Second Five-Year Plan (1956-1961): Emphasized rapid industrialization, particularly
in heavy industries, with the belief that industrial growth would generate employment.
Despite these efforts, unemployment remained a challenge, leading to the introduction of
targeted employment schemes:
 1. Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA),
2005: This landmark legislation guarantees 100 days of wage employment in a
financial year to rural households. It has been instrumental in providing employment
and improving rural livelihoods .
2. Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY), 2015: Aimed at providing skill
training to youth, enhancing their employability in various sectors.
3. Atmanirbhar Bharat Rojgar Yojana (ABRY), 2020: Launched to incentivize
employers for the creation of new employment along with social security benefits and
restoration of loss of employment during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Government Initiatives and Political Leadership
The role of political leadership has been pivotal in shaping employment policies:
 Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Tenure: Recognizing the employment challenge,
PM Modi constituted two Cabinet Committees in 2019—one on Investment and
Growth and another on Employment and Skill Development—to address economic
slowdown and unemployment.

Political Manifestos and Leadership Commitments

Political parties in India have consistently highlighted employment generation in their
manifestos:
 Indian National Congress (INC): In its 2024 manifesto, the INC emphasized job
creation, promising a national caste census and development of infrastructure to boost
employment .
 Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP): The BJP, under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has
launched initiatives like "Make in India" to boost manufacturing and create jobs.
However, critiques have emerged regarding the effectiveness of these initiatives in
substantially reducing unemployment .
Committee Recommendations and Reports
Various committees have been constituted to address unemployment:

 Bhagwati Committee (1973): Officially known as the Task Force on Employment

and Income Distribution, chaired by economist Jagdish Bhagwati, this committee was
tasked with studying unemployment and recommending measures. The committee's
report emphasized the need for labor-intensive industries and rural employment
programs to tackle unemployment effectively.
 Dantwala Committee (1980): Established by the Planning Commission, this
committee recommended an alternative approach to employment planning,
emphasizing the integration of employment objectives into the broader planning
framework.

Current Unemployment Scenario and State-wise Analysis

As per recent data:
 Unemployment Rate Trends: The unemployment rate in India has shown
fluctuations, with a notable peak during the COVID-19 pandemic. Efforts have been
made to bring it down, but challenges persist. The Unemployment Rate (UR) for
individuals aged 15 years and above showed a declining trend: 4.2% in 2020-21, 4.1%
in 2021-22, and 3.2% in 2022-23.
 State-wise Variations: States like Haryana (37.4%) and Rajasthan (28.5%) have
reported high unemployment rates, while states like Odisha (0.9%) and Gujarat
(2.3%) have lower rates .
Budget Allocations and Financial Commitments
The Indian government's budget allocations reflect its commitment to addressing
unemployment:
 In the fiscal year ending March 2025, the government announced a major spending
initiative, including significant funds for infrastructure projects aimed at job creation .
 The budget also allocated $24 billion for job creation over five years and $32 billion
for rural development in the year 2024 .
International Comparisons and Lessons
India can draw lessons from international models:
 Denmark's Flexicurity Model: Balances labor market flexibility with social security,
allowing easy hiring and firing while providing strong unemployment benefits and
retraining programs .
 Germany's Dual Vocational Training System: Integrates apprenticeships with
formal education, ensuring a skilled workforce aligned with industry needs.

India can draw lessons from these models to enhance its employment strategies,
particularly in integrating skill development with industry requirements.

 Judicial Interpretations and Labor Flexibility

The Indian judiciary has played a role in interpreting labor laws in the context of
employment. For instance, discussions around labor flexibility and judicial
interpretations have highlighted the need for balancing workers' rights with economic
efficiency.

Challenges and Recommendations

Despite various initiatives, challenges persist:
 Skill Mismatch: There's a gap between the skills possessed by job seekers and those
demanded by employers. Enhancing vocational training and education can bridge this
gap.
  Informal Sector Dominance: A significant portion of India's workforce is in the
informal sector, lacking job security and benefits. Formalizing this sector can improve
employment quality.
 Youth Unemployment: With a large young population, creating adequate job
opportunities remains critical. Encouraging entrepreneurship and startups can be a
viable solution.
Conclusion
Addressing unemployment in India requires a multifaceted approach, integrating policy
interventions, political will, and lessons from international best practices. As the Hindi saying
goes, "खाली दिमाग शैतान का घर होता है" (An idle mind is the devil's workshop).
Ensuring productive employment not only boosts the economy but also fosters social stability
and individual well-being. Through concerted efforts, India can aspire to transform its
demographic dividend into a driver of economic growth and development.

