Achieving Sustainable Development Though Intersectorality in Public Policy

Title : Achieving sustainable development though intersectorality in public policy

Author : Dr. Neethi V Rao1, Meenakshi Kushwaha2

Affiliation : 1 - Independent Researcher 2 - ILK Labs, Bangalore

Abstract:

Contemporary development challenges necessitate greater intersectorality in public policy, as highlighted by the Sustainable Development Goals Agenda. This article uses four ongoing development-oriented government schemes in India as examples of intersectoral policy-making to demonstrate why intersectorality is important for social development and how it can be strengthened. Each of the four policies namely, the Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY), Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM), the Mid-day meal (MDM) scheme and the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MNREGS) represent a somewhat different model of intersectorality. While all of them aim for intersectoral outcomes, PMUY and SBM are intersectoral at level of policy conception while MDM and MNREGS focus on intersectoral implementation. Each of them have specific individual features that offer pathways for intersectoral policy implementation within multi-level and complex policy ecosystems. In addition to their distinctions, they also share key commonalities that have contributed to their effectiveness that need to be recognized and replicated. Finally, we discuss the structural challenges for institutionalizing intersectoral policymaking using the complex policy ecosystem of India.

Article Word Count: 7434

Keywords: Intersectoral policy, Sustainable Development, India, Policy integration

1 Introduction

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) framework explicitly emphasises the need for intersectoral action, moving away from the siloed approach of sectoral goals towards policy integration (Le Blanc, 2015; Van de Pas et al. 2017). The nature of developmental challenges in low and middle income countries mean that sectoral policies often have additional impacts or externalities on associated sectors. Recognising these impacts and designing policies to simultaneously advance developmental goals along multiple dimensions is thus imperative. Intersectoral policy-making needs to be explicitly adopted and promoted to improve efficiency and effectiveness.

The idea for greater policy coherence and intersectorality has in fact preceded the SDGs. Developmental agencies like the World Bank and the International Labour organisation have been encouraging cross-sectoral approaches without necessarily adopting a conceptual or practical framework for these approaches (Biermann, 2009; Kohler, 2011; Nunan, 2012). The European Commission in its Social Policy Green Paper in 1993, recommended that social programmes integrate education, training, and employment (Mabbett, 2005). Similarly, the World Economic Forum has been advocating for the nexus approach of coordination across different policy domains, including climate change, energy, food and agriculture, and water (Visseren-Hamakers, 2015).

Public health professionals were among the earliest to recognise that a range of non-health services were necessary to mitigate ill-health and promote well-being and therefore a whole-of government approach involving a systematic integration of health considerations into policy processes of all ministries was essential (UN 2011; Khayatzadeh-Mahani, 2016; Watkins, 2017). This was conceptualised as the Health in all Policies (HiAP) approach as early as in 2006 (Ståhl, 2006). Four related strategies towards achieving HiAP were described, each with a different degree of integration (Ollila, 2011). The first was through encouraging non-health sectors to adopt policies that advance health objectives. The second strategy consists of closely coordinating with non-health sectors to develop policies that achieve mutually desirable objectives. The third strategy involves greater cooperation through providing public health information and expertise to other sectors. The fourth was through highlighting health impacts of policies through tools such as health impact assessments and providing support to health promoting impacts while minimising the negative impacts.

While these strategies are useful for public health researchers and practitioners to advocate and implement an HiAP approach, it’s not clear if these strategies are directly applicable for policy-makers and governments, especially in low and middle income countries (LMIC). Issues like the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change and rising social inequity confronting countries today are what’s been described as ‘wicked problems’; in other words they are complex with emergent phenomena that cannot be managed through sectoral policies alone (Engler, 2021). Further, policymakers in LMIC are looking to optimise resources by way of social development policies to address intersectional issues that can improve the multiple aspects of the lives of their citizens simultaneously. The term policy integration has been proposed for these processes in the context of environmental policy particularly with respect to climate change (Underdal, 1980; Persson, 2004). But in fact policymakers are looking to apply similar approaches across development sectors.

