24 February 2018

Aadhaar: Privacy, National Security and Democracy

There is a view that the the recent deliberations on the Aadhaar case in the Supreme Court of India boils down to two broad issues - privacy and national security. It further makes a point that if the learned Judges are of the view that privacy is of paramount importance then the judgement will be in favour of Aadhaar and if they are of the view that National Security has an overriding concern then the judgement will be against Aadhaar. I will be making three-to-four submissions here.

First, Aadhaar can seriously compromise national security. This is so because all the potential defence and intelligence operatives (particularly, those who are to be hired for sensitive operations in the future) are likely to have their biometrics compromised.  

To wit, covert operations by these potential operatives are likely to be undermined. It is already being talked in hushed tones (not necessarily because of Aadhaar alone) that the entire security establishment is under close watch by our friends and foes. The fear that Aadhaar will compromise our national security is not unfounded.

Second, the articulation in favour of Aadhaar for facilitating national security is actually an argument in favour of state power. In particular, the arguments are that Aadhaar will facilitate surveillance and guard against wrong doings (an euphemism for corruption) through transparency and accountability. Doing away with wrongs is laudable, but to take a position that Aadhaar will help in this endeavour is to belittle the ingenuity of financial moguls/wizards. In fact, more often than not, they operate within the realms of law (what may be morally inappropriate need not be legally wrong). Neither the short arm, nor the long arm of law will have anything to do with them. 

The only time that the financial ingenuity become a botheration is when the market goes into a tizzy. Hear again, in the name of the economy it is the moguls that are to be bailed out. It is another matter that Aadhaar may create a perception that it is guarding against the moguls misdemeanour because each and every individual does experience it first hand that each and every step of theirs is under close watch and scrutiny. It is not for them to comprehend that the closed gates are for the ant and not for the elephant. 

Third, the clamour for state power (along with concerns for national security) is nothing specific to India. It is global. Furthermore, it questions the core of democracy by weakening the importance of separation of powers. It is beyond Arrow's impossibility. It may draw similarities from Kalecki's intermediate regimes (see KN Raj's take on intermediate regimes), but is also beyond that. It takes a form where the power of money (or market: note that the term market is not to provide space for exchange of goods and services through large number of players, but, rather one that talks of power through market share, and hence, implicitly does away with the large number of smaller players - small is no more beautiful) becomes pervasive.

Under such a scenario, the four pillars of democracy - the executive, the legislature and the judiciary as also a free press - could become subservient to money power. A possible outcome is that one of the pillars of democracy, while retaining its subservience to money power, gets an upper-hand over the other pillars. The global happenings indicate that it facilitates a supremacy of the executive over the other wings - a takeover by/for/of the executive. The over-empowering role of money calls for an emerging need for political economy and/or political theory to address these concerns.

As an aside, a fourth point is that the debate between privacy and security should not be seen in binary terms. No, I am not referring to the umpteen positions that came out in the deliberations in the Supreme Court and are undoubtedly important and could also impact the judgment. But, sticking to the two broad concerns there can also be the possibility of a middle-path between privacy and national security (nay, state power).

However, there can be pitfalls in the middle-path. There could be a judgment that supports the perception that allows the state to be vigilant against wrong-doers and at the same time gives space for privacy concerns for all those who can take recourse to the long-arm of law. Such a middle path could also lead to a tilt towards state power that gives supremacy to the state power through the executive. Only time will tell.

To conclude, Aadhaar, instead of facilitating national security, actually poses a serious problem against national security. Further, Aadhaar is not likely to have a major impact against so-called moral wrongs because, more often than not, these happen within the realms of law. Globally, one observes a trend where it is difficult to maintain separation of powers because of the overbearing role of money or market power. When it comes to the Aadhaar judgment, one can only anxiously wait.

Earlier blog posts on Aadhaar


[The views expressed are that of the author and not that of the institutions/organisations that the author is associated with. Comments are welcome.]