National Employment Schemes

1. Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA),
2005
o Objective: To provide at least 100 days of wage employment in a financial
year to every rural household whose adult members volunteer to do unskilled
manual [Link]
o Impact: MGNREGA has been instrumental in enhancing rural livelihoods,
reducing poverty, and empowering marginalized communities. However,
challenges such as delayed payments and corruption have hindered its full
potential.
2. Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY), 2015
o Objective: To provide skill development training to youth across various
sectors, enhancing their employability.
o Impact: While PMKVY has trained millions, critiques point to mismatches
between training provided and industry requirements, leading to
underemployment.
3. Prime Minister's Employment Generation Programme (PMEGP), 2008
o Objective: To generate self-employment opportunities through the
establishment of micro-enterprises in the non-farm [Link] news &
breaking headlines+2Erojgar+2Central Bank of India+2
o Impact: PMEGP has facilitated entrepreneurship, especially in rural areas.
However, issues like inadequate credit support and market linkages have
limited its [Link] Bank of India
4. Atmanirbhar Bharat Rojgar Yojana (ABRY), 2020
 o Objective: To incentivize employers for the creation of new employment
along with social security benefits during the COVID-19 recovery phase.
o Impact: ABRY has encouraged formalization of jobs and provided relief to
employers. Yet, its long-term sustainability remains uncertain.
5. Pradhan Mantri Rojgar Protsahan Yojana (PMRPY), 2016
o Objective: To promote employment generation by incentivizing employers to
hire unemployed youth and providing them with social security benefits.
Directorate General of Employment+1Swipe+1
o Impact: PMRPY has led to an increase in formal employment. Nonetheless,
the scheme's reach is limited to certain [Link] General of
Employment
6. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Grameen Kaushalya Yojana (DDU-GKY), 2014
o Objective: To enhance the employability of rural youth through skill
development.
o Impact: DDU-GKY has improved employment prospects for rural youth.
However, placement rates and job retention have been areas of [Link]
7. National Career Service (NCS), 2015
o Objective: To provide a digital platform connecting job seekers and
employers.
o Impact: NCS has modernized employment exchanges. Yet, its effectiveness is
contingent on widespread adoption and regular updates.
State-Level Initiatives
1. Chhattisgarh Unemployment Allowance Scheme, 2023
o Objective: To provide financial assistance of ₹2,500 per month to educated
unemployed [Link]
o Impact: This scheme offers immediate relief to the unemployed. However, it
may not address the root causes of unemployment.
2. Kerala's Kudumbashree Mission, 1998
o Objective: To empower women through self-help groups and micro-
enterprises.
o Impact: Kudumbashree has been successful in poverty alleviation and
women's empowerment. Its model is often cited as exemplary.
3. Rajasthan's Mukhyamantri Yuva Sambal Yojana, 2019
o Objective: To provide unemployment allowances to educated youth.
Erojgar+1ClearTax+1
 o Impact: While providing temporary relief, the scheme's effectiveness in long-
term employment generation is debatable.
International Comparisons
1. Germany's Dual Vocational Training System
o Objective: Combines apprenticeships in a company with vocational
education.
o Impact: This system ensures a skilled workforce aligned with industry needs,
leading to low youth unemployment rates.
2. Denmark's Flexicurity Model
o Objective: Balances labor market flexibility with social security.
o Impact: Workers can be easily hired and fired, but generous unemployment
benefits and retraining programs provide security.
3. United States' Unemployment Insurance (UI)
o Objective: Provides temporary financial assistance to unemployed workers.
World Bank
o Impact: While offering immediate relief, critiques highlight issues like limited
coverage and adequacy of benefits.
Critical Analysis
 Budget Allocations: In the fiscal year ending March 2025, India's government
allocated ₹860 billion for MGNREGA, reflecting its commitment to rural
employment. However, the effectiveness of such allocations depends on efficient
implementation and [Link]
 Skill Mismatch: Despite numerous skill development programs, a significant gap
remains between the skills imparted and industry requirements. Aligning training
curricula with market needs is crucial.
 Informal Sector Dominance: A large portion of India's workforce is in the informal
sector, lacking job security and benefits. Policies should focus on formalizing this
sector to ensure better employment conditions.
 Regional Disparities: States like Haryana and Rajasthan report high unemployment
rates, indicating the need for region-specific strategies.
 Social Security Nets: Unlike countries with robust unemployment insurance systems,
India's social security for the unemployed is limited.
4. Poverty and Policy Making in India
