NGOs’ foreign funds and a trust deficit

The recent changes in the rules governing foreign funding of NGOs under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) have been widely discussed. The last word on it will perhaps never be written. The UPA government initiated this and we see some concrete changes now. Sifting through the bewildering(confused,आश्चर्यजनक) range of issues discussed, a few stand out. First, there is a sharp polarisation on the issue between the government and civil society, and even within civil society. Second, the polarisation is based on lack of trust, bordering on fear, with each group highlighting faults of the other. Behind all this are differing ideas of India we all hold.

It is ironical that what is at stake is not that important — a relatively small amount of money that does not significantly help or harm India. The total FCRA funds coming in was Rs.11,546.29 crore for 2011-12, the latest year for which the government has put out figures. Of this, the funds for explicitly religious activities were to the tune of Rs.270.83 crore; Rs.227.4 crore for maintenance of priests, and Rs.208.71 crore for religious schools, together coming to 6.12 per cent of total foreign funding. Similarly, those that are clearly identifiable as lobbying advocacy, awareness building, and so on, are Rs.539 crore for research and Rs. 241 crore for awareness, or 6.76 per cent of total foreign funding. Even if all these funds are used for anti-national activities, what will we do if they are domestically funded? The major uses of foreign funds are for rural development, education of the poor, health, and so on. Out of 22,702 NGOs registered under FCRA, 13,193 actually received grants, making it on average Rs.87.52 lakh per NGO that year. About 9,000 NGOs have rightly got their FCRA permissions cancelled for not submitting accounts or responding to repeated reminders.

“The justification for the clampdown on NGOs is reminiscent(remindful,याद दिलाने वाला) of the logic used by British colonials to justify new laws and regulations to curb(control,नियंत्रित) civil duties. ”

Meanwhile, there is a list of 109 international agencies that are exempt from the FCRA, consisting of the World Bank group, UN agencies, and so on. The World Bank funding in 2013-14 was $5.2 billion or about Rs.3.22 lakh crore. This funding goes to the government and not to any NGO. Indian bureaucrats are among the largest beneficiaries of World Bank and UN assignments at dollar salaries that entitle them to life long pensions after five years of deputation.
There are other foreign funds coming into India. In 2010, the RBI reported that FDI totalled $23.7 billion or about Rs.1.40 lakh crore, about 12 times the FCRA funding. By 2014-15, this had gone up to Rs.1.76 lakh crore. This is about 10 per cent of the Central government budget of about Rs.18 lakh crore. This would have been much higher but for the global slowdown, as India got $40 billion in 2008 before the global meltdown. We periodically see announcements of relaxation in FDI rules for various sectors like retail, insurance, and so on.

In short, foreign funding of NGOs is dwarfed(small,बौना) by other foreign money coming into India. Of this, the amount used for potentially questionable purposes is about 13 per cent. Let us look at another set of issues. All organisations working in society need to be transparent and accountable, including NGOs, whether domestically or foreign funded. The RTI tries to do that for the government. But beyond the NGOs, corporates and the government, there are political parties and religious organisations.

The Supreme Court has admitted a petition saying that India’s two major political parties, the BJP and the Congress, receive illegal foreign funding. Like other major democracies, India also does not permit political parties to receive foreign funding. But no notice has been issued by the government to the political parties. One of the parties said they have returned the money, and the matter was laid to rest after that. Would other organisations, including the corporate sector and the NGOs be permitted to respond similarly? The political parties have also violated the RTI Act by refusing to comply with CIC orders.

Meanwhile, the Maharashtra Government has passed an ordinance that an FIR cannot be filed against legislators and senior officers without prior approval to avoid frivolous(less serious,तुच्छ) allegations. But there is no protection for ordinary citizens against harassment whether by the police, income tax or other authorities. The police investigate allegations against themselves and give themselves a clean chit. There is no remedy for citizens who need some permission from the government and there is no reply for months or years. The government has publicly used the phrase ‘tax terrorism,’ but has so far done nothing to protect the citizen. It is well known that several religious organisations and their affiliates receive foreign funding. Those that indulge(Enjoy to excess,मज़े लूटना) in anti-national and subversive activities will not be affected by the new FCRA rules — their work is underground.

So we see a trend where government officers and elected representatives, political organisations and some religious organisations and affiliates are protected, but others are harassed. This is in line with some of the erstwhile(past,पहले का) Communist countries, such as Hungary and Russia, which are also clamping down on NGOs getting foreign funding. Interestingly there is no such clampdown in the West. Are we moving towards a free market economy along with totalitarian controls? The major reason that is offered for these controls is that sometimes NGOs indulge in activities that are “detrimental(harmful,हानिकारक) to national interest, likely to affect public interest, or likely to prejudicially affect the security, scientific, strategic or economic interest of the state.” This was the classic language used by the British colonials in order to justify new laws and regulations aimed at curbing civil liberties. This is not to say that no NGO ever does anything wrong. If they break the law, they should be brought to book. There are more than adequate(enough,पर्याप्त) laws to ensure that this happens.

Blanket ban

There is no organised conspiracy(unlawful act,षड़यंत्र) here. It is in the nature of power to exercise greater control, and exempt itself from accountability. Unfortunately, the Indian way of doing this has a colonial legacy — it is often through more red tape, leading to petty(small,कम) corruption and harassment. For a handful of NGOs who may be doing something wrong, about 13,000 are completely paralysed. It would be more honest if as a nation we take a decision to ban all foreign funding.

Behind all this is the question of the kind of India we want to build. These clampdowns are really for that. Protest against economic policies is becoming more and more embarrassing, with fallouts leading to political victory or defeat. We have to find a balance between religious freedom and its misuse, accepting funds from overseas to aid in the economy but not for civil society, and people’s interests and corporate interests. We need to hold citizens as well as governments accountable, and save both from needless harassment. Deep down, there is mistrust between the different ideas of India, with each group trying to impose its world view. Neither will succeed in the long run. Equally disturbing is the lack of trust between the people and the government. The first task really is to rebuild that trust.

Read more »

We don’t want no education...

Higher education in India is once again in the news, though not for the most attractive of reasons. Recently, the heads of more than one of the country’s best known institutions have either resigned or been sacked(terminated) following differences with the government. There are reports that the position of a vice chancellor of a prominent university is under threat. However, these instances are no more than shocks to the widespread despondency(despair,निराशा) amidst the public over the state of this branch of Indian society.

Pulapre Balakrishnan

Some time ago, the then Minister for Human Resource Development, Arjun Singh, had announced to a national meeting of vice chancellors that higher education in India was like a “sick child”. That he was partly responsible for its state, having directed it to expand by 50 per cent within three years as part of the Congress Party’s response to the Mandal Committee Report, was perhaps less of a failing on his part than the failure to initiate a diagnosis of the affliction. Were this done at that time, at least some of the subsequent damage could have been averted(avoid,बचा लेना).

Not world class

One of the deficiencies of higher education in the country, identified by the government itself, is that its colleges are nowhere to be found in the global league tables. While rating need not bother us unduly(unjustified,अनावश्यक), we must recognise that absence from the shortlist of Indian universities tells us something about the production of globally recognisable knowledge in this country. Had we chosen to ignore the global pool of knowledge, this would be of no concern. But, we cannot state this to be the case, as we drink deeply at this very pool. The fact is that in the production of knowledge globally, we are mere spectators, admiring the pirouette or applauding the tightrope walk, participating at best as cheerleaders. While I can say little with any confidence about the natural sciences, of economics it can be said that there is very little that is original being done here. Where we can speak of theory and methodology as being relatively independent, it is not only that we rely on theory developed in the anglophone world but even the empirical(experienced,अनुभवजन्य) methods are often outdated, despite the fact that unlike in the past they are now quite easily accessible. Global best-practice methodologies are more accessible today because we are by now a far richer society compared to say the 1950s, and information and the software for processing it are no longer out of reach. Of course, this is very likely not the case in the applied sciences where material resources are still prohibitively expensive. Think “large hadron collider”.

Spending on education

It would be difficult to make the case that higher education in India has been starved of resources in the aggregate(sum,कुल). A shift in public expenditure towards higher education had commenced(start,शुरू) in the 1950s, even though the social returns to primary education were very likely higher than the social returns to the tertiary. By the early 20th century, the ratio of public spending on higher education to that on schooling was by far the highest in India (UNESCO: ‘Global Education Digest’). It is interesting that in Japan, the government spends more per capita on schooling than it does on university education. Yet, Indian academics have migrated even to Japan to carry on their professional life despite the obvious linguistic hurdles. By the late 1960s, Amartya Sen was already writing about the high opportunity cost of starting universities in India and had suggested that higher education in India was being expanded largely only in response to middle-class pressure.