04 February 2018

Chimera of MSP as Cost plus 50 percent

The 2018-19 Budget for India presented on 1st February 2018 has, inter alia, mentioned about increasing the minimum support price (MSP) being given to farmers to cost plus 50 percent so as to ameliorate the distress of farmers' and facilitate an increase in farmers' income. This is a chimera. The decision-making authorities in the Government that decide the MSP represents the lioness-like head, the calculation of cost is the goat-like body, and crop production is the serpent-like tail.

The budget speech conveying cost plus 50 percent was the head spitting fire to douse discontentment among farmers' (relying on the dictum that a product of two negatives will be positive). The idea for a cost plus 50 per cent is not new. This was indicated by the National Commission on Farmers.(chair: MS Swaminathan) that submitted its final report in October 2006, which has now been resurrected after more than a decade to address a rural constituency.

It needs to be mentioned that MSP is declared for only 23 crops, but effective for two crops - paddy and wheat. Even for these two crops, after allowing for double counting, a January 2015  Report of the High Level Committee on Reorienting the Role and Restructuring of Food Corporation of India (Chair Shanta Kumar) using 70th round National Sample Survey data for July 2012-June 2013 indicates that less than 6 percent of agricultural households sold to procurement agencies who buy at MSP and these households sold only 27 percent of their produce to these procurement agencies. In short, cost plus 50 percent will have limited impact.

A calculation of the cost of production has many layers. First, it is an average of averages and that too from selected states. Under this, states that are major producers of the crop collect detailed data from sample farmers (the selection bias is likely to be there for those farmers who have some output and exclude those with no output and thereby underestimating costs). The data sent by states are again averaged at the all India level by the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP). Even if there is no selection bias, any average will have a distribution with some states and some farmers having a greater cost than the average. The greater costs are likely to be more for those whose output has been less for various agro-climatic and socio-economic reasons. Whatever may be the reason, a single cost will not have the same ameliorating effect across all farmers and across all states.

Second, and more importantly, to address the spirit of the recommendation by the National Commission on Farmers it is only appropriate that all costs (paid out and imputed) should be taken into consideration. This is complicated by the fact that there a number of variations, as per the terminology used by CACP. They are as indicated in Appendix 1. The contention being raised is that MSP is fixed based on A2+FL costs, which when one compared with C2 costs excludes interest on value of owned fixed capital assets (excluding land) and rental value of owned land (net of land revenue). Furthermore, C2 costs, when compared with C3 costs, is not adjusted for appropriate valuation of human labour and also excludes imputed value of management input. The MSP declared for Rabi 2018, as claimed by the Finance Minister's Budget speech of 2018, is already above cost plus 50 percent if one considers A2+FL costs. But, falls short if one takes C2 costs and far away from C3 costs.

Crop production is a risk-taking enterprise. This is particularly so in large parts of rainfed India that is exposed to the vagaries of weather as also market shocks (both for inputs as also produce).

In a recent exercise, one observed that the real income growth for farmers between 2002-03 and 2012-13 was only 1 percent. This was at a time when real income growth for the economy remained in the range of 7-8 percent. These does call for interventions in agriculture leading to reduction in costs, lowering of risks, increase in net returns, and assurance for better livelihood of farmers.

Concluding remarks
One wonders, which is the constituency that will be addressed even if cost plus 50 percent is effective. To be effective, efforts should not only be made to increase its reach. Furthermore, it should also not be a lip service by taking A2+FL costs; rather, C3 costs should be taken into consideration. What is more, these efforts should be part of a larger exercise in agriculture that reduce costs, lower risks, increase returns and assure better livelihood of farmers. In its current form, one is not sure whether the fire spat will douse discontent or add to the farmers' woes. In other words, two negatives when added becomes a greater negative force. Chimera is a chimera.

