Roadmap for Answer Writing
1. Introduction
- Context: Briefly introduce the Planning Commission’s establishment in 1950 and its replacement by NITI Aayog in 2015.
- Significance: Highlight the importance of understanding the differences in their principles to grasp India’s developmental strategy.
2. Key Differences in Principles
A. Approach to Policy Formulation
- NITI Aayog:
- Bottom-Up Approach: Engages stakeholders and states in policy-making.
- Fact: “NITI Aayog promotes participatory decision-making.”
- Planning Commission:
- Top-Down Approach: Central decisions imposed on states.
B. Ideological Basis
- NITI Aayog:
- Free Market Economy: Focuses on competitive federalism.
- Fact: “NITI Aayog aims for competitive federalism between states.”
- Planning Commission:
- Socialism: Operated on socialist ideals, which became outdated after LPG reforms.
C. Competitive Federalism
- NITI Aayog:
- Online Dashboards: Ranks states on development indicators.
- Fact: “Indicators include the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) India Index.”
- Planning Commission:
- Did not implement competitive ranking or metrics.
D. Decentralization and Participation
- NITI Aayog:
- Participatory Governance: Involves states and local bodies.
- Fact: “Chief ministers are actively involved in planning.”
- Planning Commission:
- Centralized Decision-Making: Typically led by union ministers or technocrats.
E. Financial Powers
- NITI Aayog:
- Advisory Role: Lacks direct financial allocation powers.
- Planning Commission:
- Direct Fund Allocation: Allocated funds to states for development.
F. Focus on Inclusive Growth
- NITI Aayog:
- Addressing Disparities: Aims for inclusive growth across regions.
- Fact: “Focus on regional imbalances and disparities.”
- Planning Commission:
- Similar goals but criticized for a top-down approach.
G. Coordination Role
- NITI Aayog:
- Convergence Among Governments: Facilitates coordination across ministries and levels of government.
- Fact: “Initiatives like the 115 Aspirational Districts promote convergence.”
- Planning Commission:
- Lacked effective coordination mechanisms.
H. Relationship with Government
- NITI Aayog:
- Think Tank Model: Maintains intellectual distance from the government.
- Planning Commission:
- Government-Linked Body: Deeply integrated into governmental operations.
3. Conclusion
- Summarize Key Points: Recap the significant differences in principles and approaches of NITI Aayog and the Planning Commission.
- Call to Action: Emphasize how these differences shape India’s current development strategies.
Key Takeaways
- Clearly identify and articulate the principles that differentiate NITI Aayog from the Planning Commission.
- Use relevant facts from credible sources to support each point.
- Maintain clarity and coherence in the response to ensure it is well-structured and informative.
Differences in Principles Followed by NITI Aayog and the Planning Commission
Introduction
The NITI Aayog, established in 2015, replaced the Planning Commission, which had been the cornerstone of India’s planned economic development since 1950. While both institutions aimed at fostering economic growth, their underlying principles and approaches differ significantly.
Principles Followed by NITI Aayog
NITI Aayog emphasizes cooperative federalism, promoting a more collaborative approach between the central and state governments. It encourages states to take ownership of their development plans, reflecting in initiatives like the State Action Plans for Climate Change.
The NITI Aayog functions primarily as a think tank, providing policy advice and strategic guidance rather than directly implementing plans. For instance, its Aspirational Districts Programme aims to improve socio-economic indicators in the most backward districts by offering targeted support and policy recommendations.
NITI Aayog adopts an outcome-based approach, focusing on results and accountability. This is evident in the Performance Grading Index (PGI) for states, which assesses their performance across various sectors, promoting transparency and accountability.
It encourages innovation and technology in policy implementation. The Digital India initiative, aimed at enhancing digital infrastructure and services, reflects this principle.
Principles Followed by the Planning Commission
The Planning Commission followed a centralized planning model, where the central government formulated and imposed five-year plans on states. The approach was top-down, with limited flexibility for states.
It played a crucial role in resource allocation through the distribution of central funds to states based on planned targets. This often led to a one-size-fits-all approach to development.
The emphasis was on achieving pre-defined targets set in the Five-Year Plans, with less emphasis on results and local context.
States had limited autonomy in planning and were largely dependent on central directives. This often resulted in mismatches between local needs and centrally mandated plans.
Recent Examples
Conclusion
NITI Aayog’s principles, including cooperative federalism, outcome orientation, and emphasis on innovation, represent a departure from the Planning Commission’s centralized, target-driven model. This shift aims to enhance flexibility, efficiency, and effectiveness in India’s development strategies.
Model Answer
Introduction
India’s Planning Commission was established in 1950, inspired by the Soviet model, to design five-year plans. In 2015, it was replaced by the National Institution for Transforming India (NITI) Aayog, reflecting the evolving needs of the nation.
Key Differences in Principles
1. Approach to Policy Formulation
2. Ideological Basis
3. Competitive Federalism
4. Decentralization and Participation
5. Financial Powers
6. Focus on Inclusive Growth
7. Coordination Role
8. Relationship with Government
Conclusion
While both NITI Aayog and the Planning Commission aim for socio-economic transformation, NITI Aayog’s approach is more modern, inclusive, and less bureaucratic, positioning it as a pivotal player in India’s development narrative.