Poverty in India is a multifaceted issue deeply rooted in historical, economic, and social
contexts. Addressing it requires a comprehensive understanding of its evolution, the
policies implemented over time, the roles played by various personalities, and the current
scenario. This analysis delves into these aspects, offering a critical examination of India's
poverty alleviation journey.
Historical Context and the Constituent Assembly's Vision
Post-independence, India's leaders recognized poverty eradication as central to nation-
building. The Constituent Assembly envisioned a nation where socio-economic justice
prevailed. This vision was embedded in the Directive Principles of State Policy,
particularly:
 Article 38: Mandates the state to promote the welfare of the people by securing a
social order permeated by justice—social, economic, and political.
 Article 39(a): Ensures that citizens have the right to an adequate means of livelihood.
 Article 41: Obligates the state to provide public assistance in cases of unemployment,
old age, sickness, and disablement.
These principles laid the foundation for India's approach to poverty alleviation.
Evolution of Poverty Estimation in India
Accurate poverty estimation has been pivotal for policy formulation. Over the decades,
various committees have been constituted to refine this estimation:Drishti
IAS+1BYJU'S+1
1. Alagh Committee (1979): Introduced the calorie-based poverty line, defining
poverty based on minimum calorie intake—2,400 kcal in rural areas and 2,100 kcal in
urban areas. This approach faced criticism for its narrow focus, neglecting other
essential needs.
2. Lakdawala Committee (1993): Recommended using consumer expenditure
surveys to estimate poverty, emphasizing state-specific poverty lines. However, it
didn't account for health and education expenditures, leading to an incomplete
assessment.
3. Tendulkar Committee (2009): Shifted to a broader perspective, incorporating
spending on food, health, and education. It set a uniform poverty line across rural and
urban areas but faced backlash for setting the urban poverty line at ₹32 per day,
deemed [Link]'S
4. Rangarajan Committee (2014): Proposed a higher poverty line—₹47 per day in
urban areas and ₹32 in rural areas—and included normative levels of adequate
nourishment, clothing, house rent, conveyance, and education. Despite being more
comprehensive, debates about its adequacy persisted.
5. NITI Aayog's Multidimensional Poverty Index (2021): Adopted a
multidimensional approach, assessing deprivations across health, education, and
 standard of living. This index aligns with global standards, offering a holistic view of
[Link]
Major Poverty Alleviation Schemes and Policies
India has implemented numerous schemes targeting poverty:
 Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) (1978): Aimed at providing
assets and skills to below-poverty-line families through a mix of subsidy and bank
credit.
 Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA)
(2005): Provides legal guarantee for at least 100 days of wage employment in a
financial year to every rural household.
 Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY) (2015): Targets "Housing for All" by 2022,
offering financial assistance for constructing pucca houses. This initiative seeks to
provide affordable housing to urban and rural poor. While it has achieved significant
milestones, challenges related to land acquisition, quality of construction, and meeting
targets remain.
 Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Anna Yojana (PMGKAY), 2020: Launched during
the COVID-19 pandemic to provide free food grains, PMGKAY has been lauded for
preventing extreme poverty during crises. Nonetheless, questions about fiscal
sustainability and long-term dependency have been raised.
 Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (PMJDY) (2014): Aims for comprehensive
financial inclusion by providing banking services to the unbanked population. This act
guarantees 100 days of wage employment to rural households. While it has provided
income support, critiques highlight issues like fund misappropriation, delayed
payments, and inefficiencies. Some argue that it has inadvertently made agriculture
less profitable by diverting labor.
Forbes India+[Link]+19Press Information Bureau+19
 National Food Security Act (NFSA) (2013): Legalizes the right to food by providing
subsidized food grains to approximately two-thirds of the population. Aimed at
providing subsidized food grains to approximately two-thirds of the population,
NFSA has been pivotal in addressing hunger. However, concerns about corruption,
inefficiency, and the quality of food grains persist. Instances of technical errors
leading to exclusion from benefits have also been reported.
 Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY) (2001): Targets the "poorest of the poor" by
providing highly subsidized food grains. [Link]
 Annapurna Scheme (1999): Provides 10 kg of free food grains per month to indigent
senior citizens who are not receiving pension.