Appendix 1: Cost concepts and their components
Includes (i) value of hired human labour, (ii) value of hired bullock labour, (iii) value of owned bullock labour, (iv) value of owned machinery labour, (v) hired machinery charges, (vi) value of seed (both farm produced and purchased), (vii) value of insecticide and pesticide, (viii) value of manures (owned and purchased), (ix) value of fertilisers, (x) depreciation on implements and farm buildings, (xi) irrigation charges, (xii) land revenue, cesses and other taxes (xiii) interest on working capital, and (xiv) miscellaneous expenses (artisans et cetra).
Includes  cost A1 plus rent paid for leased-in land.
Includes  cost A2 plus imputed value of family labour.
Includes  cost A1 plus interest on value of owned fixed capital assets (excluding land).
Includes  cost B1 plus rental value of owned land (net of land revenue) and rent paid for leased-in land.
Includes  cost B1 plus imputed value of family labour.
Includes cost B2 plus imputed value of family labour.
Includes cost C2 adjusted to take into account valuation of human labour at market rate or statutory minimum wage rate whichever is higher.
Includes cost C2* plus value of management input at 10 percent of C2*.

26 January 2018

Neither for you nor for me

Neither for you,
nor for me.

Neither for the Soldier,
nor for the Farmer.

Neither for Country,
Neither for Mother Earth.

Neither for rooting out evil,
Nor for ushering in good days.

It is all a plea,
To fool you and me.

ना आपका, 
ना हमारा । 

ना जवानों का
ना किसानों का ।

ना देश कि, 
ना धरती कि ।

ना बुराइ रोकने, 
ना अच्छाइ बढ़ाने ।

ये तो है बाहाने, 
हमे अंगूठाछाप जो बनाने ।

ନା ଆପଣଙ୍କର, 
ନା ମୋର । 

ନା ସୈନ୍ୟଙ୍କର, 
ନା ଚାଷୀଙ୍କର ।

ନା ଦେଶର, 
ନା ଧରିତ୍ରୀର ।

ନା ଦୂଷ୍କର୍ମ କମିବା ପାଇଁ, 
ନା ଭଲ ଦିନ ଆସିବା ପାଇଁ ।

ଇଏ ସବୁ ବାହାନା, 
ଆମକୁ ଭୂତ୍ତେଇବାର ଯୋଜନା ।

This is a republic day thought. A trilingual post (in English, Hindi and Odia). It may sound pessimistic, but do read between the lines for ushering in some optimism. While I started writing, I had Aadhaar in mind (note the last sentence in the Hindi post). But, then ...  For some Aadhaar related blogs of mine, see.

Aadhaar, Radiagate and Cablegate 

[The views expressed are that of the author and not that of the institutions/organisations that the author is associated with. Comments are welcome.]

25 January 2018

Creative Identification

1. Creative Identification

For progress to happen, 
Schumpeter tells us 
the need for creative destruction. 

For democracy to deepen, 
Martin Luther King tells us 
the need for creative tension.

For targeting to go on, 
UIDAI tells us 
the need for creative identification.

2. From fingerprints to shit hole

First, our fingerprints, 
and our iris. 

Now, there is a clamour, 
for our face. 

It is not far when they will 
trace our footprints. 

And then they will 
map our moles. 

Including those,
deep inside our shit hole.

Earlier versions of these are available as my facebook post here and in my twitter here and here

Earlier blog posts on Aadhaar

[The views expressed are that of the author and not that of the institutions/organisations that the author is associated with. Comments are welcome.]

26 December 2017

Millet Mission Odisha wins two SKOCH Awards

The Special Programme for Promotion of Millets in Tribal Areas (Millet Mission Odisha) has won the SKOCH Award 2017 - Silver, and the SKOCH Order-of-Merit. These were conferred at the 50th SKOCH summit held at Constitution Club of India, New Delhi, 20-21 December 2017.

Millet Mission Delegates with SKOCH Order-of-Merit Award at Constitution Club of India, 20 December 2017.
Left to Right: Ms Diptimayee Jena, Dr Chitta Ranjan Das, Mr Pankaj Kumar, Mr Rameswar Mirdha, Prof Srijit Mishra, Mr Sadananda Majhi, Mr Ramani Ranjan Nayak, Ms Rashmi Rekha Samal.
The SKOCH Order-of-Merit was conferred to the Millet Mission Odisha for being among the top 30 Transformational Innovation Projects in India. From among these, Millet Mission Odisha was selected and conferred the SKOCH Award 2017 - Silver at the concluding session of the 50th SKOCH summit. The selection for these awards went through a rigorous process: scrutiny of application, jury evaluation based on presentation, on-line voting, and experts opinion plus delegates voting at the Summit.