Quality control

Even though the expansion of higher education had commenced in the 1950s, a difference marks that phase when compared to the past decade or so, when the next major round of expansion — notably the near doubling of the number of Indian Institutes of Technology (IIT) and Indian Institutes of Management (IIM) — was initiated by the Centre and in some States. At the beginning, the human capital necessary to operate the system was not in such short supply as it is today. Quality control was relatively less constrained. But more importantly, there was a recognition that there was no point in expanding education without assuring its quality. Egregious(worst,बेहद ख़राब) instances of this are the heads of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences and the atomic energy complex being personally headhunted by Nehru. Today, it is not only that the human capital is in relatively short supply, but the political leadership valorises access at any cost. Expansion has become the raison d’être of the public presence in higher education and the querying of the quality of education is discouraged as elitism(speciality,उत्कृष्टता). This is no more than sentimentality when it is not disingenuous.

In today’s age, the production of knowledge needs governance exactly as does any other activity with social consequences(result,परिणाम). If the quality of higher education in India is to improve, the focus of the governance must be on research and learning outcomes. Poor outcomes which are to be identified as poor quality of the education make a mockery of the expansion of higher education whether by the state or the private sector. The state offering poor quality higher education with much fanfare is the moral equivalent of ostentatiously(showily,भड़कीले ढंग से) inviting hungry people only to feed them leftovers. The private sector in India is often not far behind in promising the moon but leaving students with little to show. This has been flagged as rampant(uncontrolled,अनियंत्रित) in so-called professional education. Shailendra Mehta has written a paper titled “Why is Harvard #1?” putting it down entirely to governance. While there is no reason whatsoever for India to emulate(follow,अनुकरण करना) Harvard in all its aspects, we may yet want to pay some attention to its governance model if we aspire to ever play in the top league of global knowledge production.

While the consequences for quality of a reckless(careless,लापरवाह) expansion are quite easily seen, that of another subtle(elusive,सवेंदी) but definite trend is less easily discerned(recognise,जानना). The latter may have had an important role in killing-off our universities. This is a political development which has two aspects to it, namely the adoption of a corporate-centric approach by governments and the spread of illiberalism within society. The connection between these two developments is far from obvious but one thing is clear. It is that the rise to dominance of a politics incorporating both these elements is not helpful to the pursuit of knowledge. It has led to a sort of “closing of the Indian mind” once open to myriad(infinite,असंख्य) influences and mindful of the virtues of truth and beauty. Going back a little further, we can see the vestiges of such mindfulness in our spectacular achievements in fields as diverse as philosophy and architecture. One does not have to agree fully with the poet Keats when he had declared that the link between truth and beauty is all there is to know to acknowledge that such an awareness must infuse our higher education enterprise! If you think “truth and beauty” is for the birds, you may want to read the astrophysicist S. Chandrashekar on “Motivation in science”. The severely bureaucratised environment in India’s universities has managed to expunge(erase,मिटाना) all creativity from the system.

Politically driven

When social forces act to snuff out a vibrant and free-spirited learning environment, we are largely in the hands of the political class, for it is this class that wields(manage,चलाना) the levers of power that can counteract the reaction. But when the political class abets(provoke in wrongdoing,उकसाना) these very forces, we are left pretty much in the lurch(in middle of,मंझदार). There is something of this kind at work in India today.

First, for decades now, members of the political class have been very heavily invested in the profitmaking segment of higher education. Private engineering, medicine and management education have offered full-time politicians a happy hunting ground. Naturally, there has been no concern for knowledge creation here. On the other hand, the archipelago of Central higher education institutions has been treated as a handmaiden to advance party-political agendas. This has been the case under both the fronts that have ruled India over the past decade-and-a-half. The initiatives have ranged over making an IIM education virtually free, to expanding enrolment without any concern for the consequences.

Almost a century ago, Kalidas Bhattacharya, a philosophy teacher in Calcutta, delivered an address to his students which was published as a tract named “Swaraj in Ideas”. Though the address must itself be seen in the context of the Indian national movement, its message remains as fresh as ever. Bhattacharya had argued that political independence by itself would amount to little if Indians did not have the mental capacity to imagine a world in relation to their own needs. The prerequisite for this is the development of cognitive means, an ethical sensibility and a historical understanding. This alone can be called an education. We watch with shock and awe as everything handed down from Delhi of late suggests that the political class don’t want one for our young. Higher education in India is being throttled(restrict,रोकना) by the regulator, and no one is screaming murder.

Read more »

For regional journalists, it’s a fight for survival

One chilly February evening in 2005, Amar Ujala reporter Samiuddin Neelu was returning home when he was allegedly kidnapped by a special unit of the Uttar Pradesh police. Driven in a jeep to a remote forest outside Lakhimpur Kheri, bordering Nepal, he was held at gunpoint and asked to write a suicide note as the police threatened to eliminate him in an ‘encounter’ killing.

Samiuddin’s presence of mind saved him. He told the police that he had already warned the then Mulayam Singh-led Samajwadi Party government, the National Human Rights Commission, and the Press Council of India. The policemen backed off. The harassment, however, didn’t end. The journalist was falsely implicated and imprisoned for nine days under the Wildlife Act for possessing contraband.

Why was Samiuddin hounded(chased,पीछा करना)? Because he had regularly highlighted State corruption, atrocity(cruelty,अत्याचार), illegal land encroachment, and dubious(doubtful,संदिग्ध) sterilisation schemes in his reports. His ordeal soon made headlines. The NHRC and the PCI pulled up the U.P. government, and the case rocked the State Assembly. However, little was done to punish the culprits. The probe undertaken was restricted to the cases foisted(put forcibly,थोपना) against him lessening the persecution he was subjected to.

Then, in 2010, in a significant decision, the NHRC asked the Mayawati-led government to pay the journalist Rs. 5 lakh as compensation. The NHRC observed “that the approach of the administration as well as the senior police officials has been… to trivialise(less important,महत्वहीन बनाना) the gravity of violation of human rights of Samiuddin, on one hand, and protect police officials…”

I called Samiuddin last week. Here is where he stands, a decade later. The State is yet to file an FIR on his application against the accused policemen. He has not received the promised Rs. 5 lakh as compensation. The police protection he had been provided between 2006 and 2007 has been withdrawn and his pleas for its restoration have fallen on deaf ears. He continues to receive death threats. “I live in constant fear. I don’t know when I will be bumped off,” he said.

Samiuddin’s story sums up the attitude of our political class towards journalists, especially in the hinterland, and their disregard for the recommendations or orders from independent panels.

But his is not a stray case as recent news indicate. Television journalist Ashok Namdev was brutally attacked by alleged members of the sand mafia in Chitrakoot. Deepak Mishra was shot at in Kanpur by men on motorbikes for his reporting on gambling dens. Haider Khan was brutally assaulted, tied to a motorcycle and dragged for about 100 metres, allegedly for his report on dubious land deals in Pilibhit. And then, of course, the appalling deaths of freelance journalist Jagendra Singh of Shahjahanpur and Sandeep Kothari of Madhya Pradesh, both burnt alive, were also in the headlines.

Dangerous terrain

India ranks quite high (13) in the Community for Protection of Journalists’ annual impunity index. This expains why many think that justice will be denied in Jagendra’s case. But of course political considerations are at play. In the backwaters of Uttar Pradesh, the political and economic stakes are high. It’s a lethal(deadly,सुस्त) mix of power, poverty, mafia, criminalised politics, corrupt policing and caste dynamics.

A news report finds that U.P. accounted for 74 per cent of the total attacks on journalists last year. The number of convictions: zero. Nationally, in the past 25 years, 79 journalists have been killed on duty, according to PCI figures.

But the numbers don’t really reflect the underlying fault lines in U.P. Scribes are intimidated, threatened, verbally and physically abused, coerced(forced,मजबूर करना), hounded and booked on false cases regularly. In many instances, the State government and police are complicit. The most vulnerable(weakness,कमज़ोरी) are independent journalists or those operating at the district or tehsil levels, the so-called “local” journalists. They have little organisational backing or any hope of grievance(complaint,शिकायत) redress.

With the emergence of social media, the stage for conflict(battle,विवाद) has expanded. Journalists discouraged from chasing ‘sensitive’ stories have found that they can use the Internet medium to blog on various issues. Reporters in the smallest districts command a ready audience for their posts, sometimes disagreeing with their publications’ views. Dissent and propaganda travel far and quickly, making one popular or notorious(infamous,बदनाम), and also vulnerable.

