“Probability is not a mere computation of odds on the dice or more complicated variants; it is the acceptance of the lack of certainty in our knowledge and the development of methods for dealing with our ignorance.” – Nicholas Nassim Taleb.
The whole significance of this quote is profound. On close observation, one can glean three aspects: one, that life is uncertain; two, that circumstances are best described by probability; and three, that the realisation of the former aphorisms best equips us with tools to deal with the “odds that we have been dealt with”, so to speak. Indeed, one can argue that the greatest fortunes in modern history have been made addressing uncertainty, whether it be the invention of the light bulb to rid us of darkness or Calculus as a model to understand change.
But, with declining numeracy of the general populace and the consumption of “mindless information”, starkly exacerbated further by the intentional or misguided peccancy of journalists and those engaged in the reporting of news and events, the virtues of addressing uncertainty and working with systems that are inherently imperfect have been entirely forgotten. And as a result, we are forced to answer in binaries to questions that concern us greatly, today.
Nothing highlights this better than recent discussion about the government’s push for Digital India that seeks to “transform India into a digitally empowered society and knowledge economy”. The programme focuses on three key areas:
- Digital Infrastructure: such as, the availability of internet, creation of a digital identity and public cloud access.
- eGovernance And Services: services across departments and jurisdictions enabled real time on online and mobile platforms.
- Digital Literacy: access to resources in Indian languages and enabling collaboration and participative governance.
By 2020, number of internet users in India is expected to grow to 770 million, with over 75 per cent new users from rural India (source – NASSCOM/Akamai) and mobile users expected to grow to 990 million (source – CISCO). Viewed in this context, Digital India has a real chance of translating its lofty goals to tangible results.
Pivotal to the Digital India effort has been Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s thrust on Jan Dhan, Aadhaar and Mobile (JAM). The Jan Dhan Yojana was launched in August, this year, to facilitate savings and institutional credit among the unbanked masses; it has since resulted in over 25 crore accounts and over Rs 74,000 crore in deposits, till date. The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and other Subsidies, benefits and services) Act was passed as a money bill in parliament earlier in March to provide legislative support to the Aadhaar project.
The JAM trinity is poised to improve last mile service delivery, which has long been a problem in India. For instance, the government has commenced direct transfer of LPG subsidy into the bank accounts of households seeking it.
A far cry from the days of leakages, bribes and corruption that had mired any benefit transferred from the Centre. Indeed, who can forget former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi’s rather candid quote in 1985: “Of every rupee spent by the government, only 17 paise reached the intended beneficiary”. (A very conservative estimate by some accounts.)
But, as is likely with any far-reaching government measure, Digital India has received its share of criticism, heightened further post the recent demonetisation drive during which the Prime Minister has encouraged people to adopt cashless transactions.
Ironically, the harshest criticism has come from the section of the populace that has prided itself on technology adoption and has been the primary target demographic for India’s fabled startup innovation.
The arguments against revolve around two primary points: one, that privacy of users will be compromised with potential for mass government surveillance and two, that security of digital systems is suspect and prone to hacking.
Although, both arguments are not without merit, they must be used to improve systems and processes rather than, as it is being positioned now as an argument against digital, itself. The latter is out of bounds, anyway, as the world has been fundamentally disrupted by technology.
Much of this disruption has been enabled by data. Modern computing methods, such as Big Data and Analytics (ably enabled by cloud), digest vast amounts of information about users to produce actionable insights that translate to improved quality of services by many orders of magnitude.
From ordering food and booking cabs to payment transfers and smart wearables, our way of life has been completely revolutionised. If one were to plot usefulness against importance of data shared, it would look somewhat like this:
Note – reorder parameters at will
Intelligent systems are evolving tremendously. Machine learning algorithms progressively learn from data.
Trained with one or many data sets, they will be able to predict a desired outcome from a new, unknown set of data.
The possibilities are immense, both, for individuals and communities at large. Especially, here in India, which in the words of Nandan Nilekani, former chairman of the UIDAI (Unique Identification Authority of India) and technology industry veteran “will go from a data poor to data rich nation in the next five years.” Further, he also invoked Clarke’s third law (any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic) to describe the project.
We have now passed the point where opportunity cost of keeping one’s data confidential is significantly higher than benefit of retaining privacy, now.
Of course, there is potential for misuse. But, since intelligent systems are designed to continuously optimise for benefit, the effort and expertise required to, say, reroute cars into leaping off bridges or of making surreptitious deposits to Nigerian Princes will steadily increase.
And so, too, if one’s fingerprints were artificially planted on a crime scene, they now have to corroborate with more data points than ever before.
