Note :- The text is from the case study and subjected to no editorial oversight by us. Hence read with due care.This gives an insights in to administrative and management practices and can be helpful for aspirants of this field.
Backgrouhnd :- Sports Minister releases a case study “South Asian Games 2016: the dash to the North East” .This case is a result of a study done by Prof. Sanjeev Tripathi from IIM Ahmedabad on the conduct of South Asian Games, 2016. This was the result of an endeavor of the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports to collaborate with management institutes to increase professionalism in the sports landscape in the country. The aim of this case study was to identify the factors that resulted in the successful conduct of the games in an extremely short period.
South Asian Games 2016: The dash to the North East
The South Asian Games (SAG) is a multi-sport event with eight South Asian countries competing in it: India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Maldives and Afghanistan. The 11th SAG was held in Dhaka in 2010. India offered to host the 2012 Games; however, the games got postponed due to a number of factors. Allegations of corruption in the Commonwealth Games and its repercussions and later the suspension of the Indian Olympic Association cast a shadow over the conduct of the games.
After a number of delays, in December, 2014 the Indian Olympic Association with the approval of the government decided to hold the SAG in Guwahati and Shillong in North East India. However, there were still uncertainties about the final venue of the games, these were finally sorted and the games were planned to be held in February 2016 to avoid clashes with the local festivals.
By the time the final decision was taken, it was October, 2015, and just about three months were left for the games to begin. There were a number of challenges that needed to be overcome in the organization of the games. The time was too short and because of the repeated rescheduling, there was scepticism about whether the dates would be adhered to.
The Commonwealth Games held in 2010 had been plagued with the allegations of corruption and IOA officials were afraid of playing an active role in the organization of the games. IOA wanted the responsibility of technical conduct of the games only. For all other aspects of the Games, IOA wanted the Government to take the responsibility and host the Games. Even the officers and staff in the Department of Sports (DoS) under Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (MoYS) was worried about taking decisions with the fear of being penalized later on charges of corruption.
Large multi sports events had been a rarity in North East and an international event of this stature was planned for the first time in North East. As such there was a concern about whether the infrastructure would be ready in time for hosting the games and to accommodate the athletes and the delegations. Finally, assembly elections in the state of Assam were scheduled in April 2016, and the success or the failure in organizing the games could become an election issue. The Minister of Youth Affairs and Sports, Shri Sarbananda Sonowal (from BJP) and Shri Tarun Gogoi (from Congress) the current Chief Minister of Assam would need to work together, however, they were political rivals and also aspirants for the post of Chief Minister of Assam.
The Secretary, Shri Rajiv Yadav had joined the Department of Sports in September and he had hardly any time to plan for the games, given the challenges and shortage of time. IOA was apprehensive in taking responsibility in organization of the games. Hence, accountability, responsibility and faster decision making was ensured by having the Minister MOYS, Shri Sonowal to head the South Asian Games Organizing Committee.
Further, the SAGOC, was expanded to induct officers who had an in-depth experience of organizing sports events and also had an understanding of the situation in the two North Eastern states. In this regard, Shri Injeti Srinivas, Director General (DG) of Sports Authority of India (SAI) joined as CEO Guwahati, Shri R.K. Sharma retired Director General of Police (Meghalaya) was designated as CEO Shillong and Shri Avinash Joshi an IAS officer of Assam-Meghalaya cadre who had played a role in the organization of national games in Gauwahati was inducted as Joint CEO of SAGOC. Shri Sonowal was himself from Assam and Shri Yadav, the Secretary (DoS), from Assam-Maghalaya IAS cadre had worked in this region extensively and had an in-depth understanding of the ground situation in the two states.
Some of the participating countries were sceptical of participating in the games owing to concerns about the security situation and their doubts about whether the games would be held. Delegations were sent to all the participating countries to reassure them about the games and this proved useful as all the countries committed to attend the games. To publicize the games and involve the local public, a promotional campaign was launched which focussed on Facebook, Twitter and Youtube besides the traditional channels such as TV, Newspaper and Radio.
To deal with the corruption issues, most of the purchasing was done through online portals. An Internal Working Group, operating within the DoS, met weekly to fast track any procurement issues. Shri Sunil Verma, the retired Deputy Comptroller and Auditor General of India, was appointed as ethical adviser to the SAGOC to ensure transparency, proper utilization of money and probity of the highest order in spending money.
The games were finally held on schedule in just about 90 days of the announcement of schedule. The opening and closing ceremony of the games were a big success and showcased the regional culture with a digital theme. The mascot of the games Tikhor, was able to connect with everyone and brought in a theme of naughtiness, fun and sensitivity towards preserving wild life. On the sports front, India once again emerged as a sports super power at a regional level, winning about 40% of all the medals.
Looking back it was obvious that a number of factors had worked in making the games a success. The SAGOC had a good mix of administrative experience, an expertise in organizing sports events and an appreciation of issues in the two states. The close coordination between the state government and the central government keeping aside the political differences was another important reason for the success of the games.
The close coordination of SAGOC with SAI played a major role in getting the venues and other infrastructure in place, this was facilitated by the presence of DG SAI, Shri Srinivas as CEO of SAGOC. The promotional campaign proved to be a big success and was able to establish connect with people both at local and national level. Specially, the digital campaign was able to attract a large following from younger segment. This was a result of a well thought out integrated marketing campaign with a 360 degree presence across various media channels.
Now, that the games were over, Secretary (Sports) felt that it was important to capture the key learnings from the organization of the games and to adopt these as best practices.
