Pulling its punches

Given its vast resources, both intellectual as well as financial, it's not surprising that the World Bank's latest Development Policy Review has fascinating insights as far as India's growth prospects and delivery of core public services (like education and drinking water) are concerned. While the comparisons drawn on China's huge advances on the infrastructure front and the impact on growth are well-known, the examples on service delivery are not so well-known but equally vital. For instance, while India's success in the pulse polio programme was something to shout about, as the Bank points out, routine immunisation levels are not only lower than those for countries like Bangladesh (77 per cent of children there are immunised against measles, versus 55 for India) but have even fallen, from 58 per cent in 1998-99; reports of a fresh outbreak of polio in Uttar Pradesh confirm that all is not well.

Then, for all the increase in education budgets over the years, and the increased emphasis now, as the Pratham survey showed, almost two-thirds of the children in government-run primary schools cannot read a simple story, and half of them cannot solve simple numerical problems. Similarly, while most citizens of Delhi have heard Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit arguing that unless the Capital gets more water from Uttar Pradesh, it will not be able to supply more water to citizens, the Bank points out that this is simply not true""Delhi's average water supply today is 223 litres per capita per day, but the city gets water for just four hours a day, while Ludhiana with slightly less water provides water for 10 hours. Indeed, the report cites instances of cities in Africa and Asia that provide 24x7 water with a lot less supply than Delhi gets. Jakarta has 80 litres per capita per day, Dakar has 90, and Colombo 119, but all offer 24x7 water.

Having given a host of such examples, however, the report pulls it punches""perhaps because the Indian government is one of the better clients the Bank has. So, it says, "It is not the case that a major theme of this report is that policies are, in general, badly designed", but that public institutions are "increasingly less capable of delivering on any program or policy". Then, in keeping with the usual enthusiasm of those recommending panchayati raj as the panacea to all such "implementation issues", the Bank too recommends this as the solution, adding that unless there is enforceability or accountability, most reforms will come to nought. But surely, the Bank would know that this is not possible. After all, if a villager cannot make a doctor at the primary health centre lose his/her job for being absent, where is the question of delivery levels increasing to the levels of private providers? Similarly, if a government teacher can retain a job while not being in class, where is the question of enforceability?

And dismissing teachers/bureaucrats for non-performance is simply not possible in large enough numbers to make a difference. Blaming the lack of implementation for lack of progress on key variables has been something all politicians/bureaucrats are comfortable with since it means, implicitly, that a promise to rejig the system will give them yet another chance to carry on with no meaningful change while increasing government-spend manifold. The Bank's belief that citizen report cards, such as the ones Samuel Paul does for Bangalore, will help improve quality, also appears optimistic since they work only when accompanied by the threat of dismissal for non-performance. It is unfortunate that the Bank has essentially voted along with the status quoists, instead of pushing for more market-based reforms, especially since its own research shows that private education is both cheaper and a lot more efficient than publicly-provided education.