Regional journalists are poorly paid, have very little job security, are ill-trained, randomly recruited and sacked, and exploited by scribes from big centres. They are often expected to do extra-journalistic assignments, usually unethical, or lobbying work. Even stringers employed by big publications are often paid so little that it barely covers their travel expenses.

In this difficult climate, it is a fight for survival for the journalists. There has been a steady growth of farzi patrakars (pseudo scribes), who take to journalism simply to gain access to power, position, institutions, and the privileges that come with a press card and a press sticker on the vehicle. In U.P., these privileges could mean a free bus ride or lunch. The unfortunate truth is that many of these scribes are deeply involved in corruption, provocation, false stories, trolling and blackmail. Many are hand-in-glove with criminal gangs. Some senior crime reporters I knew in Allahabad had a stake in business in the city’s red light area. In Sonbhadra, notorious for its sand mafia and illegal sand trade, journalists own ‘pattas’ (leases) for illegal sand mining. Some journalists have been found complicit in attacks on other journalists. In sum, scribes are today no longer perceived as independent or impartial, even if we discount derogatory campaigns against them.

Given these complications and the political equations, there is no single remedy to the situation. As expected, the recent cases have triggered stray debates on journalists’ safety. But little has been achieved besides outrage(anger,गुस्सा). Senior journalists have called for a “national safety plan” for scribes, while others call for the empowerment of press panels. In U.P., the government is mulling(think deeply,विचार करना) a helpline for aggrieved journalists. The mere fact that such a measure is required in a democracy is a reflection of corroding values.

The record of such government measures is not too promising either. Last year, the U.P. government set up a committee for journalists led by top mandarins and scribes. However, its members did not meet even once. Despite assurances from successive governments, there is no will or mechanism in place to protect journalists. Demands for police protection are almost never met, unless some political affiliation or influence is invoked. As crimes go unpunished, honest and independent local journalists become disheartened while the corrupt get stronger. It’s time that the journalist fraternity stands up for its weaker sections while also amending its ills.

Read more »

Let’s not miss the wood

Narendra Modi has asked for land rights to be granted quickly to tribals, but for that to happen, the forest bureaucracy’s stranglehold
on power must first go
On June 23, Prime Minister Narendra Modi directed the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) to ensure that all States implement the Forest Rights Act (FRA) and grant land rights to tribals over the next two months. Mr. Modi’s announcement is welcome, but nevertheless surprising, as his government has come under scathing(critical,कटु) criticism for removing community consent clauses for land acquisition in the ill-conceived land ordinance bill.

Nearly 250 million people live in and around forests in India, of which the estimated indigenous(native,स्वदेसी) Adivasi or tribal population stands at about 100 million. To put these numbers in perspective, if considered a nation by themselves, they would form the 13th largest country in the world, even though they cannot be depicted as representing any singular, monolithic culture. For this population, there cannot be any better news than the government’s willingness to recognise their customary rights and undo the historical injustice they have faced, as outlined in the FRA.

The directive to achieve this historical transformation in the next two months, however, shows a lack of understanding of what the process entails, and the factors that have prevented the proper implementation of the FRA since its passage in 2006.

One, the process of documenting communities’ claims under the FRA is intensive — rough maps of community and individual claims are prepared democratically by Gram Sabhas. These are then verified on the ground with annotated evidence, before being submitted to relevant authorities. The Gram Sabha is treated as a public authority under the FRA, and if the higher authorities under the law reject its claims, substantive reasons have to be provided for doing so. This exhaustive process is why the official diktat to implement the FRA so quickly lacks any understanding about the extent of the task and labour involved.

Second, the main factor inhibiting the FRA’s full implementation is the reluctance(disagree,अनिच्छा) of the forest bureaucracy to give up control. The forest bureaucracy has misinterpreted the FRA as an instrument to regularise encroachment(intrusion,अतिक्रमण). This is seen in its emphasis on recognising individual claims while ignoring collective claims — Community Forest Resource (CFR) rights as promised under the FRA — by tribal communities. To date, the total amount of land where rights have been recognised under the FRA is just 3.13 million hectares, mostly under claims for individual occupancy rights. 

Collective ownership

This deliberately narrow interpretation of the FRA is against the letter and spirit of the law, which seeks to undo historical injustices and return the forests to community jurisdiction. It also contradicts the estimates for forest area collectively used by tribal and other forest communities that are provided by government agencies themselves. The most important of these estimates is from the State of Forest Report 1999, in which the Forest Survey of India, using data from the 1991 Census, identified 32.198 million hectares of forest land inside revenue village boundaries. The inclusion of forest lands within revenue village boundaries reflects and legitimises the use, interaction and dependence of the village community on such forests.

Thus, all forest lands within revenue village boundaries would be eligible for recognition as community forest resources (CFR) under the FRA, and brought under the jurisdiction of Gram Sabhas. It should be noted that these numbers are highly conservative, as the data leaves out the States of Jammu and Kashmir, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Mizoram and Sikkim, and ignores the forests collectively used by communities outside the revenue boundaries of their villages.

While these facts indicate a remarkably high potential for recognition of CFR rights, the actual recognition of these rights remains tragically low. The MoTA’s February 2015 status report indicates that the total area reported to be recognised under CFR is only 73,000 hectares, less than one-five hundredth of the CFR potential in the country.  

This does not, however, mean that progress cannot be accelerated.

The government can start by recognising the role played in the FRA’s meagre implementation by the forest bureaucracy’s resistance as well as the acute(sharp,तेज) lack of awareness of FRA’s community rights provisions in State administrations and forest communities. In almost all States, the Forest Department has either appropriated or been given effective control over the FRA’s rights recognition process. This has created a situation where the officials controlling the implementation of the law often have the strongest interest in its non-implementation, especially the community forest rights provisions, which dilute(lessen,कमी) or challenge the powers of the forest department. Evidence from different States clearly indicates the forest bureaucracy’s efforts to stall or subvert the CFR provisions of the FRA.

If the government is serious about implementing the FRA, it should confront the forest bureaucracy and make it clear that any obstruction on their part is unacceptable. The little progress that has been made in implementation so far has been due to close coordination between tribal departments, district administrations and civil society.

There is a clear need to strengthen the nodal tribal departments, provide clear instructions to the State and district administrations, and encourage civil society actors. Without a strong political will, this historical transformation is unlikely to take place.

The Prime Minister has taken the first step. The strides(step,कदम) that come after will need a strong follow-up with a dose of realism.

Read more »

Yes, there’s sexism in science

If tech is widely seen as a male bastion today, it is because women’s stories have been deliberately erased, finds a new book in which 25 women speak up
Ask any friend to name three tech icons. It’s a safe bet they’ll come up with one or more of the following: Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Larry Page, Sergey Brin. None of them a woman.

Tech is widely viewed as a male bastion. But facts belie(misrepresent,झूठ) such a view. Not many know, for instance, that the world’s first programmer, the inventor of scientific computing, is a woman, Ada Lovelace. Or that Spanning Tree Protocol, essential for network computing, was invented by a woman, Radia Perlman. Or that the key designer of Transmission Control Protocol/ Internet Protocol was a woman, Judith Estrin.

If Lovelace, Ms. Perlman or Ms. Estrin are not household names, then these exclusions are not accidental, argues a new book titled Lean Out: The Struggle for Gender Equality in Tech and Start-up Culture, due for publication next month. Edited by Elissa Shevinsky, an American entrepreneur, the book is a collection of 25 essays by women techies.

In her introduction, Ms. Shevinsky cites(mention,उल्लेख) the famous opening line of Pulitzer-winning journalist David Streitfield’s controversial article in the New York Times, “Men invented the Internet,” and states calmly, “this myth is blatantly(obvious,साक्षात्) untrue”.

She writes, “Women played irreplaceable roles at Apple and Facebook… Their stories have been carefully erased by men like Zuckerberg and Jobs.” It is such erasure that Lean Out seeks to partly undo by endeavouring(effort,प्रयत्न) “to tell the untold stories”.

The title is a direct challenge to the thesis in Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg’s bestseller, Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead.

According to the view popularised by Ms. Sandberg, it is not systemic social or political impediments(obstacle,बाधा) but women themselves who are responsible for their poor representation in leadership roles.

Ms. Sandberg believes that women are socially conditioned not to be ambitious, to settle for less, and to prioritise homemaking at the cost of their careers. The solution, then, is for women to “lean in” to their careers more, without being hobbled(stop,अटकाना) by guilt (over sacrifices on the family front), or by the need to be liked.

If we apply Ms. Sandberg’s ‘Lean In’ theory to the tech/start-up world, then the reason there are much fewer women in leadership roles, in venture capital firms, in programming, and in entrepreneurship, is because women are not ambitious enough (or not enough of them are) — an argument rejected outright by the writers in this volume.

