General Studies 2022 GS Paper II 10 marks 150 words Compulsory Comment

Q8

Reforming the government delivery system through the Direct Benefit Transfer Scheme is a progressive step, but it has its limitations too. Comment. (Answer in 150 words) 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

प्रत्यक्ष लाभ अंतरण योजना के माध्यम से सरकारी प्रदेय व्यवस्था में सुधार एक प्रगतिशील कदम है, किन्तु इसकी अपनी सीमाएँ भी हैं। टिप्पणी कीजिए। (150 शब्दों में उत्तर दीजिए)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2022 General Studies questions

Directive word: Comment

This question asks you to comment. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'comment' requires a balanced, analytical assessment rather than mere description. Structure as: brief acknowledgment of DBT's progressive intent → systematic analysis of limitations (technological, administrative, social) → nuanced conclusion suggesting reforms. Avoid being purely critical or purely appreciative; the 'but' in the question signals the need for constructive critique.

Key points expected

  • Recognition of DBT's core objectives: plugging leakages, reducing corruption, improving targeting through JAM trinity (Jan Dhan-Aadhaar-Mobile)
  • Technological limitations: digital divide, Aadhaar authentication failures, exclusion errors (e.g., ration card cancellations due to seeding issues)
  • Administrative challenges: last-mile connectivity, banking correspondent inadequacy, delayed transfers affecting vulnerable beneficiaries
  • Social limitations: financial literacy gaps, male control over accounts disempowering women, ineligible inclusion due to outdated Socio-Economic Caste Census data
  • Specific Indian examples: PM-KISAN delays, MGNREGA wage payment failures, PDS exclusion in Jharkhand/Odisha tribal areas
  • Forward-looking suggestions: offline authentication alternatives, grievance redressal strengthening, dynamic updating of beneficiary databases

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Demand-directive understanding20%2Balances appreciation of DBT's reformist intent with substantive critique of limitations; avoids one-sided narrative; demonstrates 'comment' requires judgment, not mere listingMentions both progress and limitations but treats them mechanically without analytical integration; may lean heavily toward one sideMisinterprets 'comment' as pure description or opinion; either uncritical praise or blanket condemnation without nuance
Content depth & accuracy20%2Covers multi-dimensional limitations (technological, administrative, social) with precise terminology (JAM trinity, exclusion errors, last-mile); accurate reference to schemes like PM-KISAN, MGNREGAIdentifies 2-3 limitation categories but with generic phrasing; minor inaccuracies in scheme names or conflates DBT with other delivery mechanismsSuperficial treatment limited to 'corruption reduced' or 'poor internet'; factually wrong about DBT scope (e.g., claiming it covers all subsidies) or omits core limitations
Structure & flow20%2Logical progression: brief progressive acknowledgment → categorized limitations (tech/admin/social) → synthesis; smooth transitions; 150-word discipline maintained without abrupt cutsRecognizable structure but limitations listed haphazardly; conclusion feels tacked on; minor word count deviationNo discernible structure; random points; severely over/under word limit; missing introduction or conclusion
Examples / case-law / data20%2Specific, contemporary examples: Jharkhand PDS exclusion crisis, RBI ombudsman data on DBT grievances, NREGA payment delays in specific states, or Economic Survey findings on JAM penetrationGeneric reference to 'rural areas face problems' or 'some states have issues'; no specific data or identifiable casesNo examples; or irrelevant examples (confusing DBT with UPI, citing non-DBT schemes); fabricated statistics
Conclusion & analytical edge20%2Synthesizes limitations into systemic insight (e.g., 'techno-administrative fix without social embeddedness'); offers concrete, feasible reforms; ends on constructive, forward-looking noteRestates points without synthesis; generic recommendation like 'government should improve'; weak or missing conclusionNo conclusion; or purely negative verdict ('complete failure'); or unrealistic suggestions; abrupt ending

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →

More from General Studies 2022 GS Paper II