Broadly, policy integration can be at the level of strategic planning or through structural coordination and implementation. While integration may be the desired outcome, building and institutionalising intersectorality is the necessary process. However, structural and operational

2 challenges remain in achieving policy integration through intersectoral cooperation and coordination. Challenges associated with compartmentalisation, misalignment, institutional cultures etc. are well-described in the literature (Geerlings and Stead, 2003; Briassoulis, 2004; Tosun and Lang, 2013).

Most empirical studies on policy integration have focussed on high-income countries while LMIC experiences are relatively under-studied. Further, most studies concentrate on the integration of governance systems but there’s little or no analysis on the implementation processes and outcomes. In this article, we examine examples of ongoing intersectoral policies from India that are currently being implemented and seek to understand what lessons they might hold for similar processes in other LMIC.

India is a large emerging economy with a diverse population and policymaking structure, and crucial to addressing many of the world’s challenges due to its large population size. Fifteen of the world’s twenty most polluted cities are in India (AirVisual, 2018). Air pollution caused over 1.7 million deaths in 2019 which is 18% of total deaths in the country. (Pandey et al., 2021). India suffers from chronic malnutrition with over one-third of the children under-five being stunted (International Institute for Population Sciences, 2017). Over two-thirds of the country continues to live in poverty and unemployment is on the rise. It has been implicitly recognised that these challenges require some degree of policy coherence and has resulted in instances of intersectoral policy-making in India. Achieving sustainable development over the long-term in India and elsewhere will require institutionalising intersectorality in public policy-making.

In this article, we examine four ongoing developmental schemes as examples of intersectoral policies to identify lessons and pitfalls on how governments can successfully move towards institutionalising intersectoral policymaking. We analyse the objectives, processes and outcomes associated with these policies to provide insights for achieving greater policy integration. By focusing on schemes with intersectoral policy goals that are currently being implemented rather than intersectoral governance mechanisms or instruments, we identify a novel approach of how integration might be achieved, especially in LMIC.

Methods

We conducted a rapid review of existing developmental policies in India using government websites to identify four policies with evidence of intersectorality. We then conducted a scoping literature search using the scheme name and India as key words in the Google scholar database to identify research papers and grey literature analysing scheme performance and outcomes. We supplemented this through an analysis of policy papers, media articles and government websites with information on the selected policies. In total, we identified 59 sources for the purposes of this article. The data was analysed to identify basic features of the schemes, the processes, outputs, outcomes and challenges associated with each. Based on this analysis, lessons and challenges for broader intersectorality were identified.

Results & Discussion

Table 1 : Intersectoral Policies and their key features

Ujjawala Swachh Bharat Mission Mid Day Meal Scheme MNREGS

3 1. Elimination of open defecation and manual Scavenging 2. Modern and Scientific 1. To provide financial protection and Municipal Solid Waste strengthen 1. To prevent Management livelihoods of rural hazards and 3. To effect behavioral poor health risks change regarding healthy 1. To improve 2. To augment rural associated with sanitation practices nutritional status of infrastructure and fossil fuel use 4. Generate awareness school-going assets in rural about sanitation and its children 3. To strengthen 2. To enhance schools decentralised populations linkage with public health Policy enrollment, village-level 2. To empower 5. Capacity Augmentation for attendance and governance Objective(s) rural women urban local bodies retention systems 1. Ministry of Drinking water and rural sanitation, 2. Ministry of Human Resource Development (schools) 1. Ministries of 1. Ministry of 3. The Ministry of Housing Women & Child Petroleum and Development and Urban Affairs 1. Ministry of Rural Natural Gas 2. Ministry of Health Development (MoHUA) Ministries 2. Ministry of and Family Welfare 2. Ministry of Labour Rural 4. Central Pollution Control and Employment involved Development Board 1. Corporate Social 1. Budgetary 1. Budgetary Responsibility allocation allocation 2. Support from development 2. Corporate Social 2. Corporate Social Funding Budgetary allocation partners like USAID Responsibility Responsibility NGOs like Akshay Patra and Partnership with Oil others are roped in to provide Upgradation of infrastructure Private sector Marketing companies Private sector involvement in both nutritious food to school created under MNREGS engagement (OMCs) capital and operational development children. through the private sector.