Imagined community of nerds
If there is one idea that is attacked by most of the essayists, it is that of the white male nerd as the quintessential(quality,सर्वोत्कृष्ट) tech genius. In a brilliant essay titled ‘Fictive ethnicity and nerds’, transfeminist and gaming critic Katherine Cross traces the origin of the sexism and gender disparity in the tech industry back to the imagined community of ‘nerds’. Ms. Cross points out that on the surface, the tech industry fancies itself as a gender-blind, race-blind meritocracy. In actuality, the identity of the ‘nerd’ — widely mythologised in popular culture — is derived from a gendered and racialised patriarchy.

The ‘nerd’ is a brainy, tech-empowered reconfiguration of white masculinity meant to be superior to a version of manhood premised on the brawny physical charms of the jock. Yet, ultimately, the social trajectory of both the nerd and the jock converge at the same sexist endpoint — a boys club that has no place for women other than as objects of lust.

This might explain why, for instance, nearly all venture capitalists (96.5 per cent) in the tech universe are men. It might explain why even the minuscule(small,सूक्ष्म) number of women venture capitalists are on their way out. And it might explain why an angel investor at a Berlin tech conference thought nothing of telling a woman participant, “Hey G, I will not leave Berlin without having sex with you. Deal?”

The ‘G’ of this message, Gesche Haas, has an essay in this book titled, ‘Let’s talk about sexual discrimination(favoritism,भेदभाव)’, in which she explains why she decided to risk speaking out against a powerful investor. Writes Ms. Haas, “I can tell you what it felt like receiving a very sexually charged e-mail after a business interaction. It screamed: ‘I think you have little to no worth to me in a business context — you only have value to me merely by owning a vagina — and there is nothing you can, or will, do about me deciding to openly communicate this to you.’ To a large extent it came down to feeling powerless.”

Calling out sexism, then, is a way of regaining control. Sexual harassment, however, is only one aspect of the sexism in tech. More common is gender-based discrimination which, though more subtle(elusive,संवेदी), routinely costs women jobs, compensation, and promotions.

Many of the essays in Lean Out are deeply personal, and together they cover a wide gamut(range,विस्तार) of issues — from ‘brogrammer culture’, to lesbians in tech, to how women can build a business that “goes around” patriarchy and sexism.

The biggest takeaway of this collection is a direct contradiction of the Sandberg principle: it asks women to ‘lean out’ and be true to themselves instead of trying to ‘lean in’ or fit into a system designed and controlled by men. This could mean speaking out rather than keeping mum, seeking confrontation rather than avoiding one, and striking out on your own rather than trying to be one of the boys.

While the essays in Lean Out focus on the heart of the global tech industry, Silicon Valley, most of its observations are applicable to the tech scene in other parts of the world, including India.

The Indian equivalent

For instance, is there an Indian equivalent of the sexist white male nerd culture of ‘brogrammers’? The best way to find out is to ask women tech entrepreneurs in India. And their answer is unambiguous(clear,स्पष्ठ). “Of course!” says Ashwini Asokan, Chennai-based co-founder of Mad Street Den, an AI and Computer Vision start-up. “Most meet-ups in the Indian tech scene are all-male affairs. I find it ridiculous that professional tech communities could be all-boys clubs. I regularly call out industry events for having no women in their speaker lists.”

Having worked for nine years in Silicon Valley before moving to India two years ago, Ms. Asokan is well placed to comment on the similarities and differences between the two when it comes to treatment of women. “There is huge discrimination against women in both places. But it’s not overt,” she says. “In India, however, we are not just fighting inequality. We have a host of other issues. Our main problem is letting women get the hell out of home to begin with.”

Another U.S.-returned tech entrepreneur, Bangalore-based Myna Bisineer of Venturesity, a talent search start-up, seconds Ms. Asokan’s view. “In India, when girls get qualified and are set to take up their first job, there is a huge dropout rate right there. When they get married, more dropouts. When they have a child, there’s another big round of dropouts from the industry. So, not many are around long enough for leadership-level positions.”

Both Ms. Bisineer and Ms. Asokan are in agreement with Lean Out’s philosophy that women should be able to operate in the tech space on their own terms. But this requires changing the gender settings of the industry. What does that entail? And where do we begin?

Ms. Asokan has a few easy suggestions for start-ups: “One, fix rooms for nursing mothers in your office; two, hire a nanny, or set up a day-care centre for your staff; three, make sure your hackathons are for two-three days during the daytime instead of being overnight events; four, when you get together to organise events, have at least one woman in all your speaker panels.”

The big guns such as Google and Intel have begun making the right gestures, by promoting coding classes for women. But clearly, there’s a long way to go before there can be a level playing field between a Sundari and a Sundar Pichai.

Read more »

Let IIMs be free of government stranglehold

World-class institutions are not built by politicians, but by those working within them. The proposed IIM Bill not only curbs(control,नियंत्रित) the freedom of the 13 IIMs, but also dilutes(cut,कमी) their quality
Change is most dangerous when it is brought forth not because it is necessary but because someone simply has the power to initiate it and wishes to exercise this power. This seems to be the reason for the Human Resource Development Ministry’s proposal for an Indian Institutes of Management Bill, 2015.

It is important to note that world-class institutions are not built based on the decisions of politicians, but by those within the institution — those who spend a lifetime in their respective fields and make important decisions concerning the functioning of the institution. This is especially because political parties and agendas come and go, and therefore their temporary presence should never be allowed to influence academic decisions and excellence.

The IIM Bill, in its present form, intends to take away that decision-making power from the hands of the very people who created these great institutions through decades of hard work.

Provisions of draft Bill

In the present draft bill, a majority of clauses cited(mention,उल्लेख) indicate that the government wants to take over the autonomy of the IIMs and establish its own hegemony. Here are some instances: Clause 17 (2) says, “The Director shall be appointed by the Central Government with the approval of the Visitor, on such terms and conditions of service as may be prescribed.” Clause 21 (1) and (2) say, “Without prejudice to the foregoing provisions of this Act, the Institute shall, for the efficient administration of this Act, be bound by such directions on questions of policy, as the Central Government may give in writing to it from time to time; the decision of the Central Government whether a question is one of policy or not, shall be final.” Clause 30 of Chapter V says a co-ordination forum will be established and goes on specify who the members of the same will be. Clause 31 elaborates on this. Clauses 35 and 36 in Chapter V1, among others, also indicate the government’s overreach.

The government dictates that the IIM administrations be completely dependent on it, right from matters of appointing the director to matters of admissions; fees charged by the institutes; and tenure(period,काल), remunerations and conditions of employment. It not only makes the board of IIM (Ahmedabad) a vestigial organ, but also takes away the freedom of the institution’s faculty. In fact, the Bill attacks the freedom of these great institutions rather than giving them the freedom to excel.

The IIMs have a great reputation simply because of this: they have been given the freedom to remuneration(wage,पारिश्रमिक) and excel. This is why any well-known academics join the institutes. With freedom comes responsibility, and nobody knows this better than the faculty at the IIMs. There are several instances where people have left their cushy(easygoing,आराम), high-salaried positions in the corporate world to join IIMs at a much lower remuneration. As a result, these institutes have been able to produce some of the brightest minds in the country and in the world. IIM alumni have gone on to become leaders in various fields. It is for these reasons that I would request the government not to take away the one quality that makes the IIMs the most sought-after — their freedom.

Even in terms of the legacy of a government, one is far more likely to be remembered for reducing restrictions and governmental interference than for increasing them.

Diluting the brand

The IIMs have built a national and international brand. That is to be applauded and supported, especially because this was done without governmental management. The institutes have functioned without interference from the government in the past, and can continue to do so in the future. Does the government desire to take control over the best institutions in India and turn them into bureaucratic non-entities? Do they want institutes from other countries to overtake these institutes in terms of excellence? What is the need to gain control over an institute that is already performing well?

As someone who has spent a lifetime with some of the best educational institutions in the world, I would urge(force,प्रेरित) the government to abandon(Give up,त्यागना) these hostile(unfriendly,विरोधी) takeovers. The MHRD’s time could be better spent in other ways. The IIMs should be able to retain and enhance their autonomy, and in this endeavour(effort,प्रयत्न) they could assist Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s objectives of making India a great nation.

Some of the clauses mentioned above may not be new ones. But if they are poor clauses that do not enhance academic excellence, it does not matter if they are new or old. I hope that the government thinks of ways of increasing autonomy rather than reducing it.

