General Studies 2025 GS Paper II 15 marks 250 words Compulsory Critically evaluate

Q17

"In contemporary development models, decision-making and problem-solving responsibilities are not located close to the source of information and execution defeating the objectives of development." Critically evaluate. (Answer in 250 words) 15

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

"समकालीन विकास मॉडल में, निर्णय लेने और समस्या-समाधान की जिम्मेदारियाँ सूचना के स्रोत और क्रियान्वयन के निकट नहीं होती और (ये) विकास के उद्देश्यों को विफल कर देती हैं।" समीक्षात्मक मूल्यांकन कीजिए। (उत्तर 250 शब्दों में दीजिए)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2025 General Studies questions

Directive word: Critically evaluate

This question asks you to critically evaluate. 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

Critically evaluate requires balanced assessment with both strengths and limitations. Begin with a concise thesis on the centralization-decentralization tension in development models. Structure as: introduction defining the proposition → body analyzing why centralized decision-making fails (information asymmetry, implementation gaps) with counter-arguments on when centralization works → conclusion synthesizing with a nuanced pathway forward.

Key points expected

Explanation of the proposition: how top-down development models create information-action gaps (Hayek's knowledge problem applied to development)
Analysis of 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments as India's decentralization response, with gaps in actual devolution
Critical assessment of centralized models: PMGSY vs. MGNREGA implementation contrasts, or Smart Cities Mission's top-down design
Counter-arguments: when central coordination is essential (climate adaptation, pandemic response) and risks of local capture
Synthesis: principle of subsidiarity, need for 'cooperative federalism' and digital governance bridging information gaps

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	3	Demonstrates precise grasp that 'critically evaluate' demands balanced judgment on the proposition, not mere description; explicitly weighs when decentralization succeeds versus when centralization remains necessary	Attempts evaluation but leans heavily one-sided (only criticizing centralization or only defending it); misses the conditional nature of the proposition	Treats as 'explain' or 'describe'; lists features of decentralization without engaging the critical tension in the statement
Content depth & accuracy	20%	3	Accurately deploys theoretical frameworks (subsidiarity principle, participatory development, Acemoglu-Robinson extractive institutions) with precise constitutional/statutory references (Article 243G, 243W, PESA)	Mentions decentralization tiers correctly but conflates administrative and political decentralization; vague on constitutional provisions	Confuses decentralization with privatization or delegation; factual errors on constitutional amendments or treats local governments as merely administrative units
Structure & flow	20%	3	Clear thesis-driven structure: problem identification → evidence of failure → counter-evidence → synthesized evaluation; smooth transitions between theoretical and empirical dimensions	Linear structure with introduction-body-conclusion but body paragraphs lack internal logic; abrupt shifts between theory and examples	Disorganized listing of points; no discernible argument thread; conclusion merely restates introduction without advancement
Examples / case-law / data	20%	3	Specific, contemporary Indian evidence: Kerala's People's Plan (1996), Bhagidari scheme Delhi, 15th Finance Commission recommendations on local body grants, or World Bank data on participatory development outcomes	Generic mention of 'panchayats' or 'municipalities' without specificity; dated examples (pre-2010) without contemporary relevance	No Indian examples; relies on foreign cases (Brazil's participatory budgeting without adaptation) or entirely theoretical treatment
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	3	Original synthesis: proposes 'differentiated decentralization' based on policy domain, or integrates digital governance (SWAMITVA, e-panchayat) as bridging mechanism; acknowledges unresolved tensions	Safe conclusion calling for 'balance between center and states' without operational specificity; platitudes on 'grassroots democracy'	No conclusion or abrupt ending; purely normative statement ('decentralization is good') without analytical grounding in the evaluation

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 →