A mass government surveillance project of the type carried out by the America’s NSA, which as revealed by whistleblower Edward Snowden, was sweeping Americans’ phone records, had direct access to servers of US tech giants like Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Apple, among others, and also could search “nearly everything a user does on the internet” through data it intercepts across the world, is nearly improbable to replicate here in India.
It is important to note that the NSA has over six decades of legacy as an organisation. Its origins go back to the First World War where under dire circumstances the executive branch acted without direct Congressional authorisation. Although, now supposedly subject to Congressional oversight, the organisation’s legal accountability is suspect.
The judiciary in India, on the other hand, is robust and has been exceedingly enterprising in recent times, much to the chagrin of the political class. In fact in September 2013, the Supreme Court of India issued an interim order that “no person should suffer for not getting Aadhaar” as the government cannot deny a service to a resident if s/he does not possess Aadhaar, as it is voluntary and not mandatory.
In another interim order in August 2015, the Supreme Court of India ruled that “UIDAI/Aadhaar will not be used for any other purposes except PDS, kerosene and LPG distribution system” and made it clear that even for availing these facilities Aadhaar card will not be mandatory.
The same have been further reinforced in the courts this year, while extending it to more public welfare schemes, such as the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, National Social Assistance Programme (Old Age Pensions, Widow Pensions, Disability Pensions), Prime Minister’s Jan Dhan Yojana, and Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation.
With the necessary sense of proportion it is not difficult to surmise how implementing NSA-type state overreach would meet multiple roadblocks in India.
The present government has up until now prioritised communicating the benefits of Aadhaar over addressing possible security concerns. Perhaps, rightly so.
And the same is reflected in the enrollment numbers; as of 26th November 2016, 1.08 billion people in India have been tagged with an Aadhaar number. The benefits have already started to accrue for the section of the demographic that requires it the most. But, the government would be better served in adopting a more collaborative approach with those others who are sceptical to collectively improve security systems and processes.
It could accomplish this through peer-reviews, public AMA (ask me anything) sessions, and opening up the developer ecosystem to a wider base. Indeed, it’s a fundamental right that one can assume from the government, where it cannot be afforded from the likes of Google, Facebook or Apple.
Receive Daily Updates
Recent Posts
On March 31, the World Economic Forum (WEF) released its annual Gender Gap Report 2021. The Global Gender Gap report is an annual report released by the WEF. The gender gap is the difference between women and men as reflected in social, political, intellectual, cultural, or economic attainments or attitudes. The gap between men and women across health, education, politics, and economics widened for the first time since records began in 2006.
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]No need to remember all the data, only pick out few important ones to use in your answers.
The Global gender gap index aims to measure this gap in four key areas : health, education, economics, and politics. It surveys economies to measure gender disparity by collating and analyzing data that fall under four indices : economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival, and political empowerment.
The 2021 Global Gender Gap Index benchmarks 156 countries on their progress towards gender parity. The index aims to serve as a compass to track progress on relative gaps between women and men in health, education, economy, and politics.
Although no country has achieved full gender parity, the top two countries (Iceland and Finland) have closed at least 85% of their gap, and the remaining seven countries (Lithuania, Namibia, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Rwanda, and Ireland) have closed at least 80% of their gap. Geographically, the global top 10 continues to be dominated by Nordic countries, with —Iceland, Norway, Finland, and Sweden—in the top five.
The top 10 is completed by one country from Asia Pacific (New Zealand 4th), two Sub-Saharan countries (Namibia, 6th and Rwanda, 7th, one country from Eastern Europe (the new entrant to the top 10, Lithuania, 8th), and another two Western European countries (Ireland, 9th, and Switzerland, 10th, another country in the top-10 for the first time).There is a relatively equitable distribution of available income, resources, and opportunities for men and women in these countries. The tremendous gender gaps are identified primarily in the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia.
Here, we can discuss the overall global gender gap scores across the index’s four main components : Economic Participation and Opportunity, Educational Attainment, Health and Survival, and Political Empowerment.
The indicators of the four main components are
(1) Economic Participation and Opportunity:
o Labour force participation rate,
o wage equality for similar work,
o estimated earned income,
o Legislators, senior officials, and managers,
o Professional and technical workers.
(2) Educational Attainment:
o Literacy rate (%)
o Enrollment in primary education (%)
o Enrollment in secondary education (%)
o Enrollment in tertiary education (%).
(3) Health and Survival:
o Sex ratio at birth (%)
o Healthy life expectancy (years).
(4) Political Empowerment:
o Women in Parliament (%)
o Women in Ministerial positions (%)
o Years with a female head of State (last 50 years)
o The share of tenure years.
The objective is to shed light on which factors are driving the overall average decline in the global gender gap score. The analysis results show that this year’s decline is mainly caused by a reversal in performance on the Political Empowerment gap.
