Q8 · UPSC Civil Services Mains 2023 · GS II · 10 marks · 2 min read

← Q18 Q2 →

E-governance, as a critical tool of governance, has ushered in effectiveness, transparency and accountability in governments. What inadequacies hamper the enhancement of these features?

Topic: Transparency and e-Governance. Syllabus: Important aspects of governance, transparency and accountability, e-governance — applications, models, successes, limitations, and potential; citizens charters, transparency and accountability and institutional and other measures. Same official PYQ from year-wise 2023 and Transparency and e-Governance.

Revision summary

DBT, GeM, e-procurement and grievance portals improved speed and audit trails. The digital divide and kiosk dependence recreate intermediaries. Departmental silos and app-only design cut effectiveness. Dashboards without speaking orders and without access logs cut transparency and accountability. Capacity, cyber risk and incomplete data-protection practice are the institutional brakes.

Model answer

Introduction

E-governance is the use of digital systems to deliver public services, records, and payments. It has improved speed and traceability where Aadhaar-seeded Direct Benefit Transfer, online grievance portals, and e-procurement actually run; inadequacies in design, access, and law still cap those gains.

Body

Gains that set the test

  • Direct Benefit Transfer on the Aadhaar and Jan Dhan rails cut ghost beneficiaries in several subsidy streams and made the payment trail auditable.
  • Government e-Marketplace, e-procurement, and the Right to Information online filing improved price discovery and a paper trail.
  • MyGov, Centralised Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System, and State service-plus portals shortened some citizen-to-department paths.
  • Effectiveness, transparency, and accountability therefore rise when the digital record is complete, open to audit, and tied to a named officer.

Inadequacies of access and design

  • Digital divide by language, disability, gender, and rural connectivity leaves the same citizen dependent on a kiosk operator, which recreates the old middleman on a screen.
  • Data standards differ across departments, so a land record, a ration card, and a police FIR do not talk to each other; effectiveness falls when the citizen still visits three offices.
  • Platform downtime, weak last-mile Common Service Centres, and exclusive app-only design exclude users whom the service law still treats as entitled.

Inadequacies of transparency and accountability

  • Dashboards can display counts without publishing the rule, the fee, or the officer who rejected the file; that is visibility without transparency.
  • Algorithmic targeting in welfare and policing is often opaque; the citizen cannot contest a silent rejection when no speaking order is generated.
  • The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, and still-evolving data-retention practice have not yet produced a clear, citizen-facing log of who accessed whose record.
  • Cyber incidents, vendor lock-in, and poorly audited private partners create new fiduciary risks that paper files did not have in the same form.
  • RTI exclusions, poorly maintained public databases, and the gap between a computerised token and a reasoned order hamper accountability even when the portal is live.

Institutional inadequacies

  • Capacity of Block and municipality staff to use systems is uneven; hardware missions without process re-engineering digitise delay.
  • Inter-State and Union–State platforms (GSTN is the strong exception) remain silos, so federal services do not look like one government to the user.

Flow diagram

flowchart TD
  E[E-governance] --> P[DBT e-procurement grievance]
  P --> T[Trail and audit]
  I[Divide silos opacity downtime] --> H[Hamper T]
  C[Capacity and DPDP logs] --> T

Conclusion

E-governance has raised effectiveness, transparency, and accountability where payments, procurement, and grievances leave a complete digital trail. Inadequacies of access, interoperable records, speaking orders, data protection, and local capacity still hamper those three features.

Quick related

Students also ask

PYQ trend

When UPSC asked this

Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.

  1. 2025 · Q7 · GS II · 10 marks

    e-governance projects have a built-in bias towards technology and back-end integration than user-centric designs. Examine.

    View answer →

  2. 2024 · Q16 · GS II · 15 marks

    The Citizens' charter has been a landmark initiative in ensuring citizen-centric administration. But it is yet to reach its full potential. Identify the factors hindering the realisation of its promise and suggest measures to overcome them.

    View answer →

  3. 2024 · Q18 · GS II · 15 marks

    e-governance is not just about the routine application of digital technology in service delivery process. It is as much about multifarious interactions for ensuring transparency and accountability. In this context, evaluate the role of the 'Interactive Service Model' of e-governance.

    View answer →

  4. 2022 · Q2 · GS II · 10 marks

    "Right of movement and residence throughout the territory of India are freely available to the Indian citizens, but these rights are not absolute. " Comment.

    View answer →

  5. 2020 · Q8 · GS II · 10 marks

    "The emergence of Fourth Industrial Revolution (Digital Revolution) has initiated e-Governance as an integral part of government". Discuss.

    View answer →

  6. 2018 · Q8 · GS II · 10 marks

    E-governance in not only about utilization of the power of new technology, but also much about critical importance of the 'use value' of information. Explain.

    View answer →

  7. 2018 · Q18 · GS II · 15 marks

    The Citizen's Charter is an ideal instrument of organisational transparency and accountability, but it has its own limitations. Identify the limitations and suggest measures for greater effectiveness of the Citizen's Charters. (15).

    View answer →

  8. 2017 · Q5 · GS II · 10 marks

    Discuss the role of Public Accounts Committee in establishing accountability of the government to the people.

    View answer →

More from this topic

Q7 · UPSC Mains 2025 · GS II · 10 marks

e-governance projects have a built-in bias towards technology and back-end integration than user-centric designs. Examine.

Transparency and e-Governance

User-centric e-governance starts from the citizen’s journey; many projects start from ID, ledger and dashboard. NeGP, GSTN, Aadhaar and PFMS are strong backs; language, OTP-on-one-phone and failed biometrics are weak fronts. 2nd ARC, Sevottam and public-service guarantee laws already asked for time-bound citizen outcomes. DPDP and RPwD add consent and accessibility duties. Correction: assisted kiosks, local language, offline fallback, and the same data for the ward as for the secretary.

Q18 · UPSC Mains 2024 · GS II · 15 marks

e-governance is not just about the routine application of digital technology in service delivery process. It is as much about multifarious interactions for ensuring transparency and accountability. In this context, evaluate the role of the 'Interactive Service Model' of e-governance.

Transparency and e-Governance

E-governance is not only digitising a counter; it is multi-way interaction for transparency and accountability. The Interactive Service Model is two-way apply–track–grieve–reply, the top of the usual model ladder. Indian examples: UMANG, CPGRAMS, Passport Seva, RTI Online, GST replies, GeM. Gains: time-stamped trails. Losses: digital divide, kiosk touts, privacy risk, vanity dashboards. Assisted access and honest back-ends decide whether the model is real. Direct Benefit Transfer is interactive only when failure can be queried.

Q16 · UPSC Mains 2024 · GS II · 15 marks

The Citizens' charter has been a landmark initiative in ensuring citizen-centric administration. But it is yet to reach its full potential. Identify the factors hindering the realisation of its promise and suggest measures to overcome them.

Transparency and e-Governance

Citizens’ Charters, after the 1997 Chief Ministers’ conference, promise standards, time, information and grievance. They stall for want of legal force, measurable clocks, compensation, staff ownership and public awareness. Sevottam tried quality certification; many charters remain posters. State Right to Service Acts with penalties are the working Indian upgrade. Dashboards, local-language co-drafting and third-party audit would close the gap. RTI is about information; a charter is about the service clock — they stack.

Toppers' copies

Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.