Based on a rapid scan of existing developmental policies in India four schemes were selected for analysis. These were the Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY), the Swacchh Bharat Abhiyan (SBA) or Clean India Mission, the Mid-day meal (MDM) scheme and the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee scheme (MNREGS). Each of these schemes were progressive with intersectoral objectives and believed to be popular and appropriate in advancing their respective policy goals (Table 1). To be sure, none of the policies analysed here are meant to be models for other countries or free of deficiencies. They represent contextually relevant policy action with significant demonstrated and/or anticipated intersectoral benefits. They are each examples of policy-making in progress with both successes and challenges (Table 2). Together, they provide key insights in developing and implementing intersectoral policy from the perspective of governments in LMIC aiming for greater policy integration.

Scheme description and implementation

Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY)

The Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana, is a prime example of an evidence-based policy that can simultaneously address multiple developmental priorities (Dabadge et al., 2018; Smith & Sagar,

4 2014). It helps reduce household air pollution by facilitating the switch away from chulhas and fossil fuels for cooking. This in turn minimises the health hazards, including respiratory illnesses that are the second leading cause of death in India (Salvi et al., 2018). By making rural women the beneficiaries, the scheme additionally seeks to reduce socio-economic vulnerabilities. Oil and marketing companies that are predominantly profit-based entities are roped into a social programme by recognizing the convergence between market incentives and the socio-economic goals of increasing access to liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in rural India.

As of September 2019, more than 80 million women have received subsidized LPG connections under the scheme, as per government data. A survey conducted by the Council of Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) found that PMUY significantly helped increase access to LPG between 2015 to 2018 in states such as West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand and Uttar Pradesh (CEEW, 2018). The scheme is also credited as being electorally popular. In Uttar Pradesh, it is believed to have helped the current ruling party gain power after nearly a decade, nine months after the scheme was first launched (DNA, 2021).

Overall PMUY was able to meet its ambitious goal of providing new connections to millions of Indian households well before its deadline. This initial success leads us to focus on what comes next? While capital subsidies facilitated procuring the first connection, sustained use of LPG was not incentivised. Despite the increased LPG connections, the refill rates continue to decline (CAG 2019 report) and the latest phase of NFHS-5 survey shows that there is only a 20% increase in LPG use in the 22 states that were surveyed in the first round. This increase is not nearly enough to close the clean energy gap. In Bihar for example, pre-Ujjawala, merely 17% households used clean cooking fuel (NFHS-4). The ground view of LPG confirms this disparity. Kar and colleagues analyzed multi-year sales data from 25000 households in rural Karnataka, and found that increased enrollment in LPG customers is not matched by change in sales data. The number of refills from PMUY consumers was less than half of that of general LPG users (Kar et al., 2019).

What this tells us is that LPG connection does not necessarily mean sustained use. For each refill, beneficiaries need to pay the full cost (Rs. 700) upfront and then wait to receive the subsidies in their bank account. In addition, many rural households do not have access to home delivery service adding further to the cost of refill (CEEW, 2018) These barriers of affordability are further amplified by gender norms - many rural women, who are the the actual users of these LPG cylinders, don’t have the decision making power or the access to mobile phones or funds to order the refill (Cabiyo, Ray, I & Levine, 2020).

Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM)

The Swachh Bharat Mission is another government programme that is both inter-ministerial and inter-sectoral. Open-defecation and contamination of potable water is a widely prevalent sanitary problem in India. SBM aims to provide universal sanitation coverage by building household and community toilets across the country. By reducing open defecation, the programme aims to reduce death and disease spread by contaminated water. As per government data, nearly 98 million toilets have already been built. A WHO report of 2018 estimated that SBM could potentially avert 3,00,000 deaths in rural India (WHO & Government of India, 2018).

