7. e-governance projects have a built-in bias towards technology and back-end integration rather than user-centric designs. Examine. (150 words, 10 marks) (2025)
Direction: Intro ----- Built-in bias + User-centric neglect & recent initiatives-----Conclusion.
Introduction:
Define e-governance with some e-governance initiative examples like Digital India Mission, UMANG, DigiLocker, CoWIN, GSTN, e-Courts.
Main Body
Built-in bias towards technology & back-end integration
- Projects mainly driven by technology rather than citizens' convenience.
- Not sufficient guidance & support - Beneficiaries often depend on Common Service Centres (CSCs) to access the benefits.
- Digital infrastructure over user-specific
- Multiple authentication processes like Aadhaar OTP, mobile OTP, face authentication, etc.
- Administrative focus – Focus on data integration & coordination.
- One size fits all design - Several portals initially offered only English/Hindi interfaces, limiting access for citizens speaking regional languages.
Neglect of user-centric design
- Digital illiteracy
- Complex User interface
- Lack of accessibility & network issues
- Language barrier
- Privacy & Security issues
Recent shift to user-centric design
- Bhashini initiative - AI-based translation enabling government services in multiple Indian languages.
- Improve internet connectivity – PM-WANI scheme
- Digital literacy campaign like PMGDISHA to train rural households in basic digital skills.
- Initiatives like masked Aadhaar, DigiLocker, etc.
- Adoption of Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) – Aadhaar, UPI, DigiLocker, eSign, Account Aggregator create seamless, interoperable, citizen-centric digital services.
Conclusion:
Conclude by giving some ways, like the SMART Governance model, citizen-centric design, etc to realise the vision of "Minimum Government, Maximum Governance."
8. Civil Society Organisations are often perceived as being more anti-State than non-State actors. Do you agree? Justify. (150 words, 10 marks) (2025)
Direction: Intro--- perceived as anti-State actors (or) not perceived as anti-State actors-----Conclusion.
Introduction:
Describe briefly about the Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) – no power, no profit-oriented organisation.
Main Body
Yes, CSOs are often perceived as anti-State actors – some examples.
- Criticise government policies & projects – Especially on environmental protection, human rights, and development projects, and file PILs against government actions on this.
- Mobilise public protests – Participation in anti-CAA protests, Narmada Bachao Andolan, environmental campaigns.
- Expose corruption and maladministration – Using RTI movements.
- Question development projects – Oppose projects affecting forests, tribal rights, and biodiversity.
- Foreign funding controversies – Cancellation/suspension of FCRA registrations of NGOs over alleged violations.
- International advocacy against State policies – Raises concerns on human rights and environmental issues in international forums.
- Campaigns against strategic projects – Oppose projects like mining, nuclear, and infrastructure projects.
(OR)
No, CSOs are not perceived as anti-State actors, but act as non-State actors – some examples.
- Support government welfare programmes & deliver essential services – Assist in Swachh Bharat Mission, Poshan Abhiyaan, disaster relief measures, rural development initiatives, etc.
- Empower marginalised communities – Promote livelihoods and financial inclusion for women workers.
- Strengthen transparency & accountability – Social audits under MGNREGA conducted with civil society participation.
- Support disaster management – Provided food, medical aid and other essential things during the disaster emergency situation – like the COVID-19 pandemic.
- Promote democratic participation – Organizations like Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) improve electoral transparency through candidate disclosures.
- Bridge governance gaps – They work with government in education (Pratham), child rights (CRY), health, sanitation, and skill development where State capacity is limited.
Conclusion:
Conclude with a balanced view like CSOs act as a bridge between Government and the people, etc. In a democracy, constructive criticism, advocacy, and public participation strengthen—not weaken—the State.
9. India-Africa digital partnership is achieving mutual respect, co-development and long-term institutional partnerships. Elaborate. (150 words, 10 marks) (2025)
Direction: Intro---- mutual respect + co-development + long-term institutional partnerships-----Conclusion.
Introduction:
Describe the India-Africa relationship briefly.
Main Body
Achieving mutual respect
- South-south cooperation – Sharing experience rather than imposing it.
- Affordable and inclusive technology – Focus on low-cost and affordable technologies.
- Demand drive approach by India – implemented based on the needs of the African Countries.
- Examples include e-VidyaBharti and e-ArogyaBharti (e-VBAB) network for tele-education and telemedicine & Pan-African e-Network Project provides telemedicine and tele-education services.
Achieving co-development
- Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) – Sharing experience from Aadhaar, UPI, DigiLocker, and CoWIN.
- Recently, Gana has agreed to use India’s UPI payment.
- Capacity Building – Scholarships, digital skill development, training government officials, entrepreneurs, and IT professionals.
- FinTech & Financial Inclusion
- Health and Education – Telemedicine services, online higher education and professional courses through Indian universities.
Achieving long-term institutional partnerships
- Institutional cooperation – Between universities, research institutions, and technology centres.
- Collaboration in cybersecurity, digital governance, AI, fintech, and startup ecosystems.
- Partnerships to facilitate digital trade and e-commerce under the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).
- Growing cooperation through multilateral forums such as the G20, International Solar Alliance (ISA), etc.
Conclusion:
Conclude in a positive and progressive manner.
