Analysis of India's Proposed International Governance Index: A UPSC Perspective

 Analysis of India's Proposed International Governance Index: A UPSC Perspective

This news item touches upon key areas of Governance, India’s Foreign Policy, International Relations, and the Critique of Global Indices. For a UPSC aspirant, it's essential to understand the context, the rationale behind India's move, the criticisms of existing indices, and the potential implications.

1. The Core Issue: Why is this in the news?

• The Trigger: India, as the newly elected President of the International Institute of Administrative Sciences (IIAS), has formally proposed the creation of a new International Governance Index.

• The Context: This proposal comes against the backdrop of India's consistently poor rankings on several Western-based global indices like V-Dem, Freedom House, and the EIU Democracy Index, which the Indian government has repeatedly criticized for their "methodology."

2. Key Actors and Institutions

• International Institute of Administrative Sciences (IIAS):

  • What it is: A Brussels-based, international non-profit organization established in 1930.

  • Mandate: Promotes public governance through research, events, and knowledge-sharing for public servants and academics.

  • Membership: 31 member countries, including India, Japan, China, Germany, and Saudi Arabia. It is not a UN body but collaborates with it.

  • Significance of India's Presidency: India won the presidency (2025-2028) for the first time in an election, defeating Austria. This provides India with a platform to shape the global discourse on governance.

• Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances (DARPG):

  • Role: The nodal agency in India for administrative reforms and improving public service delivery.

  • Connection: V. Srinivas, the Secretary of DARPG, is the current President of IIAS, linking India's domestic governance agenda with this international initiative.

3. India's Stated Rationale and Plan for the New Index

• Addressing Methodological Flaws: The government argues that existing indices are:

  1. Perception-based: Rely on subjective opinions of "expert" institutions.

  2. Lack Context: These institutions often lack on-ground presence and understanding of local contexts.

  3. Lack Transparency: The exact methodology, weights, and how they are used by other bodies (like credit rating agencies) are not fully transparent.

• The Proposed Solution (The New Index):

  • Collaborative Methodology: Aims to leverage the work of established bodies like the World Bank, OECD, and UN DESA to ensure credibility.

  • Structured Process: A working group will be established under IIAS's Research Advisory Committee to develop the index.

  • Global Platform: The topic will be discussed at the IIAS annual conference in 2026, aiming for wider international buy-in.

  • Bridging the Divide: Aligned with India's stated goal of bridging the "North-South divide" and promoting "unity and inclusivity" in global governance standards.

4. The Deeper Context: India's Grievances with Existing Indices

The article cites specific examples that form the backdrop for this move:

• V-Dem Institute (University of Gothenburg):

  • Classified India as an "electoral autocracy" since 2017.

  • Ranked India 100th out of 179 on the Liberal Democracy Index (2025).

• Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI):

  • India's percentile ranks are low, especially in Political Stability (21.33) and Control of Corruption (41.51).

  • As pointed out by the Chief Economic Adviser, these WGI indices feed into the assessments of credit rating agencies, impacting India's sovereign ratings and investment flows.

• Government's Counter-Arguments (as per EAC-PM):

  • The rankings place India at a level comparable to the Emergency era (1970s), which the government finds grossly inaccurate.

  • It has called for the World Bank to ensure greater transparency from these institutions.

  • It has advocated for Indian think tanks to create their own indices to break the "monopoly of a handful of western institutions."

5. Significance and Implications for India

Positive Implications (Opportunities)	Potential Challenges & Criticisms
1. Shaping the Narrative: Allows India to proactively define and measure governance based on parameters that may be more relevant to the Global South (e.g., service delivery, digital governance, inclusivity).	1. Perceived as Retaliation: Could be seen internationally as an attempt to create a "friendly index" to counter negative rankings, potentially undermining its credibility from the outset.
2. Soft Power & Global Leadership: Positions India as a thought leader in public administration, aligning with its G20 motto of "Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam" and its ambition to be a Vishwaguru.	2. Credibility and Acceptance: For the index to be globally respected, it must be methodologically robust, transparent, and accepted by a wide range of countries and institutions. This is a significant challenge.
3. Policy Input: A more balanced index could provide better feedback for domestic reforms by focusing on tangible outcomes rather than purely perception-based metrics.	3. Risk of Dilution: To achieve consensus among diverse IIAS members (from Germany to Saudi Arabia), the index might have to dilute stringent standards on issues like civil liberties, which could be counterproductive.
4. Economic Benefits: A fairer assessment of governance could positively influence credit rating agencies, potentially leading to better ratings and lower borrowing costs.	4. Implementation Hurdles: Developing a universally accepted index is a complex, time-consuming task requiring extensive research and diplomatic negotiation.

6. Connecting to the UPSC Syllabus

• GS Paper II (Governance):

  • Important Aspects of Governance: Transparency, accountability, and good governance. The debate on how to measure governance is central to this topic.

  • Role of Civil Society: The role of national and international think tanks in shaping policy and perception.

• GS Paper II (International Relations):

  • India and its Neighborhood: India's role in international organizations.

  • Effect of Policies of Developed and Developing Countries: The "North-South divide" and India's effort to bridge it.

• GS Paper III (Economy):

  • Effects of Liberalization: How global indices and credit ratings impact foreign investment.

• Essay Paper:

  • Potential themes: "The Measure of a Nation: Beyond Global Indices", "Good Governance in the 21st Century: A Universal Standard or a Contextual Reality?", "India's Quest for a Seat at the Global High Table".

7. Expected UPSC Questions

Prelims:

1. The International Institute of Administrative Sciences (IIAS) is headquartered in:
   a) Geneva
   b) Brussels
   c) New York
   d) Paris
   Answer: b) Brussels

2. Who among the following is the current President of the International Institute of Administrative Sciences (IIAS)?
   a) Narendra Modi
   b) V. Srinivas
   c) V. Anantha Nageswaran
   d) None of the above
   Answer: b) V. Srinivas

Mains:

1. "The proliferation of global governance indices, while well-intentioned, often suffers from a lack of contextual understanding." Critically examine this statement in the context of India's proposal for a new International Governance Index.

2. Discuss the significance of India's presidency of the International Institute of Administrative Sciences (IIAS). How does the proposal for a new governance index align with India's broader foreign policy objectives?

Conclusion:

India's push for a new International Governance Index is a significant diplomatic and intellectual initiative. It reflects a growing assertiveness to challenge established Western-centric narratives and define global norms. For a UPSC aspirant, understanding the nuances of this move—its strategic rationale, the underlying grievances, and the immense challenges involved—is key to answering questions on contemporary governance and India's evolving role in the world.