Trust is crucial in any field, in any exercise. Experts in every field have respectable credentials, a lifetime of relevant experiences. If their views are not taken into consideration and their area of expertise is suddenly taken over by the government, this indicates an attempt to undermine their decision-making abilities.

The question to be asked is: Is the government really interested in supporting and enhancing world-class institutions or does it want to engage in one more bureaucratic exercise? For the sake of India and its students, for the sake of corporate India, and for the sake of jobs and academic excellence, I plead(appeal,निवेदन) with the government to abandon these initiatives.

Read more »

Indian Army chasing pipe dreams forever

The Indian Army recently dispatched a global Request for Information (RfI) for a multi-purpose Future Ready Combat Vehicle (FRCV), which has generated much mirth(joy,प्रसन्नता) in military-industrial circles, for its sheer(absolute,पूर्ण),ridiculousness and operational folly.

The Army’s request is for an FRCV that will not only serve as a ‘medium’-sized main battle tank to replace the Army’s ageing fleet of licence-built Russian T-72s but also as a ‘light-tracked and wheeled tank’, built on the same platform. In layman terms, this is like asking for a Humvee and a Maruti 800 on the same platform. Hopefully, the document will be either withdrawn or amended before its July 31 deadline.

Surely, the Directorate General of Mechanised Forces at Army Headquarters, responsible for issuing the request, realises the irony and irrationality of drawing up such absurd(illogical,बेतुका) general staff qualitative requirements (GSQRs), which are technologically impossible for any manufacturer to fulfil.

What is all the more surprising is that such QRs are formulated after extensive discussion, not only by the division concerned — in this case, the Mechanised Forces — but finally approved by the Army’s Deputy Chief (Planning & Systems), who is responsible for acquisitions. His office, as are those involved in formulating the requests and the subsequent proposals, or tenders, is purportedly staffed by competent scientific and technical advisers.

Senior Army officers concede that such over-ambitious and flawed requests for information, leading to equally over-stretched, faulty and diluted(weak,कमज़ोर) tenders, are largely responsible for the alarming equipment shortage that the forces face today. The shortfall includes small arms, howitzers, assorted helicopters, armour with night-fighting capacity, air defence capability and varied ordnance, among other things. Although Army Headquarters blames the hidebound and ill-informed Ministry of Defence (MoD) bureaucrats for this, it also has largely itself to blame for the glaring deficiencies.

‘Blinkered views’

“The whole process is carried out with limited knowledge and blinkered views,” said former Maj. Gen. Mrinal Suman, the Army’s leading authority on acquisitions and offsets. Poorly conceived, formulated and drafted QRs create confusion and delays, resulting in the entire process being aborted much later, he said. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence concurs.

In its report tabled in Parliament on April 30, 2012, the Committee declared that as many as 41 of the Army’s proposals for diverse equipment in recent years were withdrawn or terminated. The reasons included faulty or over-ambitious qualitative requirements. The Committee report unambiguously(clearly,स्पष्ठ ढंग से) pinned responsibility on the Army. The MoD and attendant financial advisers had no role in framing weapon QRs. Service Headquarters consult with the largely uniformed Directorate General Quality Assurance (DGQA), sometimes with inputs from the Defence Research and Development Organisation.

The typical process is this: all available literature on the equipment is gathered and its multiple characteristics collated. The idea is to include as many features as possible to demonstrate how exhaustively the task has been performed. Thereafter, as the draft travels up the chain of command, it gathers additional parameters, as each officer feels compelled to suggest more improvements. “The final QR takes the shape of a well-compiled wish list of utopian(idealistic,आदर्शवाद) dimensions, which simply do not exist,” stated Gen. Suman.

For instance, in 2004, the Army issued a tender for 168 light utility helicopters to replace the obsolete(old,पुराना) fleet of Cheetahs and Chetaks inducted into service in the mid-60s. The proposal required the chopper to hover uninterruptedly for 30 minutes, a capability no helicopter in the world possessed at the time. The maximum hover time then available, with a U.S. helicopter, was seven minutes. The Army was forced to withdraw the tender soon after.

Similarly, a tender to upgrade FH-77B 155mm/39 calibre howitzers, acquired in the 1980s, had to be scrapped twice, first in 2006 and again in 2009, as the QRs drawn up by the Artillery Directorate were unworkable. A BAE Systems official associated with the upgrade at the time said that the requirements were ‘unrealistic’ for these old guns, expecting more capability than even new howitzers.

In 2013, the request sent to at least five overseas vendors to replace the Army’s obsolete Bofors 40mm L-70 and Soviet ZU-23mm 2B air defence guns had to be scrapped. All five vendors declared the requirements to be unreasonable, as they demanded a firing rate of 500 rounds per minute, a capability no gun in the world possessed.

The same has applied to tenders for tank fire control systems, long range observation systems and for different ammunition types, all terminated over the years on grounds of overreach and unrealism. It would appear that the Indian Army’s search for matchless, and globally unavailable, equipment and capabilities triumphs(victory,विजय) over and over again.

Read more »

Cutting the Food Act to the bone

When Parliament passed the National Food Security Act (NFSA) in 2013, it had already become one of the most debated pieces of legislation in decades. Those for and against it had fought it out across yards of space on the editorial pages of newspapers, not to forget the slugfests(fight,लड़ाई) on television channels. The parliamentary standing committee studying it, while it was still a Bill, received over 2,00,000 public responses. A vast majority of those comments called, in writing, for expanding the provisions of the Bill.

The NFSA was, after all, an outcome of remarkable public and judicial action — a battle of over a decade to secure freedom from hunger for millions who had not gained from India’s emergence as a major economy. With all its inadequacies(insufficiency,अपर्याप्तता), the Act is still seen by many as a final assault on the unconscionable hunger that has stalked the countryside and urban slums. Over two-thirds, or more than 820 million Indians, came under its ambit(area,क्षेत्र).

Biraj Patnaik
Political reversal

In the debates in Parliament, those who vociferously(loudly,शोर गुल के साथ) argued for the expansion of the provisions, pitching in for universalisation and an increase in the quantum of the entitlements, included stalwarts(loyalist,वफादार) from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) like Sushma Swaraj, Arun Jaitley, Murli Manohar Joshi and Prakash Javadekar. The then Chief Minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi, wrote to the Prime Minister, asking for the law to be further strengthened. It was not unsurprising because the BJP-ruled States, led by Chhattisgarh, had considerably enhanced the outreach of the Public Distribution Systems (PDS) in their respective States and were credited with having put in place robust systems of transparency and accountability in public food schemes. Therefore, the BJP was determined not to let the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government and the Congress Party walk away with all the credit for this landmark legislation.

That was then. And two years is an interminably long wait in politics. Now, the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government seems equally determined to throttle(block,रोकना) the NFSA by bleeding it with a thousand cuts, both fiscal and otherwise, even before it is fully implemented. In the last one year, the mandarins at the Food Ministry have not allowed a single provision of the NFSA to remain unmolested(untroubled,बाधारहित).

The first salvo(outburst,धमाका) against the Act was fired in July last year with the illegal extension accorded to the State governments to implement the Act. Illegal, because the NFSA itself specifies that the implementation would commence(start,शुरू) within a year of the legislation being enacted. Therefore, any change in the roll-out should have been first approved by Parliament. Subsequently, the Ministry has extended the date of the implementation twice. All this ostensibly(clearly,स्पष्ठ रूप से) because States have not been able to identify those who should be covered under the provisions of the Act. Yet, the final lists from the the Socio Economic And Caste Census (2011), which most States will use for the identification have not yet been made public. This survey, which was conducted by the Central government, was delayed by six years despite Supreme Court orders that the exercise should be completed by the beginning of the Eleventh Five Year Plan.

Subsequently, in July last year, the Food Ministry arm-twisted State governments not to declare a “bonus” for farmers over and above the Minimum Support Price that is provided by the Central government. This despite the fact that it was paid from the coffers of State governments. Ironically, it was a move that hurt farmers in the BJP-ruled States of Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan the most. The procurement of food grains from farmers was severely restricted as a result of this decision, one that we will rue(regret,पछतावा) if there is a monsoon deficit, as predicted this year.

Budget cuts

The Union Budget for the current fiscal dealt the next decisive(crucial,निर्णायक) blow with punishing cuts to some of the key programmes under the Act. The Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) had a 50 per cent cut, prompting the Union Minister for Women and Child Development, Maneka Gandhi, warning the Finance Minister that the “political fallout of such a situation can be grave”. Similarly, the Mid Day Meal Scheme (MDMS) saw its budget reduced from Rs.13,000 crore to Rs.9,000 crore for a flagship programme universalised by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s government. Other social sector schemes which have a direct bearing on nutrition have seen similar and vicious(condemnable,निंदनीय) cutbacks. The weak argument that States can compensate the deficit with the additional 10 per cent of revenues that they will have now from the share of taxes does not bear the scrutiny(examine,जाँच) of numbers or logic. The majority of the programmes that bear the brunt of the austerity(The trait of great self-denial (especially refraining from worldly pleasures,कठोरता) a new budget of unaccustomed , like the MDMS, are Centrally sponsored schemes.