SKOCH Award 2017 - Silver conferred to Special Programme for Promotion of Millets in Tribal Areas being received by Prof Srijit Mishra, Director, NCDS on 21 December 2017, Mavlankar Sabhagrih, Constitution Club of India, New Delhi.
Left to Right: Mrs. Manisha Kochhar, Mrs Pratibha Phatak, Dr Gursharan Dhanjal, Dr. DB Phatak, Mr. NK singh,
Mr. Sameer Kochhar, Dr. M Ramachandran, Prof.Srijit Mishra, Prof. VN Alok, Mr. Rohan Kochhar, Mr. Nirmal Bansal.
The innovation for the Programme lies in the institutional architecture where Government of Odisha (through Department of Agriculture and Farmers' Empowerment under the aegis of Planning and Convergence Department), Civil Society (led by Watershed Support Services Network (WASSAN) as Programme Secretariat) and Academia (Nabakrushna Choudhury Centre for Development Studies (NCDS) as State Secretariat) have come together to complement and supplement each other for a people-centric initiative to facilitate nutrition security and address climate resilience.

In this endeavour, Government, Civil Society and Academia have come together from day one starting from conception, to planning, to preparing guidelines, to implementation. The institutional architecture has been designed to draw upon the advantages of each entity, but also by providing space for flexibility that is required for a collective endeavour and to address emerging concerns.

To address the demand versus supply mismatch (or Chicken-Egg paradox), a framework with concurrent emphasis on production, consumption, processing, and marketing has been designed

The implementation of the programme brings together science and tradition. The knowledge of improved agronomic practices (line transplantation and system of root intensification) and use of suitable equipment (for instance, weeder) was superimposed on the understanding of local biodiversity and existing agricultural practices.

In its first year of implementation (Khari 2017), the programme is operational in 28 blocks across seven districts (Gajapati, Kalahandi, Kandhamal, Koraput, Malkangiri, Nuapada, and Rayagada) and  Millet production has been taken up in 7,444 acres by 13,457 farmers. The Project Director, Agricultural Technology Management Agency (PD, ATMA) is the nodal agency at the district level who along with the Programme Secretariat work at each block with the Facilitating Agencies (FAs) to implement the programme through the Community Based Organisations (CBOs). The crop cutting experiments have been promising with yield measured at 4-8 quintals/acre for line transplantation and at 6.5 to 14 quintals/acre for system of root intensification. The Government of Odisha is planning to extend the programme to 27 additional blocks in Kharif 2018.

Initiatives are being taken for pilot inclusion of millets in State Nutrition Programmes (SNPs - Anganwadi's, Mid-day Meals and Ashram Schools) and linking them to the Public Distribution System (PDS). An urban internship has been launched to spread knowledge on the health benefits, create awareness on contemporary as also traditional recipes, and provide a market for the produce.

Millet Mission Odisha will be an important partner in the initiative on National Nutrition Mission and in spirit is with the Government of India's call to the United Nations to make 2018 as the International Year of Millets.

The application for consideration of SKOCH Innovation Award 2017 was submitted by NCDS the State Secretariat for the Mission. The Director of NCDS, Professor Srijit Mishra who is also spearheading the activities of the State Secretariat had made the presentation for jury evaluation in November 2017. He has received the two awards at the 50th SKOCH summit on behalf of all the stakeholders of Millet Mission Odisha.

