Content
- Unlocking innovation with India’s procurement reforms
- India’s economic ambitions need better gender data
Unlocking innovation with India’s procurement reforms
Basics
- Context: Editorial discusses how India’s rigid public procurement policies hinder research and development (R&D).
- Issue: Balancing transparency and cost-efficiency with the flexibility needed for scientific innovation.
- Recent Trigger: June 2025 reforms to General Financial Rules (GFR) — exemptions from GeM for specialised R&D equipment, higher financial thresholds, and delegation of approvals.
Relevance:
- GS-2: Government policies and interventions in R&D, transparency vs. efficiency, public procurement reforms.
- GS-3: Indian economy, innovation ecosystem, Atmanirbhar Bharat, ease of doing science, R&D financing.
Practice Question:
“Public procurement is no longer just an administrative tool but a catalyst for innovation.” Critically examine the recent reforms to India’s General Financial Rules (GFR) in light of global best practices. (250 Words)
Author’s Core Argument
- Procurement frameworks designed for cost-control often suffocate innovation by prioritising compliance over scientific needs.
- Recent GFR reforms are a welcome step, enabling flexibility (bypassing GeM, raising limits, quicker global tenders).
- Globally, procurement can be a catalyst for innovation (Germany, US SBIR, South Korea models). India’s reforms move in this direction but lack deeper structural innovation elements.
- Suggests systemic reforms like outcome-weighted tenders, sandbox exemptions, AI-based procurement tools, and co-procurement alliances.
Counter Arguments
- Too much discretion risks corruption or misuse, undermining transparency.
- Procurement flexibility without robust accountability may recreate inefficiency and rent-seeking.
- Domestic vendors may get sidelined if global tenders dominate.
- Focus on procurement reform alone ignores broader issues like underfunding of R&D (India’s GERD ~0.7% of GDP vs. >2% in OECD).
- Privatisation of labs is not a panacea; risks loss of strategic autonomy if not carefully balanced.
Overview
- Polity/Legal:
- Reforms under GFR align with India’s innovation agenda and ease-of-doing-science.
- Needs clear rules on accountability and oversight (CVC, CAG).
- Governance/Administrative:
- Decentralising decisions to institutional heads reduces bureaucratic delays.
- But capacity-building and integrity systems must be strengthened.
- Economy:
- Faster R&D procurement enhances competitiveness in high-tech sectors.
- Domestic suppliers need policy support (PLI for scientific equipment).
- Society:
- Better R&D outcomes feed into health, education, and welfare innovations.
- Procurement reforms indirectly improve service delivery (e.g., medical devices, vaccines).
- Environment/Science & Tech:
- Catalytic procurement can accelerate green technologies (renewables, storage).
- AI-based procurement could reduce delays, wastage, and carbon footprint of supply chains.
- International:
- Learning from Germany, US, South Korea models shows procurement as a strategic tool.
- India can position itself in global innovation networks by aligning procurement with mission-oriented research.
Challenges
- Ensuring transparency while allowing flexibility.
- Limited domestic capacity in high-end equipment manufacturing.
- Risk of centralised corruption if oversight weak.
- Institutional inertia and resistance to change.
- Funding constraints in R&D ecosystem.
Way Forward
- Policy: Adopt “mission-oriented procurement” (Mariana Mazzucato model).
- Committees: Implement NITI Aayog’s innovation financing recommendations; consider ARC reports on public procurement reforms.
- Best Practices:
- Germany’s KOINNO for innovation procurement support.
- US SBIR model for start-up integration.
- EU’s joint procurement alliances.
- Technology: Deploy AI tools under INDIAai for predictive sourcing.
- Inclusion: Build domestic supplier ecosystem through targeted incentives.
Conclusion
India’s procurement reforms mark a positive step in aligning research needs with administrative rules. To truly unlock innovation, procurement must evolve from a compliance mechanism to a catalyst for scientific breakthroughs, balancing flexibility, transparency, and accountability.
India’s economic ambitions need better gender data
Basics
- Issue: Women contribute just 18% to India’s GDP, despite forming half of the population.
- Context: Female Labour Force Participation Rate (FLFPR) has improved to 41.7%, but only 18% are in formal employment.
- Fact: Nearly 196 million employable women remain outside the workforce.
- Why it matters: Inclusive growth and India’s $30 trillion economy aspiration by 2047 depends on integrating women into the economy.
Relevance:
- GS-1: Role of women, gender issues, social empowerment.
- GS-2: Welfare schemes for vulnerable sections, gender budgeting, governance reforms.
- GS-3: Inclusive growth, employment, demographic dividend.
Practice Question:
“Without visibility in data, women remain invisible in policy.” Discuss the significance of gender-disaggregated data and initiatives like the Women’s Economic Empowerment (WEE) Index for achieving India’s economic goals by 2047. (250 Words)
Author’s Core Argument
- India lacks gender-disaggregated data, leading to invisibility of women’s contribution in policy design.
- The Women’s Economic Empowerment (WEE) Index, launched by Uttar Pradesh, is a pioneering tool tracking women’s participation across five levers: employment, skilling, entrepreneurship, livelihood/mobility, and safety/infrastructure.
- Visibility of inequities leads to targeted reforms (e.g., transport recruitment changes after data on women’s low participation).
- Replication of the WEE Index across states is essential for embedding a gender lens in governance.
Counter Arguments
- Index-based approaches risk becoming data-heavy but action-light if not linked with accountability and budgetary reforms.
- Excessive focus on measurement may delay immediate structural reforms (childcare, workplace safety, equal pay).
- Risks of state-level uneven adoption, where progressive states move ahead but laggard states widen the gender gap.
- Gender empowerment also depends on societal norms — data alone cannot shift entrenched patriarchy.
Overview
- Polity/Legal:
- Supports constitutional vision of equality (Articles 14, 15, 16).
- Aligns with gender budgeting mandates in Union and State budgets.
- Governance/Administrative:
- WEE Index embeds a gender lens in MIS systems across departments.
- Enhances evidence-based policymaking at the district level.
- Economy:
- Closing the gender gap could add $770 billion to India’s GDP by 2025 (McKinsey estimate).
- Boosts entrepreneurship and access to credit for women.
- Society:
- Helps track barriers such as dropouts after Class 12 or post-graduation.
- Strengthens women’s mobility, safety, and participation in non-traditional sectors.
- International:
- Similar to OECD’s Gender Data Portal and UN Women’s SDG tracking.
- Aligns with SDG 5 (Gender Equality) and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Growth).
Challenges
- Weak institutional capacity for data collection at local level.
- Risk of tokenism in gender budgeting, confined to welfare schemes.
- Limited awareness and resistance to gender mainstreaming across departments.
- Lack of integration between state indices and national planning.
Way Forward
- Universal gender-disaggregated data: Integrate across all MIS platforms.
- Outcome-based gender budgeting: Move beyond inputs, link with results.
- Capacity building: Train local governments in gender-sensitive data use.
- Sandbox models: Allow select institutions/states to experiment with gender-first policies.
- Learn from global best practices: Canada’s Gender Results Framework, Rwanda’s gender-responsive planning.
Conclusion
The WEE Index is a pioneering step in making women’s economic role visible. To truly leverage India’s gender dividend, reforms must move beyond measurement to systemic action, accountability, and cultural change.