State-Specific Initiatives
Certain states have pioneered innovative poverty alleviation models:
 Kerala: Emphasized education and healthcare, leading to high Human
Development Index (HDI) [Link] India
 Tamil Nadu: Implemented mid-day meal schemes ahead of national adoption,
improving nutrition and school attendance.
 Odisha: Transitioned from being one of the poorest states to achieving significant
poverty reduction through disaster management and livelihood programs.
Current Poverty Scenario: Richest and Poorest States
As of recent data:
 Poorest State: Bihar, with a poverty rate of approximately 33.74%. Factors include
low industrialization and high dependency on [Link]
 Richest State (by GDP per capita): Sikkim, attributed to its small population and
investments in hydropower and tourism.
It's noteworthy that while states like Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu have high Gross State
Domestic Product (GSDP), their large populations result in moderate per capita income
figures.
Budgetary Allocations and Expenditures
The Union Budget reflects the government's commitment to poverty alleviation:
 MGNREGA: Allocated ₹86,000 crore in the 2025-26 budget, maintaining previous
levels despite increased demand during economic downturns.
 Rural Development: ₹2.66 trillion allocated, focusing on infrastructure and
employment [Link]
 Food Subsidies: ₹2.03 trillion earmarked to ensure food security for vulnerable
populations.
However, critiques highlight that while allocations are substantial, the effectiveness
depends on efficient implementation and addressing leakages.
Role of Key Personalities and Political Parties
 Jawaharlal Nehru: As India's first Prime Minister, Nehru emphasized a socialist
pattern of society, initiating the Planning Commission and Five-Year Plans focusing
on industrialization and community development.
 Indira Gandhi: Introduced the "Garibi Hatao" (Remove Poverty) slogan during
the 1971 elections, leading to programs like the Twenty-Point.
 Narendra Modi: Focus on self-employment (Startup India, PMEGP), but critics
argue informality has increased.
 Nitin Kamath: Highlighted that “medical emergency is biggest cause of poverty”
– preventive healthcare is ignored.
 Despite these efforts, critiques suggest that economic growth has not translated
equitably, with wealth concentration increasing among the top 1%. AP News+1The
Guardian+1
 International Comparisons and Lessons
Countries like China have achieved significant poverty reduction through rapid
industrialization and targeted policies. India can learn from such models by focusing
on manufacturing growth, skill development, and integrating rural economies into
global value chains.

