The Performance of Social Pensions in India : The Case of Rajasthan
The Government of India has recently announced a dramatic expansion of social pension schemes both in terms of coverage and benefit levels. Yet relatively little is known about how these programs are administered or how well they achieve their obje...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Working Paper |
| Language: | English en_US |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2008/07/20172152/performance-social-pensions-india-case-rajasthan http://hdl.handle.net/10986/20197 |
| Summary: | The Government of India has recently
announced a dramatic expansion of social pension schemes
both in terms of coverage and benefit levels. Yet relatively
little is known about how these programs are administered or
how well they achieve their objectives. This paper assesses
the performance of a social pension scheme in the Indian
state of Rajasthan. In particular, the authors review the
experience with respect to program awareness, coverage,
targeting, and leakage as well as delivery mechanisms. The
overall assessment is positive and holds broader lessons for
social assistance in India. Thus, transaction costs once
pensions are sanctioned are low, disbursements are largely
as per schedule, leakage in the form of shortfalls in
benefits is generally low, and satisfaction levels with the
social pension scheme are high. At the same time there are
clear areas for improvement on both the policy and
administration side. There is evidence of under coverage and
high transaction costs associated with the application
process. Though targeting is generally progressive,
especially for old age and widow pensions though less so for
disability pensions, targeting is far from perfect and the
eligibility criteria are not strictly enforced. There is a
strong case for relaxing, rationalizing, and clarifying some
of the existing criteria. On the administration front,
several basic issues relating to implementation need to be
addressed, particularly with respect to transaction costs in
the sanction of pensions, wide inter-district variations in
performance within the state, and inadequate record-keeping
and monitoring. |
|---|