To tackle India’s shameful track record in maternal deaths and women’s nutrition, the NFSA introduced the maternity entitlement scheme. Every pregnant and nursing mother was to receive Rs.6,000 as a one-time cash transfer. Two years down the line there are still no signs of the scheme taking off.

But credit must be given where it is due. And the one for driving the last nail into the coffin of the NFSA, if it was required at all, must go to the Food Ministry and the latest round of revisions made by it to the Public Distribution System (Control) Order. This order was notified by the Department of Food and Public Distribution on March 20. There are three elements in this order that are in total contempt of Supreme Court orders and the provisions of the NFSA which stand out.

Phase out and freeze

First, the Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY) is being sought to be phased out, with States being instructed not to add any new household to this category if any household drops out of the programme due to an improvement in social or economic status, death, etc.; the number of households would be reduced to that extent. This means that over time, the programme would be phased out. AAY provides 35 kilogrammes of food grains per month (irrespective of the number of members in the household) to 20 million of the most vulnerable(poor,गरीब) families in the country, and which is currently accessed by the most vulnerable tribal communities, persons with disability and the aged. Launched on Mr. Vajpayee’s birthday 15 years ago, when the NDA was in power, it was a scheme that he took personal interest in and nurtured through his tenure(period,काल). The effectiveness of this programme led even the UPA to expand it twice. There couldn’t have been a surer way to disrespect Mr. Vajpayee’s legacy programme than to wind it down.

Second, in complete contravention of Supreme Court orders and the NFSA (Section 9), the PDS (Control) Order freezes the number of people who can access the entitlements, to the decadal Census figures rather than expand it each year based on the population estimates of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India. What this means is that State governments cannot add to the number of beneficiaries to accommodate the increase in population in the 10-year period between the publication of the final Census results.

Establishing citizenship

Most damningly, for the first time, the PDS (Control) Order explicitly places an additional burden of citizenship, besides being a resident of the State, for someone to access benefits under the NFSA. Ostensibly, this is to check foreigners, (especially the large number of Canadians who are perhaps queuing up at our ration shops!) to get the benefits of the PDS. In practical terms, what this means is that some of the most vulnerable migrant communities of India would find themselves excluded from the PDS. And if you thought this was an entirely theoretical proposition, try getting a ration card in Delhi if you are a Bengali migrant who also happens to sport a Muslim name. Well, try getting yourself a ration card anyway. The last PDS (Control) Order issued in 2001 did not think it necessary to make this distinction, nor did the NFSA, where the entitlements are defined for “persons” rather than citizens. Since the jurisprudence on the right to food flows from Article 21 of the Constitution, on the right to life and liberty, the right to food should be available to all persons without their having to establish their citizenship first.

The impact of these measures is already being felt across the country with the visibly weakening political will of the Central government impacting programme implementation in the field. Chhattisgarh’s PDS, arguably one of the best in the country — even the Supreme Court has repeatedly highlighted as an example that other States should emulate(follow,अनुकरण) — is tainted by a procurement scam. Close to 7,00,000 ration cards were cancelled. While a large number of them were reinstated subsequently, the most marginalised sections of the population did not manage to find their way back into the system.

Pulses have been removed from the PDS in non-tribal districts. Despite provisions made in the State budget this year, the pioneering Phulwari crèche programme for children is not being expanded; the scheme for nutritional supplements for patients suffering from tuberculosis is languishing in files. Bureaucratic intransigence coupled with a diminishing political commitment is threatening to dismantle the State’s welfare architecture. Heartbreakingly, Chhattisgarh had two starvation deaths in quick succession last month, for the first time in years. And as the elections to the local bodies showed, Maneka Gandhi was right after all. There is a political price to pay.

The irony that the world will not miss is that the Modi government has emerged as a global champion of farmers’ rights and food security with its progressive position on the public-stockholding issue at the World Trade Organization to fix unjust trade rules. A classic case, if there was one, of do as we say and not as we do.

Read more »

Foreign Service must remain elitist

Whether at the time of uncertainty over foreign policy before the Lok Sabha elections, or after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s reinvigoration of foreign policy, foreign service reforms have focussed on expansion, lateral entry of officers and general dilution(Lesser,कमी) of the service’s elitist(supporter of specialist,विशिष्ट वर्ग समर्थक) character. But no attention is given to the fact that the Indian Foreign Service (IFS) is already a shadow of its former self, and does not appeal to civil service aspirants. Most of those who join the IFS are those who did not qualify for the Indian Administrative Service (IAS). If IFS has to perform effectively, its elitism should be preserved, its attractiveness enhanced, and it should be brought to the centre of international relations as it was originally intended to be.

Partners in foreign policy

Nobody disputes the academic Amitabh Mattoo’s argument that “India’s foreign policy must be seen as a shared partnership across departments within the government of India, and academia and think tanks outside the traditional corridors of power”. But the answer is not to merge the various partners while destroying the identity of each, but to allow each of them to develop in their own spheres and provide inputs to the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA). No one seems to suggest that the IAS and Indian Police Service should be expanded through lateral entry to improve their performance. The logic of this argument for the IFS seems to defy(refuse,विरोध करना) the need to preserve a specialised and professional foreign service. IFS, it should be noted, is no less professional or specialised than the other services.

Foreign policy is framed by various departments of the government, academia, think tanks and the media. They should all have their own defined roles in drafting foreign policy and must remain independent of each other. The MEA should not absorb them into a monolithic institution that has no diversity. Think tanks and the media should shape foreign policy from outside rather than from within the government. Is the right remedy to recruit media experts into the IFS in order to get their inputs on foreign policy? Would they fit into the bureaucratic milieu with its hierarchical and political constraints?

The usual lament(sorrow,दुःख) is that the IFS is smaller (900 officers) than Chinese (4,000) and American (20,000) diplomatic services. This number is insufficient to meet the requirements of our 120 missions and 49 consulates. It is a fact that India started off with more missions than it could manage. It is not easy or politically correct to close down missions once they have begun; India, therefore, maintains them with a skeletal staff in marginal posts. Its larger missions are well-endowed and it does not need to be envious(jealous,ईर्ष्यालु) of bigger missions maintained by the U.S. or China. The right mix of need and affordability must determine the numbers. The information revolution should lead to a reduction, rather than an increase, in the number of missions abroad. The size of the service should not by itself detract from the efficiency of diplomacy.

Those who argue for expansion and lateral entry seem unaware of the fact that in most of India’s important missions, the IFS is in a minority, as it is staffed by officers of other Ministries. Many Ministries have preserved positions in the name of specialisation, but most of them are IAS officers, who may have been recruited specifically for assignments abroad. They may not even have gained experience in the concerned Ministries before being posted abroad. When there is such a practice, there should be no need to induct(admit,भर्ती) them into the foreign service itself. Moreover, Ministries such as Commerce, Finance, Industry, Environment, Science and Technology, Atomic Energy, Space and the Cabinet Secretariat have officers who specialise in various international negotiations. The missions are merely asked to service these delegations; even the heads of mission receive only a courtesy call and a cursory report. These officers function, in effect, as diplomats, and they should be added to the strength of the IFS when functional requirements are taken into account. In other words, we have more diplomats in action internationally than the strength of the IFS indicates.

If officers who claim their seniority on the basis of their services in totally unrelated areas enter the IFS laterally, this would only dilute the service’s quality. Past experience has shown that such entrants do not leave the service after a term or two, but remain to claim higher positions, spending their whole careers in diplomacy. If there is a need to induct officers from outside, the procedures available should be used rather than induct those who had once spurned(reject,ठुकराना) the IFS. The expectations of advancement in the IFS should not be belied.

The MEA has already begun to recruit more officers every year, and that is the only way that such a specialised service should be expanded. If necessary, there are retired officers with proven ability, to fill the gaps without claiming high positions and salaries.

Reforms needed

The suggestion here is not that reform of the diplomatic service is unnecessary. First, it should be made more attractive so that the best candidates are chosen. Like Jawaharlal Nehru did, the aptitude and readiness of the selected candidates should be ascertained before they are chosen. It is patently wrong to take in officers who qualify without English proficiency. No amount of language training after entry into the service would equip them for the rigours of the work abroad. The recruitment of a large number of doctors and engineers is by no means negative, particularly in the context of the growth of technology. Some of India’s best diplomats have come from the medical profession. But we should not lose sight of the recent trend in management to deploy more graduates of social sciences and humanities. Training should be constantly revamped to equip officers to deal with different regions.

