Several Indian states have deployed information technology (IT) to improve the operations of their public distribution system (PDS). Madhya Pradesh has gone the farthest in this regard by issuing ration cards to only those with unique identification (UID) numbers. The state is also using the services of an IT firm. Since an IT system takes some time to be put in place and then some more to get rid of the glitches, it will be some time before a definitive assessment can be made of whether the amount spent over several years on IT has been worth it. But it must be noted right at the outset that no system, not even one based on the use of IT with any number of technical checks and safeguards, is foolproof enough to prevent misuse. Besides, IT is, at best, a technical tool and what use it is put to depends on both the quality of the system design and the attitude of those who use it. Using IT, at the same time, helps instant monitoring and quick aggregation of disparate data which allows users to get the overall picture of the functioning of a system faster than would have been possible otherwise. So it is important to resist the temptation to be hostile towards IT as a newfangled thing while not assuming it to be omnipotent.
In terms of the specifics, it is disappointing that ration shops in India have not been brought into the IT network and do not use point-of-sale devices. Also, smart cards are not being used so that the ability to embed in them data on entitlement, use and balance available online reduces the usefulness of IT. Moreover, it is not clear why a separate vendor is needed to check tamper-proof coupons and tally them with the counterfoils received from ration shops. This checking could have been done with the data generated at the ration shop itself if it had been properly equipped. In fact, there should be no need to issue tamper-proof coupons (there are printing costs involved) if tamper-proof smart cards are used. Of course, smart cards also cost money. Ideally, stocks with trucks carrying supplies and ration shops should be verifiable at any time and sample checks with a beneficiary community should reveal if people are actually getting what the ration shop says has been sold to them.
Some civil society groups do not like UID, although it is nothing but a device to biometrically determine unique identity. What more is done with UID is not central to running a good PDS with the help of biometric identification enabled through UID. Also, the fact that door-to-door verification is needed even when IT is used indicates that biometric identification removes duplication and impersonation; it cannot determine whether a person is really poor or not. And the fact that Tamil Nadu runs an efficient system without much use of IT shows that with right motivation it is possible to run a system well in the old-fashioned way.