See two earlier related blogs

25 December 2017


In discussing Aadhaar, this note raises concerns on the possibility of abdication of responsibility by the Government, on possible collusion between the executive and the legislature, on silence with regard to exclusion errors, and on violation of a basic concept of jurisprudence. Hence, not ruling out denial of entitlement, or, Nir-Aadhaar.  
I have already written about Aadhaar earlier. These are with regard to Aadhaar, Radiagate and CablegateIf a Lie is told Three Times, Right to Privacy, Aadhaar and Democracy (also re-posted at LSE blog), and Aadhaar Interim Order Calls for Some Clarification. All these were written before the Aadhaar Act 2016 and before a nine-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court of India gave an unanimous judgement that Right to Privacy is a Fundamental Right.

The concerns on privacy raised in my earlier blogs have been vindicated by the Supreme Court Judgement. However, the judgement was not linked to legality of Aadhaar, privacy or otherwise, as that is to be dealt by an independent bench. These are matters of procedural propriety. As an aside, one wonders, whether Artificial Intelligence (AI), in a Digital+ world could reduce the associated time lapses. Nevertheless, before we concede ourselves to an AI world (Aadhaar-linked or otherwise), I would like to raise some additional concerns from a human or, should I say, humane perspective. 

The Abdication of Responsibility by the Government 
It is worrying to note that, as in the right to privacy adjudication, it is a motley of individuals who took up the case for their rights. As against them, the Government was arguing that the Constitution of India does not confer any right to privacy. The Government took a position by interpreting an earlier judgement where 'right to privacy' was denied when an individual or entity used it to hide some illegality. It is true that such conflicts can always arise when there are multiple concerns that the Government has to address. But, the question that props up is should it not be the Government's responsibility to have suo moto taken an initiative to address the relevance of right to privacy over policing/regulatory concerns. In such sensitive matters, if the Government takes a one-sided position then should it not be construed as an abdication of their responsibility.

This abdication of responsibility should also be true in the case of Aadhaar because while the Government considers it to be a tool to facilitate provisioning of entitlements, it is designed to address policing/regulatory concerns and in so doing it gives a greater emphasis to aspects that facilitates exclusion over inclusion. I will come to a discussion on exclusion versus inclusion concerns later. But, before that, it is important to raise concerns on a possible collusion between the executive and the legislature.

Collusion Between Executive and Legislature  
There are no two opinions about the need for different organs of the State to complement and supplement each other. But, this coming together should be for the people. Unfortunately, the coming together can also be used to subvert the in-built checks and balances. This is particularly so between the executive and the legislature, as the executive head of the Government also has a command over the legislature. Besides, it can even bypass the Judiciary by amending existing statutes or by making new ones. 

In the case of Aadhaar, the legal sanctity has been provided through a money bill. Its initial articulation for provisioning of entitlements has become secondary as such provisioning also entail monetary transactions. The Central as also the State Governments are all in sync and want to link all entitlements to Aadhaar. 

Advantages argued in favour of Aadhaar-linked transactions is that it would enable direct cash transfer to the intended individual, it would reduce transaction costs with respect to procedures, and it would reduce leakages. This gives the impression that the linking will foster inclusion, but is silent on possibilities of exclusion. This is surprising because, in provisioning of entitlements, greater importance should be given to exclusion errors.  Hence, it does raise eyebrows on whether the silence on exclusion errors is deliberate. Even if the silence is an oversight that is not deliberate and even if the intentions are well-meaning, it does show that through an articulation that is seemingly inclusive there emerges an implicit collusion between the executive and the legislature that is numb to exclusion.

Exclusion versus Inclusion Errors  
An exclusion error happens when a deserving person is excluded whereas an inclusion error happens when a non-deserving person is included. Between the two, the former is considered serious, that is, no deserving person should be excluded even if in the process of ensuring this some non-deserving persons get included. Now, if a programme or scheme is universal (for instance, mid-day meals in schools for each and every child) then every child is included and there is no exclusion error. As against this, if a programme or scheme is not implemented (say, no mid-day meals in a school because there was no ration) then there is no inclusion error (no possibility of a non-student partaking mid-day meals). 

