India’s welfare system is undergoing a major transformation driven by digital technology. With over a billion Aadhaar enrolments and 1,206 schemes linked to the Direct Benefit Transfer system, the government aims to deliver social welfare efficiently and at scale. However, this shift raises critical questions about democratic values and political accountability in welfare delivery.
Technocratic Shift in Welfare Delivery
India’s welfare model increasingly relies on data-driven algorithms and measurable outcomes. The focus has moved from deciding who deserves support and why to how to minimise leakage and maximise coverage. This technocratic approach prioritises efficiency and coverage but tends to depoliticise welfare. Schemes like E-SHRAM and PM KISAN reflect this streamlined, error-intolerant logic. The citizen is now seen as an auditable beneficiary rather than a rights-bearing individual.
Decline in Social Sector Spending
Despite claims of a socialistic state, India’s social sector spending has declined to 17% in 2024-25 from an average of 21% during 2014-24. Key welfare areas such as minorities, labour, employment, nutrition, and social security witnessed a sharp drop from 11% pre-COVID-19 to 3% post-COVID-19. This reduction affects vulnerable groups and undermines inclusive welfare goals.
Challenges in Transparency and Accountability
The Right to Information (RTI) regime faces an existential crisis with over four lakh pending cases and vacancies in key posts. The Centralised Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System, while resolving many complaints, risks flattening federal structures into mere ticket-tracking systems. This algorithmic insulation centralises visibility but diffuses political responsibility, weakening accountability.
Democratic Deficit in Welfare Governance
Welfare is losing its role as a space for democratic deliberation. The system often ignores the complexity of citizens’ lived experiences. According to Justice D.Y. Chandrachud’s dissent in the Aadhaar case, reducing citizens to data points risks dehumanising them and bypassing constitutional protections. Democracy depends on making suffering visible and contestable, not just computable.
Need for Context-Sensitive and Participatory Models
There is a pressing need to empower states to design welfare systems sensitive to local contexts. Community-driven impact audits and participatory planning should be institutionalised. Platforms like Kerala’s Kudumbashree offer models for cooperative and grassroots involvement. Civil society’s role in political education and legal aid must be strengthened to enhance community accountability.
Embedding Safeguards and Human Feedback
Digital governance must include offline fallback mechanisms and human oversight. Statutory bias audits and the right to explanation and appeal should be codified to protect citizens from algorithmic errors and exclusion. Democratic antifragility is essential to prevent system failures under stress and to maintain trust in welfare delivery.
Reorienting Welfare for a Viksit Bharat
For India to become a developed nation, digitisation must be balanced with democratic principles. Citizens should be partners in governance, not mere ledger entries. Welfare must regain its democratic core where transparency, accountability, and participation guide policy and implementation.
Questions for UPSC:
- Critically discuss the impact of digital technologies on democratic accountability in India’s welfare delivery systems.
- Analyse the challenges faced by the Right to Information regime in India and its implications for transparency and governance.
- With suitable examples, discuss the role of federalism in designing context-sensitive welfare policies in India.
- Examine the concept of ‘democratic antifragility’ in governance. How can it help improve resilience in public service delivery systems?
