Email
Print
ShareIndia's GDP of $1,200 billion is growing nominally at around 11% per year (assuming 6% real growth plus 5% inflation). At this rate, India's GDP will be $2,400 billion by 2016, and $4,800 billion by 2023. Assuming government expenditure at all levels to be about 30% of GDP experienced in recent years, India's 20 million civil servants will be responsible for spending $1,440 billion annually by 2023, and raising multiple levels of current revenue.
Rapidly increasing GDP, and the growing importance of securing energy supplies and trade routes, and enhancing India's economic and strategic space would require more sophisticated economic diplomacy and other skills at all levels of government.
The training of civil servants is currently undertaken in the hundreds of public sector institutes belonging to the central and state government organisations, and to public enterprises including financial institutions.
The aggregate expenditure on these institutes has been considerable, though precise data on the number of institutes or about expenditures are not available. Even though many of them have existed for decades, the functioning and performance of these institutes have not received much attention either from the policy makers or from the researchers.
There is an urgent need to fill this gap through rigorous, empirical evidence-based research. Policymakers must set appropriate individual and organisational incentive structures for the training institutes.
Are the existing government training institutes equipped to train and re-skill current and future civil servants; and public enterprise employees to spend (and raise) such increasingly large amounts productively and efficiently? Are they equipped to enhance India's economic and strategic space which is essential for its broader security?
These questions are particularly relevant given the substantive, not token, austerity required to reduce the combined central and state government fiscal deficits (projected to be around 12% of GDP for 2009-10); to obtain better results from given budgetary outlays; and to reallocate expenditures towards areas with potential to contribute to inclusive economic growth.
Based on a variety of sources, including personal experiences, and the revealed outcome in spite of the existence of relevant training institutes for a considerable period, the governance quality has not significantly improved in many diverse areas.
This had led to reduced credibility of governmental institutions as with rising incomes, expectations of competency in the government has also increased.
There is therefore a strong case for substantial revamping of government training institutes if they are to fulfil their responsibilities in meeting the complex challenge facing the country. There are three areas where substantial revamping will be required.
First, the governance structure of these institutes needs to be revamped for greater transparency and accountability for the results in terms of improved delivery of public services and quality of governance.
The training institutes should have the equivalent of independent directors, as required for listed companies, with the responsibility for ensuring that overall public interests are being served. Many of the institutes were set up when India's economy was much smaller and less complex, and its economic paradigm did not emphasize using the external sector as an engine of economic growth.
Training at most of these institutions is typically provided primarily by existing or retired civil servants, most of whom have a fairly short tenure.
Often, their effectiveness is considerably reduced by the tendency to micromanage the curriculum, and administration of the training institute from the State capital, leading to excessive rigidity and inflexibility. Continuation of seniority rather than ability or domain expertise based internal administrative structures of the training institutes may also hamper their effectiveness and constrain introduction of new ideas and methods.
While the existing and retired civil servants provide much needed continuity to the functioning of the civil service, there is also a need for expertise outside of the civil service to introduce new thinking and methods.
This is especially important in public enterprises and areas such as railways and provident & pension fund administration, where there has been considerable technological and other changes.
For example, the Employees Provident Fund Organization (EPFO) manages more than Rs 2 lakh crore, but there are no finance specialists at NATRSS, nor much-needed information technology specialists who can enhance the EPFO's capabilities in this area.
There is also ample anecdotal and other evidence (such as India's comparatively low yield per hectare for many crops) that substantial amounts spent on agricultural training have not produced commensurate results, primarily because of the ineffective governance and incentive structures. At a time when food security is vital, it is essential that agricultural training and extension of the states be substantially revamped.
Second, revamping should include the content of the training provided to civil servants. It is not uncommon to only include current laws, practices in budgeting or in technical areas, and administrative structures in the training curriculum, but not provide appropriate analytical structures or 'whys' of a particular provision of the law or administrative structure.
For example, if income tax officers are trained only in the detailed provisions of the 1961 Income Tax Act, then when the proposed direct taxes code becomes law, they will not be able to function effectively without substantial retraining. Training for the goods and services tax (GST), proposed to be introduced in April 2010, should also have begun by now, but there do not appear to be visible signs of urgency to train the relevant officials.
Third, most of the training institutions are located on prime real estate, or occupy land space which is well in excess of legitimate needs. These have significant opportunity costs. More efficient and productive utilisation of these assets and the property rights associated with them could be an additional source of revenue for the country, assisting in fiscal consolidation and flexibility.
There is therefore a strong case for subjecting government training institutes to outcome budgeting, to ensure that they become part of the solution in meeting India's complex challenges rather than part of the problem.
The writer is professor, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore and can be reached at sppasher@nus.edu.sg. Views are personal
