“In contemporary development models, decision-making and problem-solving responsibilities are not located close to the source of information and execution defeating the objectives of development.” Critically evaluate.
Approach · directive: “critically evaluate”
What it asks · Evaluate the claim that centralised decision-making, far from where information lies and work is done, undermines development — with evidence for and against and a balanced view.
It asks 3 things — answer each
- Critically evaluate — the case for the claim: decision-making far from information and execution undermines development
- Critically evaluate — the case against: where central decisions are justified, and where proximity has been restored
- Verdict and way forward: practising subsidiarity
Open with · Hayek argued (1945) that knowledge of 'the particular circumstances of time and place' needs decentralised decisions; the statement says India's development model ignores this principle of subsidiarity.
Cover
- For: uniform, centrally designed schemes ignore local soils, water and social realities.
- For: Article 243G devolution is discretionary; devolution to panchayats rose only from 39.9% to 43.9% (2013-14 to 2021-22).
- For: parallel bodies bypass elected councils, so feedback between execution and design breaks; assets go unused.
- Against: scale, standards, digital public infrastructure and equity need central decisions; local elites can capture power.
- Against: Aspirational Districts, Gram Panchayat Development Plans, direct Finance Commission grants; Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu top the devolution ranking.
- Table: the right level for each decision — Centre, State, Gram Sabha.
- Way forward: activity mapping, untied funds, own revenue, working State Finance Commissions, trained staff, social audits.
Close with · SDG target 16.7 asks for responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels; development will follow when panchayats and municipalities decide, not merely deliver.
Add value (verified)
- Article 243G asks States to empower panchayats to act as real units of local government, including planning for economic development and social justice.The Constitution of India (Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and Justice, as on 1 May 2024) — Article 243G ↗“to enable them to function as institutions of self-government”
- Hayek's 'The Use of Knowledge in Society' (1945): knowledge of particular local circumstances is dispersed, so decisions must be decentralised to use it.F. A. Hayek, 'The Use of Knowledge in Society' (American Economic Review, 1945) - reprint at the Library of Economics and Liberty (Econlib) ↗“We need decentralization because only thus can we insure that the knowledge of the particular circumstances of time and place will be promptly used.”
- Article 243G: State law may devolve to panchayats the preparation of plans and implementation of schemes for economic development and social justice, including Eleventh Schedule matters.The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), Article 243G - Legislative Department ↗“(a) the preparation of plans for economic development and social justice; (b) the implementation of schemes for economic development and social justice as may be entrusted to them including those in relation to the matters listed in the Eleventh Schedule”
- Status of Devolution to Panchayats in States (IIPA, released February 2025): devolution to rural local bodies rose from 39.9% to 43.9% between 2013-14 and 2021-22.Report on Status of Devolution to Panchayats in States - PIB, Ministry of Panchayati Raj, 13 February 2025 ↗“The latest report, prepared by IIPA, reveals that devolution has increased from 39.9% to 43.9% between the period 2013-14 to 2021-22.”
- Panchayat Devolution Index ranking: Karnataka first, Kerala second, Tamil Nadu third.Report on Status of Devolution to Panchayats in States - PIB, Ministry of Panchayati Raj, 13 February 2025 ↗“Karnataka Tops Devolution Ranking; Kerala and Tamil Nadu Bag Second & Third Spot respectively”
- SDG target 16.7: responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.Goal 16 - UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (sdgs.un.org) ↗“Target 16.7 Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2025, GS Paper II — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 3 Oct 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer· 341words · Minimalist IAS
In 1945 the economist F. A. Hayek argued that the knowledge that matters most is of 'the particular circumstances of time and place', and that only decentralisation lets it be used promptly. The statement holds that India's development model violates this principle of subsidiarity: decide at the lowest competent level.
How distant decision-making defeats development
- Uniform design: schemes framed in Delhi or State capitals with standard norms ignore local soils, water and social realities.
- Discretionary devolution: Article 243G lets States empower panchayats to plan and implement schemes for economic development and social justice, but leaves it to State law; devolution rose only from 39.9% to 43.9% between 2013-14 and 2021-22.
- Parallel bodies: SPVs, line departments and district committees bypass elected councils, cutting the feedback loop between execution and design.
- Poor outcomes: weak local ownership, unused assets and leakages despite high spending.
Where the claim overstates
- Scale: macro policy, drug standards, digital public infrastructure and inter-regional equity need central decisions.
- Elite capture: local power can be captured by dominant castes and elites; central norms protect the weak.
- Proximity returning: the Aspirational Districts Programme uses district-level data and district-led problem-solving; Gram Panchayat Development Plans, direct Finance Commission grants and MGNREGA social audits follow the same logic.
- State models: Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu top the Ministry of Panchayati Raj's 2025 devolution ranking, showing deep devolution is achievable.
| Decision | Best level | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Macro policy, standards | Centre | Scale, equity |
| Scheme design, funds | State | Regional diversity |
| Beneficiaries, local assets | Gram Sabha | Local knowledge |
Verdict and way forward
- Verdict: the claim is largely valid, since India centralises design and decentralises only execution. The fix is not devolving everything but matching each decision to the level that holds the information.
- Practise subsidiarity: activity mapping of functions for each tier, predictable untied funds, own-source revenue, working State Finance Commissions, trained local staff and social audits that feed back into design.
SDG target 16.7 calls for responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels. India's development goals will be met only when panchayats and municipalities decide, not merely deliver.
Prepared by Minimalist IAS to the answer standard of Shivam Singh (mentor, 7 years) · facts checked against official sources (how we verify) · updated 3 Oct 2026. UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.