CLASS NOTES

Poverty in India is a multifaceted issue, deeply rooted in historical, economic, and social
contexts. Addressing it requires a nuanced understanding of its dimensions, the evolution
of policy measures, and the roles played by various stakeholders over time.
Historical Context and Evolution of Poverty Measurement in India
The discourse on poverty in India dates back to the colonial era, with Dadabhai Naoroji's
seminal "Drain of Wealth" theory highlighting the economic exploitation of India under
British rule. Naoroji, often referred to as the "Grand Old Man of India," was the first
Indian to be elected as a Member of Parliament in Britain. He argued that a significant
portion of India's wealth was being transferred to Britain, hindering India's economic
development .Edukemy+1Azadi Mahotsav+1
Post-independence, measuring poverty became a priority to inform policy decisions.
Initially, poverty was defined based on calorie intake, with the Y.K. Alagh Committee in
1979 setting the poverty line at 2,400 calories per person per day in rural areas and 2,100
calories in urban areas. This approach faced criticism for its narrow focus. Subsequent
committees, including those led by Lakdawala (1993), Tendulkar (2009), and Rangarajan
(2014), attempted to refine poverty estimation by incorporating broader parameters such
as expenditure on health and education. However, these methods were still critiqued for
not fully capturing the multidimensional nature of poverty.
Recognizing these limitations, NITI Aayog introduced the Multidimensional Poverty
Index (MPI), aligning with global standards to assess poverty beyond income metrics.
This index considers factors like education, health, and living standards, providing a more
comprehensive understanding of deprivation.
Government Policies and Schemes Addressing Poverty and Unemployment
India has implemented numerous schemes aimed at alleviating poverty and
unemployment:
 Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA):
Launched in 2005, this act guarantees 100 days of wage employment per year to rural
households, aiming to enhance livelihood security.
 Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (PMJDY): Initiated in 2014, it focuses on
financial inclusion by providing banking services to the unbanked population.
 Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY): Started in 2015, this scheme aims to
provide affordable housing to the urban and rural poor.
 National Food Security Act (NFSA): Enacted in 2013, it seeks to provide subsidized
food grains to approximately two-thirds of India's population.
Despite these initiatives, challenges persist. For instance, the quality of food grains
supplied under the Public Distribution System (PDS) has been questioned, with reports
indicating that even provisions for institutions like the Air Force have been substandard,
leading to health issues and perpetuating the vicious cycle of poverty.
Regional Disparities and Case Studies
Poverty and its manifestations vary across regions:
 Nandurbar, Maharashtra: This district has alarmingly high malnutrition rates, with
reports indicating 179 child deaths over three months in 2023 . Despite various
schemes, the region struggles with inadequate healthcare infrastructure and socio-
economic [Link] Today
 Sivakasi, Tamil Nadu: Known as the "firecracker capital of India," Sivakasi has been
notorious for child labor, with children employed due to their nimble fingers but
receiving meager wages . This raises concerns about labor laws and the enforcement
of child [Link] India
 Kashmir: The region's economy, heavily reliant on tourism, faced setbacks due to
unpredictable weather patterns, such as the absence of snow until December, affecting
livelihoods dependent on winter tourism .The Guardian
 East Sikkim: During the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the drivers' community
faced severe economic hardships, leading to instances of suicides . This underscores
the need for social security nets for vulnerable occupational groups.
Healthcare and the Poverty Trap
Healthcare expenses significantly contribute to poverty in India. Nithin Kamath, co-
founder of Zerodha, highlighted that most Indians are just "one hospitalization away from
bankruptcy," emphasizing the dire need for comprehensive health insurance . While
initiatives like Ayushman Bharat aim to address this, challenges remain in terms of
coverage and [Link]+2Hindustan Times+2Business News Today+2
Constitutional Provisions and Policy Recommendations
The Indian Constitution, through Directive Principles of State Policy, emphasizes the
state's role in ensuring social and economic justice. Articles 38 and 39 mandate the state
to minimize income inequalities and ensure adequate means of livelihood for all citizens.
To enhance poverty alleviation efforts, India can draw lessons from international models:
 Brazil's Bolsa Família Program: A conditional cash transfer scheme that has
successfully reduced poverty and improved health and education outcomes.
 Bangladesh's Microfinance Initiatives: Empowering the poor, especially women,
through access to small loans, fostering entrepreneurship and self-reliance.
Conclusion
Addressing poverty in India requires a multifaceted approach, considering regional
disparities, healthcare challenges, and the effectiveness of existing schemes. Continuous
evaluation, community participation, and learning from global best practices are essential
to create sustainable solutions.

