 "bureaucrats, government officers, IAS, Administrative Service, UPSC, IPS, IFS, civil servants, bureaucracy")
India spends a lot less on its public sector than the United States (US), which is axing employees and cutting costs under President Donald Trump.
India spends 5.5 per cent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on wages of workers in the public sector as against 9.5 per cent in the US and 9.8 per cent globally, shows the data compiled from the World Bank Worldwide Bureaucracy Indicators.
The Elon Musk-headed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been taking steps to downsize the government establishment, including those working at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Nasa) and hundreds of weather forecasters.
India also spends less than other emerging-market peers like Brazil, South Africa, and Russia.
The indicators are designed to include all those employed directly or indirectly by the government, such as those working in public-sector companies, public administration as well as public-sector education and healthcare.
The wage bill relative to overall public expenditure was also lower in India than in many other countries.
The public sector accounts for a significant portion of India’s formal employment — at nearly 45 per cent — though this may reflect the lack of formal jobs in India, and the size of its informal economy, in which people work without social security like pensions.
The public sector accounts for only 8 per cent of India’s employment. It is 45 per cent in Russia.
Health accounts for the lowest share of paid public-sector employment at 7 per cent. Education is at 30 per cent. Public administration covers less than a quarter of jobs in India compared to 34 per cent globally.
“…claims that India’s state is bloated in size and submerged in patronage have weak basis,” said a 2020 paper “Why Does the Indian State Both Fail and Succeed?” from Johns Hopkins University professor Devesh Kapur. The paper noted the Indian state had typically delivered better on macroeconomic rather than microeconomic outcomes with reasons for poor outcomes, including social cleavage and under-resourced local governments.
“In contrast to the improvements at the micro level, the macro policy capabilities of the Indian state are raising concerns. Since India’s Independence, observers have admired the state’s capabilities embedded in its elite bureaucracy and its ability to formulate policy, while lamenting the severe weaknesses of its front-line functionaries to implement programs … Today, these patterns seem to be reversing,” it added.
Sohini Sahu, professor at the Department of Economic Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Kanpur, said: “What really matters is the quality of governance which is essentially linked to the nature of institutions.”
Institutions can play a major role in determining the effectiveness of government rather than broad indicators such as headcount or spending, she suggested. Building effective institutions depends on various factors such as the rule of law, honesty (evidenced by overall corruption levels), and cultural dimensions like individualism versus collectivism. An institution not in keeping with local cultural norms can be rejected by citizens, and thereby detract from its effectiveness, she added.
