Que. “Development and welfare schemes for the vulnerable, by its nature, are discriminatory in approach.” Do you agree? Give reasons for your answer.
“वंचितों के विकास और कल्याण की योजनाएं अपनी प्रकृति से ही दृष्टिकोण में भेदभाव करने वाली होती हैं।” क्या आप सहमत हैं? अपने उत्तर के पक्ष में कारण दीजिए।
Structure of the Answer
(i) Introduction: Define development and “welfare schemes” for “vulnerable groups” and mention their aim to address existing inequalities yet possibly appear “discriminatory.”
(ii) Main Body: Examine benefits and limitations of targeted schemes, discussing potential “discriminatory” aspects, dependency issues, and alternative inclusive approaches.
(iii) Conclusion: Emphasize that while schemes reduce inequality, careful implementation is necessary to avoid dependency, stigma, or unintended discrimination.
Introduction
Development and “welfare schemes” for “vulnerable sections” aim to address “historical inequalities” by providing resources to disadvantaged groups. However, their targeted approach can appear “discriminatory,” raising questions about fairness, inclusivity, and potential social division.
Rationale for Targeted Welfare Schemes
(i) Addressing Historical Disadvantages: Targeted schemes work to rectify “historic inequities” faced by marginalized groups, providing essential support in areas like “education,” “healthcare,” and “employment” to counter deep-rooted inequalities.
(ii) Ensuring Social Justice: These schemes promote “social justice” by focusing resources on disadvantaged groups, allowing equal opportunities and ensuring vulnerable populations have fair access to societal resources.
(iii) Promoting Equity in Access: By creating “equitable frameworks,” welfare schemes help level the playing field, enabling disadvantaged groups to have the same starting points as more privileged sections of society.
(iv) Supporting Inclusive Development: Focused welfare programs aim to bring vulnerable groups into the “economic mainstream,” ensuring that development benefits are more widely and fairly distributed.
(v) Enhancing National Cohesion: Uplifting vulnerable sections strengthens “national unity” by narrowing gaps between groups, fostering social cohesion, and promoting a more integrated society.
Criticisms and Challenges of Targeted Schemes
(i) Perception of Discrimination: Some view targeted welfare schemes as “discriminatory,” fostering resentment among non-beneficiaries and creating potential divisions within society.
(ii) Dependency Syndrome: Welfare reliance can foster a “dependency syndrome,” weakening self-sufficiency and potentially deterring beneficiaries from pursuing independence and economic empowerment.
(iii) Stigmatization of Beneficiaries: Recipients may face “social stigma,” as association with welfare schemes can reinforce perceptions of vulnerability and undermine their social standing.
(iv) Administrative Complexities: Identifying eligible beneficiaries can be challenging, leading to “exclusion errors” and inefficiencies that prevent schemes from reaching their intended impact.
(v) Resource Allocation Inequities: Prioritizing vulnerable groups in resource distribution may cause resentment or perceptions of “inequity” among other sections needing support.
Benefits of Targeted Schemes over Universal Schemes
(i) Effective Poverty Alleviation: Targeted schemes focus on those most in need, enabling more efficient and impactful “poverty alleviation” by concentrating resources on critical areas of need.
(ii) Efficient Resource Allocation: In limited “budgetary conditions,” directing resources to vulnerable groups ensures maximum social benefit, addressing gaps that universal schemes might overlook.
(iii) Alignment with Affirmative Policies: Targeted welfare aligns with “affirmative action” policies, supporting marginalized communities in a way that universal approaches might not achieve.
(iv) Empowering Vulnerable Populations: Welfare schemes provide “skills and education” to vulnerable groups, helping them overcome economic barriers and achieve independence.
(v) Reducing Inequality Rapidly: Targeted programs are designed to “reduce inequality” swiftly by concentrating resources where they can make the greatest impact on disadvantaged populations.
Recommendations for Inclusive and Balanced Welfare Design
(i) Universal Basic Services: Providing universal access to “health” and “education” reduces dependency on targeted welfare, creating a baseline for all citizens without discrimination.
(ii) Phased Transition to Universal Models: Gradually shifting from targeted to universal welfare models helps balance equity with inclusivity, fostering long-term independence for vulnerable populations.
(iii) Community-Based Initiatives: Programs aimed at entire communities enhance “social cohesion,” benefiting all and reducing stigmatization associated with receiving targeted aid.
(iv) Transparency and Awareness Campaigns: Clear communication around scheme objectives fosters “understanding and acceptance,” reducing misconceptions about discriminatory practices.
(v) Monitoring and Feedback Mechanisms: Ongoing “monitoring” ensures schemes remain effective, responsive, and transparent, allowing necessary adjustments to serve vulnerable populations more inclusively.
Conclusion
While “development and welfare schemes” for vulnerable groups aim to address systemic inequalities, they can appear “discriminatory” due to their selective nature. Through transparency, inclusive design, and phased transitions, policymakers can enhance welfare schemes’ impact, ensuring these programs foster a fair and “inclusive society” without creating dependency or divisions.
