Why in the News?

Digital monitoring tools such as biometric attendance and facial recognition apps are increasingly being used across welfare programmes — from MGNREGA to Public Distribution System (PDS). However, evidence suggests that these technologies may intensify exclusion without improving accountability, shifting the burden of compliance to already vulnerable workers.

Digital Surveillance in Welfare Delivery

Governments have introduced smartphone-based attendance and biometric checks to ensure punctuality and curb “leakages” such as ghost beneficiaries.

Examples:

• Biometric attendance in government offices intended to enforce discipline.
• MGNREGA attendance recorded via mobile apps to prevent fake muster rolls.
• MoRD’s ABBA system: Aadhaar-based authentication for ration delivery.
• Poshan Tracker app requiring Anganwadi workers to upload photographs of mothers and children to prevent fraud.

The assumption: Technology = Accountability

But results show otherwise.

Ground-Level Reality: Exclusion & Punitive Outcomes

Digital surveillance often punishes the vulnerable rather than the corrupt:

• Connectivity issues prevent workers from uploading mandatory photos → wages withheld.
• Elderly, disabled and women struggle with authentication → lose entitlements.
• Device and data costs shift financial burden to frontline workers.
• Excess documentation delays attendance marking → wage losses.
• Fear of punitive action pushes workers to comply even when tech fails.

Instead of ensuring transparency, digital mandates often reduce access to welfare itself.

Limited Effectiveness in Reducing Corruption

Despite strict digital monitoring:

• Master roll frauds still occur in MGNREGA because tech cannot ensure whether real work was done.
• Unauthorized ration diversion continues in PDS despite ABBA.
• Insensitive verification rules (e.g., fixed photograph uploads) lead to genuine users being rejected.

Accountability for officials remains minimal, while frontline workers bear the brunt.

Tech-Fixes vs Systemic Accountability

Government Objective	Reality on Ground
Eliminate corruption	Corrupt adapt faster than systems
Improve service delivery	Exclusion of genuine beneficiaries
Evidence-based tracking	Surveillance replaces care

Technology addresses symptoms, not institutional failures like:

• lack of political will,
• inadequate grievance redressal,
• weak audits,
• poor administrative transparency.

Surveillance ≠ Accountability
Accountability requires responsibility from officials, not punitive tracking of workers.

Ethical and Social Concerns

• Privacy violations due to constant photo and data uploads
• Stigmatisation of the poor as “potential fraudsters”
• Loss of dignity and trust in welfare systems
• Ignoring socio-economic barriers like digital illiteracy

Jean Drèze and Amartya Sen warn against using technology as a substitute for governance reform.

The Core Issue: Accountability Deficit

Surveillance technologies often:

• become ends in themselves
• confuse visibility with proof of delivery
• divert focus from official accountability to worker compliance

Example: Even when technology fails, workers get blamed, while leakages by authorities remain unchecked.

The Way Forward

A humane and effective welfare system must ensure:

• Offline-enabled verification options
• Grievance systems that do not penalize workers
• Transparency in administration (social audits)
• Low-cost, worker-friendly technology
• Accountability fixed upward, not downward

Technology should support, not substitute, responsible governance.

Conclusion

Digital surveillance tools in welfare programmes promise improved accountability but often produce exclusion, delays, harassment, and new forms of corruption. Without institutional reforms, technology becomes “snake oil” — offering a false cure while the actual disease of governance failure persists. Ensuring welfare dignity requires shifting accountability onto authorities, not onto the poor whose rights these systems were designed to protect.

Source: Surveillance apps in welfare, snake oil for accountability – The Hindu

UPSC CSE PYQ

Year	Question
2018	E‑governance is not only about utilization of the power of new technology, but also much about the critical importance of the ‘use value’ of information.
2019	Implementation of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) based Projects / Programmes usually suffers in terms of certain vital factors. Identify these factors and suggest measures for their effective implementation.
2020	The emergence of Fourth Industrial Revolution (Digital Revolution) has initiated e‑Governance as an integral part of government.
2023	E‑governance, as a critical tool of governance, has ushered in effectiveness, transparency and accountability in governments. What inadequacies hamper the enhancement of these features?