In reality, both errors are possible. Sometimes inevitable. For instance, some students could not get mid-day meal because they came to school late just at the mealtime and food was not cooked for them and there could be instances where some authorities partake mid-day meals cooked at schools to ensure that quality is maintained. But there can be situations where these errors are intentional - denial of mid-day meals to some children so that authorities can partake.

It is even possible to show additional ghost entries in school attendance and siphon-off funds apportioned towards mid-day meals. Technically, this is an inclusion error. But, in plainspeak, this is a matter of corruption. It is touted that an Aadhaar-linked attendance system can address such concerns. Well, and good! But, then, what about the possibilities of exclusion errors. What if a student does not have Aadhaar? What if a student's Aadhaar does not match? What if there is no electricity or no internet connectivity? And, so on and so forth.

Invoking A Basic Concept of Jurisprudence
A basic concept of jurisprudence is to err on the side of innocence, that is, many culprits may go unpunished, but no innocent should be punished. This is akin to being lenient for inclusion errors but there should be no single case of exclusion error. In other words, no deserving person should be excluded from the intended programme or scheme.

Privacy or not, there are umpteen evidences where Aadhaar-linked transactions can lead to exclusion. It may be argued that a system trying to correct irregularities may have some costs. Unfortunately, these costs are to be borne by those for whom the entitlements are intended.

For instance, in the mid-day meals scheme nearly 10 crore (or 100 million) children are entitled to receive noon meal every day. Now, if for whatever reason there is one child for every 100 who is denied food then it implies that one lakh children would be denied food per day. Such exclusions could be higher for children in schools without access to electricity or internet where, incidentally, the incidence of under-nutrition are relatively higher. Even if such exclusion is limited to only one child per day then also it is akin to punishing an innocent. In other words, Aadhaar cannot rule out exclusion, and hence, does fail the test of a basic concept of jurisprudence. It is about denial of entitlement, Nir-Aadhaar.

A reading of the path taken by the Government with regard to Aadhaar (or, even privacy) conveys that there has been an abdication of responsibility. It is worrying that this path surmounts to a collusion by the executive and the legislature. This is so because in its efforts to do away with inclusion errors it is silent on exclusion errors. Even if unintentional, this violates a basic concept of jurisprudence, as it could deny entitlements. Or, in the guise of Aadhaar, it is Nir-Aadhaar.

[The views expressed are that of the author and not that of the institutions/organisations that the author is associated with. Comments are welcome.]

