The recently concluded G20 summit witnessed two important India-led interventions. One emphasises investments in physical infrastructure through the India-Middle East-Europe Corridor (IMEC). The other emphasises investments in digital public infrastructure (DPI). While IMEC has grabbed more eyeballs, it still seems a sketchy plan compared to the DPI model. The DPI model advanced by India has already found takers in some parts of the Global South.
Five years ago, the International Institute of Information Technology in Bengaluru launched the Modular Open Source Identity Platform (MOSIP) to help other countries set up Aadhaar-like systems. More than 10 countries, from Sri Lanka to Sierra Leone, have initiated MOSIP projects so far. After the G20’s endorsement, many more could sign up for it.
The adoption of the DPI model could open up new vistas of opportunities for India’s IT sector while raising the country’s profile globally. However, the DPI momentum can sustain only if policymakers take into account both the strengths and weaknesses of India’s own digital infrastructure.
There are three key elements of India’s DPI offering that have evinced global interest. First, a digital ID system for citizens that enables authentication of welfare beneficiaries, and helps tackle leakages. Second, an open source software architecture that is designed to avoid dependence on any one technology giant. Third, a fast payment system that can leverage the digital ID system to widen the net of financial inclusion, and catalyse growth.
Digitisation is increasingly being seen as a means to save fiscal resources while targeting state spending better. At the same time, digitisation has also raised concerns about the dominance of American Big Tech and Chinese Surveillance Tech. India’s offering of an open digital ecosystem taps into these anxieties.
However, the Indian DPI model is not without its share of challenges. The first challenge is the lack of a robust legal framework to protect citizens’ data. The current data protection law offers much weaker protection than was envisaged earlier.
The second challenge relates to the coercion and exclusion involved in India’s DPI model. Aadhaar was supposed to be an enabler. Making it mandatory has hurt some of India’s most deprived regions, where data connectivity remains poor and authentication failures are common.
The third challenge relates to the risk of overselling the impact of India’s DPI model. While there is no doubt that India’s progress on digital and financial inclusion has been impressive, there are several other countries with an even more impressive record.
Instead of dismissing critics, policymakers need to engage with them and address the chinks in the DPI model to make it a successful export. Fixing these gaps will help Indian citizens, and offer a more robust model for the rest of the world.
Full article: https://lnkd.in/gssc2e9k
Founding Director IIIT Bangalore, Former Chairman BoG, IIITDM-Kancheepuram
1moCannot agree more Thanks for writing