How to prioritise a smart approach to governance

This post is written by Madhu Sivaraman, Policy Manager at LEAD, Krea University in India.

• The problem: Governments are entering uncharted territories of governance through regulation.

• Why it matters: Such regulation impacts on innovation and the convenient use of technology.

• The solution: Prioritising government interventions through a smart approach.

Covid-19 has brought the much-required migration of government processes into digital systems much faster. There has been an increased acceptance of digital tools overcoming the bureaucratic reluctance which hitherto had impeded a ‘smarter’ governance.

But the benefits of digital adoption and usage need to be considered albeit concerns of privacy and data security, given its benefits in improving governance. As someone who has observed the Indian government’s systems in various capacities, I’ve seen how the regulatory capacity of the government had to comprehend the seismic changes in governance due to the forced reliance on digital systems.

Two scenarios are discussed here for the reader to understand what goes into the discussion table of bureaucrats and how it pans out in reality.

To Zoom out or not!

The first confrontation in the digital space happened over the use of Zoom. The Ministry of Home Affairs issued advisories to all its departments against using Zoom for online meetings. This was taken as a measure against security concerns on the application and to safeguard against any malicious use.

The suggestion however stopped short with direction against its use within its government departments and a more of an advisory against its use by private individuals. India could have very well stepped into the examples set by Iran or Cuba, which went for an outright ban, but pragmatically laid guidelines for its usage, given its fast adoption and usage among its citizens.

Meanwhile, government meetings had to be held with the Vidyo application developed by a US firm; the Indian government kickstarted efforts to develop an indigenous application that is yet to have gained traction. The level of bureaucracy meant. face-to-face interactions were instead replaced by WhatsApp discussions. Soon almost half of India’s population will be connected over WhatsApp, enabling government-citizen interactions to be carried out more effectively through this platform.

For regulation, but how?

It is a common facet of all forms of government across the world that they exist to regulate. The question of significance specifically in the digital space is how much regulation is required. A feather touch or a heavy weight?

This probing has been most striking on policy decisions by the government in India that were pronounced on data security and privacy norms and policies towards transport aggregators. The government especially at the federal level has tried in vain to use the Indian Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to put brakes on the Uberisation of the mobility space. However, the Act modelled under the London Hackney Carriage Act, 1831 of the UK curtailed the operations of Uber and Ola, the leading taxi aggregators which had revolutionised city commute through their shared mobility model. Similar regulatory intervention was made to curtail some of the innovative practices adopted by e-commerce platforms, which arguably have become one of the most competitive segments in India poised to grow to $111.4 million by 2025 (IBEF). By curtailing initiatives like Big Billion Sales - a flagship event of Amazon India - the government has been trading to unchartered territories always facing the challenge of destroying a disrupting technology. As the government tries to expand the regulatory footprint in the digital space, questions are raised on its reasoning and efficacy.

Key takeaways

The two scenarios in the digital space provide a glimpse of what happens in the policy cycle that influences governance. In both the cases the reasoning in decision making should be more of pragmatism: ie. whether convenience should get acceptance over concerns of security and whether micro-scale regulation will impact market innovation and competition.

While these decisions might be guided by external interests, governments should look at the broader picture of what benefits the stakeholders involved and help set priorities for governance. Whether it would stifle genuine competition and innovation, whether unwanted time and resources will be used in administering the policy decision and finally whether the priorities of the government are carried out effectively through such decisions.

Smart thinking should guide government priorities to enable governance to be more effective. Such thinking is derived from the context set by the political machinery within which the bureaucracy works. The success of a policy lies in the manner in which the political and executive administration jointly identify their priorities through a smart approach considering resources at stake and the pragmatism involved.

👋 You can create a post like this one! Share your thoughts with a community of public servants. Learn more

(Image Credit: Unsplash)