The present practice of posting on an ad hoc(unplanned,अनौपचारिक) basis should cease. Officers should develop expertise in countries and regions. Multilateral postings should not be meant for rotational blessings, but for those who have the talent and experience. Instead of rotating officers so that they retire comfortably, we should give them other incentives to stay in tough assignments. Those in difficult places must be compensated financially. Postings, an art at present, should be made a science, with a clear criteria. There should be no vagaries of political influence or acceptability.

The real shortage of officers is not in missions abroad, but at the headquarters. Many heads of divisions cover whole continents with very little support. Temporary deputation of officers from various disciplines can strengthen the headquarters till we have a sufficient number of IFS officers to return. The style of the present Prime Minister seems to be to rely on a small number of people to work intensively on issues; this method could be developed into a system.

The role and relevance of the policy planning and historical divisions are often exaggerated(overstated,अतिशयोक्ति). Policy planning cannot be done in a vacuum; it is the territorial divisions which can help formulate policy. The historical division should be a service unit, helping policymakers, as it is functioning right now. Nothing prevents the Ministry from drawing on the experience and wisdom of people from other fields, without absorbing them into the Ministry.

Many youngsters who aspire to the IFS have begun to believe that it really does not call the shots in foreign policymaking, as decision-making has passed on to the technical Ministries. They believe that the MEA has been reduced to a post office. Unless this impression is removed by concrete action, real talent cannot be attracted to the Videsh Bhawan. Foreign services are elitist in most countries, and India should not fritter away(Spent unwisely,गवाना) its strengths by diluting its specialised and professional character.

Read more »

India must look beyond neutrinos

One of India’s most loved Presidents, missile technologist A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, and his distinguished(dignified,विलक्षण) adviser Srijan Pal Singh have made a strong plea in favour of the India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO). They have focussed on dispelling(force away,दूर करना) local people’s fears about the possible effects (including cancer) of neutrino research. The controversy around these fears has obscured a larger conversation we need to have about the place and shape of science in India, and in this piece I shall suggest some questions we need to think about.

A key argument cited(mention,उल्लेख) by Dr. Kalam and Mr. Singh is that the observatory will help India to gain leadership in science. This raises two questions: Why must India gain leadership in science? If it must, is a project like the neutrino observatory the best way forward?

Impact of ‘spin-offs’

To raise the first question is to risk being accused of Luddite blasphemy. How can you even question the importance of science we’ll be asked; if pressed, statistics and rankings of the poor state of Indian science will be quoted. We’ll be told that scientific research will lead to economic growth; comparisons with the West and China will be drawn. The odd spin-off story about the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) or the Indian Space Research Organisation will be quoted to demonstrate how Big Science changes lives and impacts the economy.

Dr. Kalam and Mr. Singh promise applications in non-proliferation and counter terrorism, mineral and oil exploration, as well as in earthquake detection. But there has been a long history of the impact of spin-offs being exaggerated(overstated,बड़ा चढ़ा कर कहना); an article in the journal of the Federation of American Scientists (a body whose board of sponsors included over 60 Nobel laureates) calculated that NASA produced only $5 million of spin-offs for $65 billion invested over eight years. If such is the low return from projects which involve high levels of engineering design, can spin-offs form a plausible(believable,विश्वसनीय) rationale for what is largely a pure science project? The patchy(incomplete,अपूर्ण) record of Indian Big Science in delivering on core promises (let alone spin-offs) make it difficult to accept that INO will deliver any significant real-world utility despite claims. It was not for nothing that the highly regarded Science magazine termed the project “India’s costly neutrino gamble”.

Even if it delivers useful technology, the argument that research spurs(inspire,प्रेरित) economic growth is highly suspect. As David Edgerton has shown, contrary to popular perception, there is actually a negative correlation between national spending on R&D and national GDP growth rates with few exceptions. This correlation does not, of course, suggest that research is a drag on the economy; merely that rich countries (which tend to grow slowly) spend more on science and technology.

Thus, national investment in science and technology is more a result of growing richer as an economy than a cause of it. Investment in research is an inefficient means of economic growth in middle income countries such as India where cheaper options for economic development are plentiful. Every country gets most of its technology from R&D done by others. The East Asian Tigers, for example, benefitted from reverse engineering Western technologies before building their own research capabilities. Technologies have always been mobile in their economic impact; this is more so today when Apple’s research in California creates more jobs in China than in the United States.

Most jobs in our own booming IT sector arose from technological developments in the U.S. rather than Indian invention.

Is the INO the best way forward for Indian science?

One may cite better uses (sanitation, roads, schools and hospitals) for the $224 million that is to be spent on the most expensive research facility in Indian history; but that argument is unfashionable (and some may say unfair). However, even if one concedes the importance of India pursuing global leadership in scientific research, one may question if investing in the INO is the best way to do so.

Allocation of resources

Like many other countries, India has long had a skewed approach to allocating its research budget to disciplines, institutions and individual researchers; given limited resources, this has a larger negative impact in India than in the rich countries. Of the Central government’s total research spend in 2009-10, almost a third went to the Defence Research and Development Organisation, 15 per cent to the Department of Space, 14 per cent to the Department of Atomic Energy (which is now in-charge of the INO project) and 11 per cent to the Indian Council of Agricultural Research. The Department of Science, which covers most other scientific disciplines, accounted for barely 8 per cent of the Central government’s total R&D spending. Barely 4 per cent of India’s total R&D spending took place in the higher education sector which accounts for a large share of science and technology personnel in the country. Much of this meagre spending took place in elite(specific,विशिष्ट वर्ग) institutes such as the IITs and IISc., leaving little for our universities where vast numbers of S&T professors and research scholars work.

Spending on Big Science has thus been at the cost of a vibrant culture of research at our universities. Given its not so insubstantial investment in research, India punches well below its weight in research output. This raises serious questions as to whether our hierarchical model of allocating resource to research has paid off.

It may be argued that to gain leadership in science, money is best spent in supporting a wide range of research at many institutions, rather than investing an amount equivalent to nearly 16 per cent of the 2015-16 Science Ministry budget in a very expensive facility like INO designed to benefit a relatively small number of scientists working in a highly specialised and esoteric(confidential,गोपनीय) field.

We need to invest in nurturing research at the still-struggling new IITs (and IISERs) as well as increase support to the old IITs (and IISc). More generally, we need to allocate public resources for research more fairly (though perhaps not entirely equitably) to the specialised bodies and educational institutions, including the universities. Besides raising the overall quality and quantity of our research output, this will allow students to experience being taught by leaders in their discipline who would not only inspire the young to pursue a career in research, but also encourage the small but growing trend of the best and the brightest staying back in India for their doctorate rather than migrating overseas.

While few can fully understand and appreciate their potential, neutrinos can tell us much about matter and the universe. There is indeed a case to be made for an observatory, which goes beyond narrow utility or national pride to the curiosity, the joy of discovery and the sense of wonder about nature that lie at the very heart of what it means to be human.

As India’s Second Five Year Plan put it, material welfare is not an end in itself but merely a means to a better intellectual life; a society which devotes most of its resources to the bare essentials of life is limited in its pursuit of higher ends. But given that for many in India, these bare essentials are simply inadequate(not enough,अपर्याप्त) and we are far from having a thriving(flourishing,फलता फूलता) research culture, we need to think about whether this particular “higher end” is worth the cost.

Read more »

Attitudes on Indian women must change

Recently, I was at a meeting with senior Indian diplomats. After a healthy discussion on India’s recent foreign policy accomplishments — defence agreements with the U.S., trade deals with China and Japan, and a general feeling of confidence surrounding the proactive international agenda of the Narendra Modi government, one of the members of the group raised the question of the appalling treatment of women in India. “This is one of the hardest questions I encounter as a diplomat,” the senior-most diplomat said. He went on to elaborate that this is not a country-specific problem. After all, he said, in total numbers the U.S. has more cases of rape and sexual assault than India does, including aggressive sexual assaults in university campuses. So, he concluded, the media, especially the international media, should stop singling out India on this issue.

Vishakha N. Desai

I found myself both distressed and slightly sympathetic on hearing his answer. On the one hand, as a historian and daughter of a Gandhian woman who fought for India’s independence and helped establish one of the first women’s organisations in the country, I know that explaining the role of women in India is complicated. Whenever I am asked this question in the U.S., I often say that it depends on the context.