19 December 2017

Millet Mission at 50th SKOCH summit

The Millet Mission Odisha (Special Programme for Promotion of Millets in Tribal Areas) has won the SKOCH Order-of-Merit, which will be conferred during the 50th SKOCH summit being held at the Constitution Club of India, New Delhi, during 20-21 December 2017. This was based on Jury evaluation from a presentation (also see SlideShare and video from 24 minutes onwards).  The Mission is also in the race for SKOCH Award 2017, which is also dependent on the delegate votes. Hence, this is a request to delegates at the summit on why you should at least visit our booth (#24) and be a part of the millet mission.
  • The programme is based on an Institutional Architecture that brought together three pillars of progress - Government, Civil Society and Academia for a people-centric initiative to facilitate nutrition security and climate resilience.
  • It will be an important partner in the Government of India's call to UN to make 2018 as the International Year of Millets and in the initiative on National Nutrition Mission
  • To address the demand versus supply mismatch (or Chicken-Egg paradox), a framework with concurrent emphasis on  production, consumption, processing, and marketing has been designed.
  • It brought together science and tradition. The knowledge of improved agronomic practices and use of suitable equipment was superimposed on the understanding of local biodiversity and existing agricultural practices to facilitate climate resilient agriculture that is sustainable.
  • Initiatives are being taken for pilot inclusion of millets in State Nutrition Programmes (SNPs)  and the Public Distribution System (PDS).
  • There is scope to scale these initiatives both within and outside the state and also to converge it with other agricultural schemes.
  • Its urban internship is meant to spread knowledge on the health benefits, create awareness on contemporary as also traditional recipes, and provide a market for the produce.
The Millet Mission initiative also resonates in spirit with most of the Jai Hind Keynote lectures of the 50th SKOCH summit. To wit:
  • Millet Mission will facilitate 'Naya Grameen Bharat' being envisaged by Narendra Singh Tomar, Honourable Union Minister of Panchayati Raj, Rural Development and Mines.
  • It will transform tribal areas, similar to the story of 'Transforming Madhya Pradesh' by Shivraj Singh Chouhan, Honourable Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh.
  • It does combine science and technology to facilitate new agronomic practices and in that sense is also about 'Transformational Technological Changes for India 2030' by YS Chowdary, Honourable Minister of State for Science and Technology.
  • It is about climate-resilient sustainable agriculture along with a new institutional architecture to facilitate governance and hence does echo 'Sustainable Development and Indian Economic Governance' by Ashok Chawla, Chairman, TERI.
  • Being a pro-people agricultural intervention, it also echoes the sentiments of 'Agricultural Growth and Poverty Elimination' by Ashok Gulati, Infosys Chair Professor, ICRIER.
  • Focusing on interventions that are knowledge-intensive, it is also about 'Enhancing Indian Investments' by Suresh Prabhu, Hounourable Union Minister for Commerce and Industry.
  • With a focus on marginalised population, it will have some lessons from below for 'A Macro Economic View for India for 2030' by Indira Rajaraman, Economist.
  • Bringing together a host of civil society groups and volunteers working pro bono, it does reflect 'Legitimising Lobying and Advocacy' by Dilip Cherian, Founding Partner and Group Chairman, Perfect Relationsc.
  • In enhancing of livelihood for tribal farmers the mission will also contribute to 'The Road to a $10 Trillion Economy' by Bibek Debroy, Chairman, Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister.
  • Emphasis on capabilities of local population and small enterprises would be in sync with 'Job Generative Economic Agenda' by Bijayant Jay Panda, Honourable Member of Parliament, Lok Sabha.
  • A programme that by design is inclusive does have an audience for 'Universal Basic Income' by Haseeb Drabu, Honourable Finance Minister, Jammu & Kashmir. 
  • The proposed urban internship may draw on lessons from 'Urban Development India 2030' by M Ramachandran, Former Urban Swcretary and Distinguished Fellow, SKOCH Developmet Foundation.
  • Protection of tribal livelihoods from unforeseen influences is akin to 'Protecting Virtual Borders' by Gulshan Rai, National Cyber Security Coordinator.
  • Concern for people (or, economy) may get echoed in 'Monetary Policy and Fiscal Framework: The Route of India 2030' by Ashima Goyal, IGIDR and Part-time Member, Economic Advisory Council to Prime Minister. 
  • A people-centric policy initiative for the excluded cannot not be part of 'Political Economy: Requisites for New India' by Lord Meghnad Desai, Founder and Chairman, Meghnad Desai Academy of Economics.
  • The need to engage with multiple stakeholders and an approach that acknowledges diversity in cropping patterns and agro-climatic conditions would in some tangential sense may benefit from the lessons from 'Multilateralism and India 2030' by Shaktikanta Das, G20, Sherpa, and Member, 15th Finance Commission.
  • The plans to pay farmers through direct benefit transfer after validating practices through mobile apps would fit into 'A Digital Path to India 2030' by Pranjal Sharma, Member, Advisory Board, PACI, World Economic Forum.
  • To go beyond urban and to bring in the excluded could be important concerns for 'FinTech Power India' by S Ganesh Kumar, Executive Director, RBI.
  • Larger concern for the excluded, or as we say on scheduled crops for scheduled population may have important lessons for 'Fiscal Federalism and India 2030' by NK Singh, Chairman, 15th Finance Commission.
In summary, one may mention that the Millet Mission is a people-centric initiative involving Government, Civil Society and Academia for climate resilience and nutrition security. In doing so, it also gives us lessons on a host of other things that include inclusiveness, convergence, and governance among others. 

An earlier note on the Millet Mission that also discussed about challenges and the strategies to overcome these challenges is available here.