Editorial Warns Against Targeting Universal Welfare
The editorial from Deccan Herald argues that introducing filters such as income criteria into universal welfare schemes dilutes their effectiveness. It points to India's Public Distribution System (PDS) and Ayushman Bharat as examples where universal coverage has been more successful than targeted approaches.
Evidence from PDS and Ayushman Bharat
The editorial cites data showing that the PDS, which provides subsidized food grains to all households in many states, has reduced hunger and malnutrition more effectively than targeted programs. Similarly, Ayushman Bharat's universal health coverage has improved access to healthcare for millions, while targeted schemes often exclude the neediest due to bureaucratic errors.
Risks of Exclusion Errors
According to the editorial, targeting through income filters leads to high exclusion errors, where deserving beneficiaries are left out. It notes that even advanced countries face challenges in accurately identifying the poor, leading to inefficiencies. The editorial argues that universal schemes avoid these pitfalls and foster social solidarity.
Economic and Political Arguments
The editorial also highlights economic benefits: universal schemes have lower administrative costs and higher public support, making them politically sustainable. It warns that targeting can stigmatize recipients and create divisions. The piece concludes that universal welfare is a more effective and equitable approach for India.