Global Trends and Outcomes:
– Globally, this year, i.e., 2021, the average distance completed to gender parity gap is 68% (This means that the remaining gender gap to close stands at 32%) a step back compared to 2020 (-0.6 percentage points). These figures are mainly driven by a decline in the performance of large countries. On its current trajectory, it will now take 135.6 years to close the gender gap worldwide.
– The gender gap in Political Empowerment remains the largest of the four gaps tracked, with only 22% closed to date, having further widened since the 2020 edition of the report by 2.4 percentage points. Across the 156 countries covered by the index, women represent only 26.1% of some 35,500 Parliament seats and 22.6% of over 3,400 Ministers worldwide. In 81 countries, there has never been a woman head of State as of January 15, 2021. At the current rate of progress, the World Economic Forum estimates that it will take 145.5 years to attain gender parity in politics.
– The gender gap in Economic Participation and Opportunity remains the second-largest of the four key gaps tracked by the index. According to this year’s index results, 58% of this gap has been closed so far. The gap has seen marginal improvement since the 2020 edition of the report, and as a result, we estimate that it will take another 267.6 years to close.
– Gender gaps in Educational Attainment and Health and Survival are nearly closed. In Educational Attainment, 95% of this gender gap has been closed globally, with 37 countries already attaining gender parity. However, the ‘last mile’ of progress is proceeding slowly. The index estimates that it will take another 14.2 years to close this gap on its current trajectory completely.
In Health and Survival, 96% of this gender gap has been closed, registering a marginal decline since last year (not due to COVID-19), and the time to close this gap remains undefined. For both education and health, while progress is higher than economy and politics in the global data, there are important future implications of disruptions due to the pandemic and continued variations in quality across income, geography, race, and ethnicity.
India-Specific Findings:
India had slipped 28 spots to rank 140 out of the 156 countries covered. The pandemic causing a disproportionate impact on women jeopardizes rolling back the little progress made in the last decades-forcing more women to drop off the workforce and leaving them vulnerable to domestic violence.
India’s poor performance on the Global Gender Gap report card hints at a serious wake-up call and learning lessons from the Nordic region for the Government and policy makers.
Within the 156 countries covered, women hold only 26 percent of Parliamentary seats and 22 percent of Ministerial positions. India, in some ways, reflects this widening gap, where the number of Ministers declined from 23.1 percent in 2019 to 9.1 percent in 2021. The number of women in Parliament stands low at 14.4 percent. In India, the gender gap has widened to 62.5 %, down from 66.8% the previous year.
It is mainly due to women’s inadequate representation in politics, technical and leadership roles, a decrease in women’s labor force participation rate, poor healthcare, lagging female to male literacy ratio, and income inequality.
The gap is the widest on the political empowerment dimension, with economic participation and opportunity being next in line. However, the gap on educational attainment and health and survival has been practically bridged.
India is the third-worst performer among South Asian countries, with Pakistan and Afghanistan trailing and Bangladesh being at the top. The report states that the country fared the worst in political empowerment, regressing from 23.9% to 9.1%.
Its ranking on the health and survival dimension is among the five worst performers. The economic participation and opportunity gap saw a decline of 3% compared to 2020, while India’s educational attainment front is in the 114th position.
India has deteriorated to 51st place from 18th place in 2020 on political empowerment. Still, it has slipped to 155th position from 150th position in 2020 on health and survival, 151st place in economic participation and opportunity from 149th place, and 114th place for educational attainment from 112th.
In 2020 reports, among the 153 countries studied, India is the only country where the economic gender gap of 64.6% is larger than the political gender gap of 58.9%. In 2021 report, among the 156 countries, the economic gender gap of India is 67.4%, 3.8% gender gap in education, 6.3% gap in health and survival, and 72.4% gender gap in political empowerment. In health and survival, the gender gap of the sex ratio at birth is above 9.1%, and healthy life expectancy is almost the same.
Discrimination against women has also been reflected in Health and Survival subindex statistics. With 93.7% of this gap closed to date, India ranks among the bottom five countries in this subindex. The wide sex ratio at birth gaps is due to the high incidence of gender-based sex-selective practices. Besides, more than one in four women has faced intimate violence in her lifetime.The gender gap in the literacy rate is above 20.1%.
Yet, gender gaps persist in literacy : one-third of women are illiterate (34.2%) than 17.6% of men. In political empowerment, globally, women in Parliament is at 128th position and gender gap of 83.2%, and 90% gap in a Ministerial position. The gap in wages equality for similar work is above 51.8%. On health and survival, four large countries Pakistan, India, Vietnam, and China, fare poorly, with millions of women there not getting the same access to health as men.