Recent Posts
- In the Large States category (overall), Chhattisgarh ranks 1st, followed by Odisha and Telangana, whereas, towards the bottom are Maharashtra at 16th, Assam at 17th and Gujarat at 18th. Gujarat is one State that has seen startling performance ranking 5th in the PAI 2021 Index outperforming traditionally good performing States like Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, but ranks last in terms of Delta
- In the Small States category (overall), Nagaland tops, followed by Mizoram and Tripura. Towards the tail end of the overall Delta ranking is Uttarakhand (9th), Arunachal Pradesh (10th) and Meghalaya (11th). Nagaland despite being a poor performer in the PAI 2021 Index has come out to be the top performer in Delta, similarly, Mizoram’s performance in Delta is also reflected in it’s ranking in the PAI 2021 Index
- In terms of Equity, in the Large States category, Chhattisgarh has the best Delta rate on Equity indicators, this is also reflected in the performance of Chhattisgarh in the Equity Pillar where it ranks 4th. Following Chhattisgarh is Odisha ranking 2nd in Delta-Equity ranking, but ranks 17th in the Equity Pillar of PAI 2021. Telangana ranks 3rd in Delta-Equity ranking even though it is not a top performer in this Pillar in the overall PAI 2021 Index. Jharkhand (16th), Uttar Pradesh (17th) and Assam (18th) rank at the bottom with Uttar Pradesh’s performance in line with the PAI 2021 Index
- Odisha and Nagaland have shown the best year-on-year improvement under 12 Key Development indicators.
- In the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Goa and Tamil Nadu and, the bottom three performers are Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand and Bihar.
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers were Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Mizoram; and, the bottom three performers are Manipur, Assam and Meghalaya.
- Among the 60:40 division States, Orissa, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh are the top three performers and Tamil Nadu, Telangana and Delhi appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland; and, the bottom three performers are Jammu and Kashmir, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh
- Among the 60:40 division States, Goa, West Bengal and Delhi appear as the top three performers and Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Bihar appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Himachal Pradesh and Tripura were the top three performers and Jammu & Kashmir, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh were the bottom three performers
- West Bengal, Bihar and Tamil Nadu were the top three States amongst the 60:40 division States; while Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan appeared as the bottom three performers
- In the case of 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Assam and Tripura were the top three performers and Nagaland, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand featured as the bottom three
- Among the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa and the bottom three performers are Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand and Goa
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Mizoram, Sikkim and Nagaland and the bottom three performers are Manipur and Assam
In a diverse country like India, where each State is socially, culturally, economically, and politically distinct, measuring Governance becomes increasingly tricky. The Public Affairs Index (PAI 2021) is a scientifically rigorous, data-based framework that measures the quality of governance at the Sub-national level and ranks the States and Union Territories (UTs) of India on a Composite Index (CI).
States are classified into two categories – Large and Small – using population as the criteria.
In PAI 2021, PAC defined three significant pillars that embody Governance – Growth, Equity, and Sustainability. Each of the three Pillars is circumscribed by five governance praxis Themes.
The themes include – Voice and Accountability, Government Effectiveness, Rule of Law, Regulatory Quality and Control of Corruption.
At the bottom of the pyramid, 43 component indicators are mapped to 14 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that are relevant to the States and UTs.
This forms the foundation of the conceptual framework of PAI 2021. The choice of the 43 indicators that go into the calculation of the CI were dictated by the objective of uncovering the complexity and multidimensional character of development governance
The Equity Principle
The Equity Pillar of the PAI 2021 Index analyses the inclusiveness impact at the Sub-national level in the country; inclusiveness in terms of the welfare of a society that depends primarily on establishing that all people feel that they have a say in the governance and are not excluded from the mainstream policy framework.
This requires all individuals and communities, but particularly the most vulnerable, to have an opportunity to improve or maintain their wellbeing. This chapter of PAI 2021 reflects the performance of States and UTs during the pandemic and questions the governance infrastructure in the country, analysing the effectiveness of schemes and the general livelihood of the people in terms of Equity.
Growth and its Discontents
Growth in its multidimensional form encompasses the essence of access to and the availability and optimal utilisation of resources. By resources, PAI 2021 refer to human resources, infrastructure and the budgetary allocations. Capacity building of an economy cannot take place if all the key players of growth do not drive development. The multiplier effects of better health care, improved educational outcomes, increased capital accumulation and lower unemployment levels contribute magnificently in the growth and development of the States.
The Pursuit Of Sustainability
The Sustainability Pillar analyses the access to and usage of resources that has an impact on environment, economy and humankind. The Pillar subsumes two themes and uses seven indicators to measure the effectiveness of government efforts with regards to Sustainability.
The Curious Case Of The Delta
The Delta Analysis presents the results on the State performance on year-on-year improvement. The rankings are measured as the Delta value over the last five to 10 years of data available for 12 Key Development Indicators (KDI). In PAI 2021, 12 indicators across the three Pillars of Equity (five indicators), Growth (five indicators) and Sustainability (two indicators). These KDIs are the outcome indicators crucial to assess Human Development. The Performance in the Delta Analysis is then compared to the Overall PAI 2021 Index.
Key Findings:-
In the Scheme of Things
The Scheme Analysis adds an additional dimension to ranking of the States on their governance. It attempts to complement the Governance Model by trying to understand the developmental activities undertaken by State Governments in the form of schemes. It also tries to understand whether better performance of States in schemes reflect in better governance.
The Centrally Sponsored schemes that were analysed are National Health Mission (NHM), Umbrella Integrated Child Development Services scheme (ICDS), Mahatma Gandh National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SmSA) and MidDay Meal Scheme (MDMS).
National Health Mission (NHM)
INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (ICDS)
MID- DAY MEAL SCHEME (MDMS)
SAMAGRA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN (SMSA)
MAHATMA GANDHI NATIONAL RURAL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE SCHEME (MGNREGS)