Attitude
Change is undoubtedly an impending reality for political landscape in India.
Though primarily perceived as a short-term game plan during election seasons,
addressing expectations is also a developmental economics issue involving
enormous costs. In this context, addressing attitude change is a common
challenge for traditional political parties, which so far, were operating
without openness in policy framework. Its impact is already being seen in
different forms: be it unprecedented electoral response in State Government Elections
of Delhi, effects on how the business is conducted – be it agriculture,
fisheries and health, and already scarce forest, land, and water resources.
With changes in key variables, namely average age of population, earning
capacity, exposure to and aspirations for better standard of living, it is in
our collective interest that our country moves towards an attitude resilient
development path.
The
important question here is how to grow fast while keeping in mind the need for
poverty eradication, managing urbanization, and improving public health,
education and development. As a developing country, India strongly believes
that it requires adequate development space for its people.
I
am only reiterating the fact that attitude change is a real issue and like
every serious concern it also entails some inevitable trade-offs and choices
that are to be made as a part of the planning exercise when malicious agencies
will want to get involved in the name of change within the competing demands of
a vibrant political franchise. Lately with the growing concerns about attitude
change, the set of trade-offs faced by traditional policy makers and dependent
lobby agencies has expanded, with critical decisions to be made regarding meeting
expectations.
On
the flip side, poorer sections of the society are demanding more space, in order
to achieve the same level of per capita income and welfare as enjoyed by the
rich in the country. There is a huge lacuna in terms of bringing their attitude
and aspirations’ divide amongst these sections - can also be perceived as developmental divide.
For India in the short and medium run dependence on bringing this gap will
continue to be a necessary part of enabling growth.
The
choice between focussing on purely growth centric processes or adopting an
ambitious attitude correction trajectory were never easy to make and are going
to be even more difficult in the coming years. As growth weakens, growth
becomes more of priority; it will become difficult for attitude change to sustain
itself.
The
central question then will remain: How do we finance all of our needs, while
staying within a prudent attitude envelope? The answer has to be more efficient
spending and policies to generate equitable and inclusive growth, along with
additional efforts to constantly monitor the definition of the same as we move
forward.
The
need of the hour is also to create strong incentives to encourage civil society
participation in democracy. The political market will need to be transformed to
attract for more participation and reduce nepotistic despondency.
Given
the constraint on resources, ultimately the entire task boils down to optimal
resource allocation and mobilization and also the creation of an incentive structure
that motivates citizenry appropriately. The role that markets and development/
non-government organizations can play in this task is significant. New and
additional resources through the participatory mechanism of our vibrant
democracy will play a crucial role in handling this attitude change.