The pandemic has only slowed down in its tracks the progress India was making towards achieving gender parity. The country urgently needs to focus on “health and survival,” which points towards a skewed sex ratio because of the high incidence of gender-based sex-selective practices and women’s economic participation. Women’s labour force participation rate and the share of women in technical roles declined in 2020, reducing the estimated earned income of women, one-fifth of men.
Learning from the Nordic region, noteworthy participation of women in politics, institutions, and public life is the catalyst for transformational change. Women need to be equal participants in the labour force to pioneer the societal changes the world needs in this integral period of transition.
Every effort must be directed towards achieving gender parallelism by facilitating women in leadership and decision-making positions. Social protection programmes should be gender-responsive and account for the differential needs of women and girls. Research and scientific literature also provide unequivocal evidence that countries led by women are dealing with the pandemic more effectively than many others.
Gendered inequality, thereby, is a global concern. India should focus on targeted policies and earmarked public and private investments in care and equalized access. Women are not ready to wait for another century for equality. It’s time India accelerates its efforts and fight for an inclusive, equal, global recovery.
India will not fully develop unless both women and men are equally supported to reach their full potential. There are risks, violations, and vulnerabilities women face just because they are women. Most of these risks are directly linked to women’s economic, political, social, and cultural disadvantages in their daily lives. It becomes acute during crises and disasters.
With the prevalence of gender discrimination, and social norms and practices, women become exposed to the possibility of child marriage, teenage pregnancy, child domestic work, poor education and health, sexual abuse, exploitation, and violence. Many of these manifestations will not change unless women are valued more.
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]2021 WEF Global Gender Gap report, which confirmed its 2016 finding of a decline in worldwide progress towards gender parity.
Over 2.8 billion women are legally restricted from having the same choice of jobs as men. As many as 104 countries still have laws preventing women from working in specific jobs, 59 countries have no laws on sexual harassment in the workplace, and it is astonishing that a handful of countries still allow husbands to legally stop their wives from working.
Globally, women’s participation in the labour force is estimated at 63% (as against 94% of men who participate), but India’s is at a dismal 25% or so currently. Most women are in informal and vulnerable employment—domestic help, agriculture, etc—and are always paid less than men.
Recent reports from Assam suggest that women workers in plantations are paid much less than men and never promoted to supervisory roles. The gender wage gap is about 24% globally, and women have lost far more jobs than men during lockdowns.
The problem of gender disparity is compounded by hurdles put up by governments, society and businesses: unequal access to social security schemes, banking services, education, digital services and so on, even as a glass ceiling has kept leadership roles out of women’s reach.
Yes, many governments and businesses had been working on parity before the pandemic struck. But the global gender gap, defined by differences reflected in the social, political, intellectual, cultural and economic attainments or attitudes of men and women, will not narrow in the near future without all major stakeholders working together on a clear agenda—that of economic growth by inclusion.
The WEF report estimates 135 years to close the gap at our current rate of progress based on four pillars: educational attainment, health, economic participation and political empowerment.
India has slipped from rank 112 to 140 in a single year, confirming how hard women were hit by the pandemic. Pakistan and Afghanistan are the only two Asian countries that fared worse.
Here are a few things we must do:
One, frame policies for equal-opportunity employment. Use technology and artificial intelligence to eliminate biases of gender, caste, etc, and select candidates at all levels on merit. Numerous surveys indicate that women in general have a better chance of landing jobs if their gender is not known to recruiters.
Two, foster a culture of gender sensitivity. Take a review of current policies and move from gender-neutral to gender-sensitive. Encourage and insist on diversity and inclusion at all levels, and promote more women internally to leadership roles. Demolish silos to let women grab potential opportunities in hitherto male-dominant roles. Work-from-home has taught us how efficiently women can manage flex-timings and productivity.
Three, deploy corporate social responsibility (CSR) funds for the education and skilling of women and girls at the bottom of the pyramid. CSR allocations to toilet building, the PM-Cares fund and firms’ own trusts could be re-channelled for this.
Four, get more women into research and development (R&D) roles. A study of over 4,000 companies found that more women in R&D jobs resulted in radical innovation. It appears women score far higher than men in championing change. If you seek growth from affordable products and services for low-income groups, women often have the best ideas.
Five, break barriers to allow progress. Cultural and structural issues must be fixed. Unconscious biases and discrimination are rampant even in highly-esteemed organizations. Establish fair and transparent human resource policies.
Six, get involved in local communities to engage them. As Michael Porter said, it is not possible for businesses to sustain long-term shareholder value without ensuring the welfare of the communities they exist in. It is in the best interest of enterprises to engage with local communities to understand and work towards lowering cultural and other barriers in society. It will also help connect with potential customers, employees and special interest groups driving the gender-equity agenda and achieve better diversity.