Similar schemes have existed on paper but SBM brought sanitation issues into mainstream political discourse and public imagination. Average citizens and public personalities were

5 mobilized in cleaning drives in their neighbourhoods and workplaces. Synergies were found with other sectoral schemes such as the Ministry of Human Resource Development’s education programmes to improve cleanliness in schools.

On 2nd October, 2019, the Prime Minister announced that SBM had successfully met its target of an open defecation free (ODF) India, a claim that many contradict. While a record number of toilets were indeed built under the scheme, they did not necessarily translate into sustained use. In terms of implementation in the rural areas, the scheme suffered from three major bottlenecks (Mohan, 2017). Firstly, it required households to use their own funds upfront, limiting the ability of poorer families especially from SC/ST communities to partake in the scheme. Secondly, many households do not have adequate water supply to be able to use the newly built toilets. Women especially hesitate in building toilets without adequate water supply because the burden of fetching more water for toilet use will fall on them. And, lastly, many toilets built under the scheme are in a state of disrepair. These defunct toilets need to be revived to ensure ODF status for villages. Some opportunities for intersectoral synergy exist here. For instance, investing funds from the National Rural Drinking Water Programme as well as planning MNREGS water-focussed projects in synchrony with the toilet construction could address the issue of water shortage both at household as well as community levels. In rural areas, the troubling use of coercive measures - like naming and shaming, threatening with the loss of government benefits - has also been well documented (Gupta et al., 2019). While coercive measures may lead to short term gains in terms of good metrics, sustained behaviour change requires a more holistic approach.

In urban areas, even though new community toilets were built under SBM’s mandate, multiple barriers to access persist. A ground report from Delhi revealed that despite the 19000 community toilets built by the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board (DUSIB) , slum dwellers continued to defecate in the open (Upadhyay, 2020). Toilets were often too far from where people live or work, especially for women, making them difficult to access. This is a tricky issue to address because the toilet locations are based on availability of land, water, and sewage connections. Additionally, given the high population density of slums, there are too many users per toilet, resulting in overcrowding, long wait times and more maintenance.

In terms of urban sanitation, the practice of manual scavenging has been a blind spot, with no clear steps to eliminate this already prohibited but persistent practise (Panchang et al., 2020). Panchang recommends long term engagement with communities and paying closer attention to water supply, housing density and occupational hazards (manual scavengers) for long term success.

Beyond building toilets to enable ODF status, another mandate of the urban component of SBM was keeping cities clean through scientific management of municipal solid waste. Under SBM, cities had to ensure 100 per cent source-segregation of waste and as per SBM’s 2019 data, about three-fourth of the wards in the country segregate all their waste at source. However, the metrics used for waste segregation do not differentiate between waste segregation at source and ensuring end-to-end segregation (Henam & Bandela, 2020). Even though waste segregation was part of the mandate of SBM, local authorities have been slow to come up with mechanisms that facilitate the implementation of this objective. Different states and different urban local bodies also use different metrics. The lack of uniform parameters makes it difficult to assess the waste management process. In practice, many more indian cities have instituted door-to-door waste collection, and even started collecting segregated waste in multi-colored

6 bins but due to lack of end-to-end mechanisms, continued dumping of mixed waste into landfills is a common outcome.

Despite the considerable attention and the demonstrated political will, there remain challenges with both PMUY and the SBM with regard to inducing long-term behaviour change. The cost of LPG refills is still prohibitively expensive for many of the beneficiaries of PMUY, even as routine access is hampered by the poor penetration of distributors and availability of multiple sizes of LPG cylinders in rural areas. Alternatives like cow-dung and firewood are far cheaper to obtain and many prefer the taste of food cooked over traditional cooking stoves.

Similarly despite the large number of toilets built under SBM, ownership does not translate to use. Many of these newly-built toilets remain unused or are infrequently used due to poor availability of water coupled with socio-economic complications associated with caste and gender disparities. These challenges require focussed attention over the long-term and better implementation by all stakeholders.

Mid-day Meal (MDM) scheme

The Mid-day Meal (MDM) scheme is an intersectoral programme that has improved over time through sustained engagement by various government departments, civil society and the judiciary. Introduced originally in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu in the 60s, the scheme gradually gained popularity across the country and has now become one of the most important interventions towards childhood malnutrition and school education.