5. Contradictions of Indian Democracy in Policy Making

India’s democracy is often hailed as the largest and most vibrant in the world. Founded on
constitutional ideals of justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity, the Indian democratic
framework envisions policy-making as a participatory, transparent, and equitable process.
Yet, the ground reality presents a paradox: while the democratic structure remains intact,
policy outcomes often reflect centralization, exclusion, and institutional weakness. This
essay explores the inherent contradictions in Indian democratic policy-making, analyzing
their causes, manifestations, and implications through empirical evidence, legal
provisions, and historical context.
I. Theoretical Ideals vs. Ground Realities
The Indian Constitution envisions participatory democracy (Article 38) and socio-
economic justice (Directive Principles, esp. Articles 39, 41, 46). However, policy-making
in practice is frequently top-down, technocratic, and often detached from local realities.
Example: The Three-Tier Panchayati Raj System (73rd and 74th Constitutional
Amendments) was intended to decentralize decision-making. Yet, in most states, the
devolution of powers remains incomplete. According to the Ministry of Panchayati Raj
(2023), only 14 states have devolved more than 15 subjects to local governments. This
results in democratic decentralization in principle, but bureaucratic centralization in
practice.
II. Electoral Populism vs. Evidence-Based Policy
Democracy requires responsive governance, yet the electoral compulsions in India often
lead to short-term populism overriding long-term planning.
Example: The farm loan waiver schemes, such as those introduced in Uttar Pradesh
(2017) and Maharashtra (2019), garnered political support but did little to address
structural agrarian distress. Reports by the RBI and NITI Aayog argue that these waivers
undermine fiscal discipline and don’t reach the most vulnerable small and marginal
farmers.
Contradiction: While democratically elected governments aim to be responsive, policy
decisions are often reactionary and economically unsustainable, driven by electoral
calculus rather than empirical data.
III. Legal Rights vs. Implementation Deficit
India has established progressive laws guaranteeing rights to education (RTE Act, 2009),
food (NFSA, 2013), and work (MGNREGA, 2005). However, these laws often suffer
from implementation paralysis.
Case Study: MGNREGA mandates 100 days of wage employment per rural household,
yet in 2022-23, the average days worked per household was only 42, according to the
Ministry of Rural Development. Delayed payments, corruption, and inadequate funds
plague the scheme, leading to reduced faith in the efficacy of legal entitlements.
Contradiction: Democracy grants legal rights, but administrative lethargy and lack of
political will create a gap between law and lived reality.
IV. Institutional Checks vs. Majoritarianism
The Indian democratic model is built on the separation of powers, federalism, and checks
and balances. However, in recent years, concerns over the centralization of power and the
weakening of institutions like the judiciary, Election Commission, and investigative
agencies have surfaced.
Example: The abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir (2019) was executed
without consulting the state’s legislature, raising questions about federalism and
democratic consensus.
Contradiction: Though democracy requires inclusive dialogue and respect for institutional
roles, executive dominance can subvert the democratic spirit.
V. Citizen Participation vs. Democratic Apathy
The vibrancy of a democracy depends on active citizenship. However, policy-making
remains largely elite-driven, with limited citizen participation outside elections.
Example: Urban planning policies such as Smart Cities Mission (2015) have been
critiqued for being technocratic and excluding slum dwellers and marginalized
communities. A 2020 Housing and Land Rights Network (HLRN) report found that less
than 5% of proposed smart city projects involved community consultations.
Contradiction: India celebrates electoral participation, but democratic engagement
between elections remains minimal and exclusionary.
VI. Data Transparency vs. Opacity in Governance
For democracy to thrive, information must be accessible to the public. Yet, opacity in data
release undermines evidence-based discourse.
Example: The NSSO Employment-Unemployment Survey (2017–18) showing a 45-year
high in unemployment was withheld until after the 2019 general elections. Similarly,
critics have accused the government of downplaying COVID-19 mortality figures.
Contradiction: A democratic government should be accountable and transparent, but
strategic data suppression weakens informed public debate and policy accountability.
VII. Policy Uniformity vs. Federal Diversity
India's federal structure mandates accommodation of regional diversity in policy-making.
However, national schemes are often designed with a one-size-fits-all approach.
Example: The implementation of GST (Goods and Services Tax) led to protests by
several states citing revenue loss and fiscal strain. Kerala and West Bengal demanded
more autonomy in implementing relief measures during natural calamities and COVID-
19.
Contradiction: Though constitutionally federal, India’s policy mechanisms often disregard
the pluralism and local needs of its states.
VIII. Welfare Targeting vs. Exclusion Errors
Welfare programs in India increasingly rely on digital targeting through Aadhaar and
algorithms, which have resulted in the exclusion of vulnerable groups.
Case Study: In Jharkhand, between 2017–19, at least 20 starvation deaths were reported
due to Aadhaar-linked authentication failures in the PDS system (HRLN and [Link]
investigations).
Contradiction: While digitization aims for efficiency and inclusion, in reality, it can
exacerbate exclusion due to lack of digital literacy and infrastructural gaps.
Conclusion: Reconciling the Contradictions
The contradictions in Indian democratic policy-making stem from the disjuncture
between democratic ideals and systemic practice. While India remains a vibrant electoral
democracy, the quality of governance and policy responsiveness remains uneven. To
reconcile these contradictions, India must:
 Deepen decentralization by empowering local governments.
 Institutionalize public consultations in policy formulation.
 Strengthen institutional autonomy and data transparency.
 Bridge the gap between rights and their effective realization.
 Make democracy a lived experience beyond electoral participation.
In Amartya Sen’s words, “Development requires the removal of unfreedoms.” For India’s
democracy to fulfill its transformative potential, its policy-making must evolve from
being episodic and elite-driven to participatory, just, and accountable.