The Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) completes a year in office on Tuesday. It is too soon to pronounce on its effectiveness at boosting India's economic growth - while it has taken many positive steps, there appears to be no coherent direction as of now. Yet it is not too soon to consider exactly where more of the government's policy attention needs to be focused if India is to recover from its prolonged slump. Naturally, given the prime minister's larger-than-life persona, Mr Modi himself corners most eyeballs. But it is not his office, nor even those of the "big three" ministries on Raisina Hill, that will determine the success of this government in the four years it has remaining. It is the second rung of ministers, just below the Hill, who will do so.
Ministries such as power, environment and forests, roads and highways, commerce and industry, communications, labour and so on are going to be the bedrock of policy reform in the years to come. These are the last-mile "management" ministries; on their performance depends the fate of a government that has claimed "execution" as its strength. And indeed many of these ministries have taken major steps forward. Auctions of natural resources have been begun, for example. The environment ministry has begun the process of implementing the T S R Subramanian report, which may lead to a clean-up of complicated and contradictory environmental regulations. However, three things need to be kept in mind. First, the ministries' goals must be realistic and rational, so that government credibility is built up. Second, the steps taken must be carefully planned, to ensure that they slot into each other and that there is no unexpected blowback. And third, the ministers in question must be flexible and open to changing their decisions when they run into unexpected difficulties.
The government's make-or-break ministers must realise that, when judged by these three yardsticks, there is room for improvement. The power and roads ministries, for example, have gone public with very ambitious targets, a violation of the first suggested principle. This is not so dissimilar from the promises that were made by the United Progressive Alliance early on. If individual NDA efforts were to fail to meet these maximalist targets because of unforeseen difficulties, then the hit that government credibility would take would be disproportionate. So a certain modesty of ambition would not be amiss, at least to begin with. On the second principle - the matter of planning and judgement about blowback - it is worth noting that the ministry of environment and forests has run into trouble repeatedly with the National Green Tribunal. The effect this will have on much-needed reform to environmental regulations is uncertain. And on the third principle - flexibility about decision-making - the coal auctions, a supposed success, are a good example. Questions continue to be asked about the economic rationale behind, and consequences of, many of the apparently irrational bids. There is also significant variation in the winning bids. This suggests that the auction design might need some tweaks - but the coal ministry has not signalled its openness to that idea.
The government is planning a publicity blitz, driven perhaps by a sense that its achievements have not been properly communicated to voters. This is a red herring. The second rung of "implementation" ministers, who collectively are those most responsible for India's economy, will be better served learning from the past year, so as to ensure that no publicity blitzes will be necessary on May 26, 2016.