It is very confusing for outsiders to make sense of the multivalent nature of Indian women’s position in society. They wonder: how is it that India can produce women political leaders, from a Prime Minister to Chief Ministers, but also rank amongst the countries with the highest levels of infanticide(murder of infant,शिशुहत्या), with millions of “missing girls” as the Nobel laureate, Amartya Sen, has pointed out? How is it that India can boast of female executives in national financial institutions, but its women rank 140 out of 179 countries in the Mother’s Index Rank (compared to China, which ranks 61)?

Clearly, these apparent contradictions don’t fit neatly into easy generalisations. My 98-year-old mother was as upset as I was to hear about the horrible Nirbhaya case in Delhi. But when I went to see the recent theatrical production of the same name in New York, it left me distressed — it was mainly about anger and victimisation of young Indian women. Seeing the play in New York, where a majority of the audience had no knowledge of India or its complex cultural attitudes towards women, made me acutely(intense,तेज़ी से) aware of the dangers of projecting a one-dimensional view of any culture. I almost wanted to stand up and say, “Please, there is another side to this story: I am a second-generation feminist, and my mother was fighting for women’s dignity in 1935!”

Nonetheless, I had to acknowledge that for the large majority of Indian women, life is not only tough, but precarious(unstable,अस्थिर). As a recent Economist article points out, resources spent on women in India are more uneven than in most countries. Women in India are far likelier to die giving birth, because of a lack of even basic medical assistance, than in China. The increased numbers of sexual assaults and rapes (at least in terms of reporting) in recent decades suggest that growing prosperity, if anything, has led to a greater clash of traditional attitudes with contemporary ambitions.

This brings us back to the discussion with Indian diplomats. In the international context, it is not useful to make excuses or rationalise the problems a large number of Indian women face. It would be far more effective if we first acknowledged that there is a serious problem in India. It is as much about attitudes as it is about policies.

Women’s groups in India were right to criticise Prime Minister Modi when he gave a backhanded compliment to Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina for being tough on terrorism “despite being a woman”. Such retrograde views, whether conscious or unconscious, are all too prevalent among Indian leaders. They have to be pointed out, and the leaders must be made accountable. Equally important, policies have to change, whether around increasing resources for strengthening the maternal health of women, or for educating girls and keeping them in schools.

Indian diplomats would do well if they first addressed the problem facing Indian women, pointed out what the government is doing or is willing to do to address the issue, and finally educated their international audiences about the complex nature of women’s roles in India. Only then can they place the issue in a global context and share their concerns for women everywhere, making sure that they denounce degrading of women no matter where they occur. It will not help to blame the media or external forces as being out to sully India’s reputation. India is strong enough today to acknowledge its problems and move forward by finding solutions. It will require consistent efforts to change age-old attitudes that kept women subservient(slavish,असहाय).

Read more »

Building affordable homes

India’s real estate sector needs large funding, transformative infrastructure development, and supportive regulatory and policy mechanisms to achieve social and economic objectives
For Indians, the most important form of social security is to own a house. It is a proxy for their social standing and prestige. But housing is expensive: realty in New Delhi and Mumbai is generally priced out of reach and remains mostly unsold. In India, there is a housing shortage, along with rising inventory and mostly bankrupt developers. Land, especially with basic infrastructure in place, remains a limited commodity.

Feroze Varun Gandhi

There is now significant social stress on the economy with rising urbanisation and an expanding middle class, along with a housing shortage estimated at 62.5 million units. Over 65 million people live in slums. The demand for houses is expected to increase to 88.8 million affordable units, according to the Pronab Sen Committee on Slum Statistics, within the next two to four years, with the deficit in urban areas touching 18.9 million units. An estimated investment of $1.7 trillion is required to meet the housing shortage.

Amidst(in the middle of,के बीच) this demand graph, the housing and construction sector remains India’s second largest employment generator. Real estate comprises 20-30 per cent of this, contributing to 5 per cent of India’s GDP. Despite this demand, investment remains in a downturn. Affordable housing remains a myth. Why is land available and yet so unaffordable?

The absence of land

Unfavourable land management policies such as the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation Act), 1976, remain prevalent in certain States, along with low Floor Space Index (FSI) ceilings in different cities. As a result, small low-rise residences and commercial complexes are being developed on each plot, leading to lower incomes for developers and, hence, higher prices to cover land costs.

The issue of titling(right,अधिकार) and the lack of property rights information add to the problem. Under Indian law, registration of sale of land is compulsory, but the registration authority is not required to verify from the seller either the history or ownership of the land. This weakens buyer protection and acts more as a fiscal instrument for the state instead of being a statutory support of certainty to title. Urban India recognises presumed ownership to land, a questionable claim which can be challenged.

Floor Area Ratio/FSI ratios have led to horizontal expansion and need to be doubled to bring about a vertical expansion. Andhra Pradesh, in particular, has removed the FAR concept, creating adequate supply and stabilised prices. A land pooling policy would aid in semi-urban areas, with beneficiaries being exempted from tax on capital gains and stamp duties.

If there is successful implementation of the National Land Records Management Programme (NLRMP) by 2018, it will make it easier for developers to focus on suitable land parcels with reduced litigation(judicial processing,मुकदमेबाजी) risks.

Regulatory complexity

Project launches and completion delays are becoming commonplace, alongwith bottlenecks in the supply of raw materials and labour. Regulatory approvals remain a complex process, with a minimum of 34 of them to be followed by a developer to obtain construction permits. This takes 18-36 months.

Most departments issuing such permits have similar checklists. This leads to duplication of work and delays. Both the National Housing Policy 2007 and the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission have identified “simplification of the building approval process” as an important area for action. The government needs to expedite(speed up the progress,शीघ्र निपटाना) the implementation of the IT-enabled “single window approval system” with linkages between the Centre and State governments, urban bodies and panchayat levels (SAPREP Committee, 2013). Urban experiments in Ahmedabad, Chennai and Pune have resulted in automated building plan approval processes.

Globally, many countries offer streamlined online processes and incentives to facilitate affordable housing — these can include tax deductions, density bonuses, direct subsidies, land grants, land use changes, and so on. The use of fee waivers and fast-track methods are tools adopted by some countries such as Malaysia to set administrative requirements. Hong Kong’s ‘smart regulator’ programme merged eight procedures involving six different agencies and two private utilities into a one stop centre. Affordable housing can be boosted by establishing a green channel for approving low-cost housing projects. The National Building Code of 2005 needs to be revisited for low-cost housing norms, and automatic clearances for projects with  Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design/Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment certification should be ensured.

Gathering initial funding for any real estate project is a daunting(scare off,भयभीत करने वाला) task, especially for new entrants, as the Reserve Bank has set a 15 per cent threshold(entrance,प्रवेश) for banking exposure to real estate (including housing loans and construction finance). The absence of long-term funding from financial institutions has led developers to consider alternative financing with higher interest rates, leading to higher housing inflation.

Granting infrastructure status to real estate, especially to affordable housing, will open up additional financing avenues — insurance firms, tax-free infrastructure bonds or up to 50 per cent funding through external commercial borrowing. A public-private partnership mode with government backing, as Rajasthan has done, will also secure institutional lending at lower costs. Out of the Rs.22,407 crore budgeted for the housing sector, a separate allocation is required for affordable housing.

Rationalisation of tax, constituting 30-37 per cent of deal value, will incentivise housing development. This can be ushered(guide,दिखाना) in by reviewing its various constituents including stamp duty, service tax, value added tax, land conversion charges and external development charges. Unification of stamp duty and other charges across all States along with exemption on excise duty for pre-fabricated housing components is a medium-term measure. Introducing the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Bill, 2015 and the Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets (Imposition of Tax) Bill, 2015 (popularly known as the black money bill) will curb(control,नियंत्रण) the flow of black money into real estate, improving the overall affordability of the sector.

Keeping it affordable

High inflation rates affect the buying ability of first-time buyers, given higher interest payments. The government needs to focus on closing the affordability gap for economically weaker sections and low income groups’ housing segments through increased credit lines to micro housing finance companies, an expansion of formal banking services and subsidies on interest component for affordability gap loan. Revisiting the Rent Control Act could free up a significant portion of the 20 million unoccupied housing units.

Hong Kong and Singapore have institutionalised highly successful public housing programmes catering to 50 per cent and 85 per cent of their population respectively. Social housing, built through public-private partnership projects, could be developed to provide subsidised rental housing. Making rental income tax-free could potentially unlock 11 million housing units.

India’s real estate sector needs large funding, transformative infrastructure development, along with supportive regulatory and policy mechanisms to achieve social and economic objectives. Careful nurturing through policy action could catalyse India’s affordable housing boo

Read more »