New Delhi: What should welfare mean in an era of rapid digitisation, expanding cash transfers, and changing centre priorities? The launch of Realising Rights: A Handbook of Welfare in India, published by Azim Premji University on June 26 considered this question in depth. Edited by Bhargav B.S., Dipa Sinha, Rajendran Narayanan, Revati Mathai, and Vijay Ram S, the handbook emerged from the editors’ desire to move beyond the narrow public discourse that often portrays welfare either as an electoral “freebie” or as an economic burden, Sinha said at the book launch.“Welfare is important. It is not only about a few or many poor people who are left out of the growth process, but it is central to the growth process. It is central to the kind of development experience that any country has,” said Sinha, adding that investments in nutrition, education, healthcare, employment, and social security are not simply redistributive measures but essential drivers of productivity, human capital formation, and long-term economic growth.Sinha, a development economist, also highlighted the disparities in the implementation of welfare schemes across states, arguing that a one-size-fits-all approach often undermines their effectiveness. “We see across the chapters through the various discussions and qualitative insights that come across is that even if the states are spending more in terms of the design, it is still quite centralised all the way up to the union government, and there is not very much flexibility at the state government level, and then within states below, and this many chapters across identify as a challenge for the implementation of the schemes,” she said.Economist Narayanan illustrated the consequences of centralised welfare design with the example of farmers, noting that uniform cash transfer schedules often fail to match different cropping cycles across states, leaving some farmers to receive benefits only after the harvest.The editors of the handbook also observed that India’s expenditure on social protection, health, and education remains lower than that of many middle-income countries and even below several long-standing national targets.Dipa Sinha and Rajendran Jayadev along with Arjun Jayadev (middle) Photo: Azim Premji University.From rights to cash transfers“If you start off with a system where not everyone is anchored to rights, you start off by exclusion by design,” Narayanan said, describing how cash transfers were introduced to plug leakages but often end up excluding intended beneficiaries due to Aadhaar-related issues and gaps in identification. The panel discussion that followed explored the broader political economy of welfare in India. Economist Dr. A.K. Shiva Kumar highlighted how the government needs to differentiate as to which product in the market needs to be free and which should be subsidised.Retired IAS officer Arti Ahuja emphasised that welfare should be understood not only by what the state provides but also what terminology we are using. She said, “Terms such as beneficiary and freebie shape public perception in ways that undermine citizens’ rights.”Ahuja also cautioned that technology-driven welfare delivery, despite improving efficiency, can exclude vulnerable groups lacking digital access. She noted that according to a survey she had read, only 56.6% of women aged 15 and above own their personal smartphone, with the digital divide being particularly severe in rural India. She further pointed to the lack of transparency surrounding cash transfers, arguing that governments often have limited visibility into how these funds are ultimately utilised. The retreat of the stateRetired IAS officer P. V. Ramesh noted how the state has gradually contracted in both capacity and presence. “Political leadership across party lines has embraced a neoliberal approach that relies more heavily on the private sector to provide basic amenities, while the government just transfers cash easily in bank accounts,” Ramesh said. He concluded that this shift risks weakening the state’s responsibility towards healthcare, education, and other universal public servicesJournalist Sobhana K Nair remarked that the handbook exposed gaps in media coverage of India’s welfare programmes, saying journalists had failed to closely track many important schemes. She argued that the book captures a broader shift from a rights-based welfare framework to one centred on discretionary government transfers. Nair referred to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s 2015 rally in Arrah, Bihar, in which he announced a special package of Rs 1.25-lakh crore after earlier promising Rs 50,000 crore. “I promise you today that the government in Delhi will give Bihar Rs 1.25 lakh crore,” he said. Underlining the usage “I”, she commented, “For me this is clearly the first public articulation of the turn that the government was taking. And ever since then we have seen how the right based infrastructure has slowed.” Nair further added that the government has “murdered” rights-based programmes such as MGNREGA by introducing Viksit Bharat Gram (VB-GRAM) Yojana. Electoral promiseThe panel also examined the changing political economy of welfare and the growing prominence of cash transfer schemes in electoral politics. Nair argued that the success of Maharashtra’s Ladki Bahin Yojana influenced similar welfare strategies elsewhere, pointing to Bihar’s Mukhyamantri Mahila Udyami/Rozgar Yojana, under which women are promised financial assistance of up to Rs 2 lakh in six instalments. She noted that beneficiaries must clear periodic reviews to receive subsequent instalments, “Each instalment is like a hurdle race. You have to keep proving that you utilize that money very well. At the end of the sixth instalment which is named as “Vishesh” roughly 500 women will be left to avail themselves of it.”P.V. Ramesh, however, cautioned against equating cash transfers with electoral success. Citing N. Chandrababu Naidu’s defeat in the 2019 Andhra Pradesh assembly elections despite direct cash transfer schemes, and the defeat of Y. S. Jagan Mohan Reddy’s government in 2024 despite expanding unconditional cash transfers, he argued that “cash transfers are not directly proportional to election wins.” Instead, he stressed that the deeper concern was the erosion of the state’s capacity to provide universal, quality public services, urging governments to rebuild institutions capable of delivering healthcare, education and welfare effectively. Adding to the discussion, Ahuja said that the incentives embedded within India’s political economy discourage long-term structural reforms. “Today, citizens cannot speak to anybody”, Shiva Kumar said, adding that governments have increasingly distanced themselves from direct accountability. He observed that citizens today have to interact with digital systems or call-centre operators, weakening the traditional relationship between citizens and the bureaucracy. In their closing remarks, the panellists agreed that the future of welfare lies not in expanding cash transfers alone but in rebuilding state capacity, strengthening public institutions and placing citizens at the centre of policymaking. Ahuja urged governments to move beyond fragmented, scheme-based interventions towards a person-centric approach, arguing that “the time has come for us as a country to focus on the person.“We have become too focused on the means while losing sight of the people,” Shiva Kumar said, proposing a future welfare framework built around six Ps that are principles, priorities, policies, partnerships, practices and politics.