In 1995, the government of India launched a nutrition support programme that was an early precursor to the current scheme. In November 2001, a ruling by the Supreme Court of India gave final shape to the scheme by specifying the calorific and nutritional content of the hot, cooked meals to be provided in all government-supported schools. In 2013, the scheme was brought under the ambit of the National Food Security Act, reinforcing it as a key intervention against childhood malnutrition in India. The scheme has also achieved convergence with India’s flagship nutrition and early childhood development programme, the integrated child development services (ICDS) jointly delivered by the Ministries of Women & Child Development and Health & Family Welfare.

Study after study has shown that the midday meal scheme has contributed to improving school enrolment, especially for girls (Dreze & Goyal, 2003; Khera, 2006). Besides enrollment, past research has also shown positive impacts of the scheme on nutrition and learning outcomes, especially among children from vulnerable communities (Afridi, 2010, 2011; Afridi, Barooah, & Somanathan, 2013). A study published in 2014 showed that the midday meal scheme functioned as a safety net for children under drought conditions in Andhra Pradesh (Singh, Park, & Dercon, 2014). In February of 2019, the Prime Minister personally served meals to 20 children at a school in Uttar Pradesh, reiterating the importance of the scheme and its role in promoting nutrition and healthy childhoods (Chaturvedi, 2019).

However there remain several areas that need further improvement including consistent budgetary allocations, improving infrastructure for manpower for cooking hot meals, and reducing corruption in the provision of rations. Different states have their own implementation mechanisms with different levels of successes and not a uniform operational manual.

7 Caste-based discrimination in schools that shadows the mid-day meal implementation has been documented both anecdotally and systematically. In 2014, a study in the states of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, Jharkhand, Odisha, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh revealed that students from lower caste faced several forms of discrimination during meal time - about being served later than their upper caste classmates, receiving significantly less food than children from other groups, and being seated separated from upper caste children (Sabharwal, 2014). Apart from impacting the nutrition the children received, the discrimination also affected their motivation to attend school leading to irregular attendance. In 2015, a dalit student in Jodhpur was beaten up for touching plates that were meant for upper caste children (Reddy, 2018). This is not a hidden issue. In 2013, the Parliamentary Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes highlighted how the practise of untouchability still hampers the scheme, but little has been done to address the issue following that.

While overall the scheme has been successful in school retention and improving nutrition, some states are constantly lagging behind. Many of the poor-performing states lack basic infrastructure and accountability mechanisms overall. For example, fatal food poisoning incidents from Bihar have made national headlines from time to time and also scared away parents (Gupta, 2013). In a state where about 8000 schools have no buildings, often the school infrastructure is not sufficient to accommodate and safely store and cook food (examples of food grains stored alongside fertilizers and pesticides) and no adequate monitoring or accountability mechanisms exist. The scheme also competes for funding priority with the state run schemes like free bicycles and free school uniforms for children.

Although the rare adverse incidents seem to overshadow the quiet success of the MDM scheme, they do highlight the importance of fixing long - term issues with the scheme (Khera, 2013). Khera outlines four specific lessons - Firstly, revising the administration and monitoring systems, so that such incidents never happen again. Secondly, correcting the imbalance of media coverage that suffers with bias for rural and social-security programs undermining the chance of an informed debate. Thirdly, the need to guard against vested interests in the name of public-private partnerships that prioritize profits. And lastly, a call for poor-performing states to learn from leading states like Odisha, Tamil Nadu and Rajasthan in order to improve the nutritional content of food provided.

Religious and personal norms that contradict nutritional guidelines have also influenced decision making around the scheme (EPW, 2015). Reducing conflicts over the menu such as the outrage caused by NGO Akshay Patra’s refusal to include eggs and locally consumed spices in the meals it has been contracted to deliver in several states (Yamunan, 2019). Issues of this nature are seen across all government schemes and the long experience with the Mid-day Meal scheme can be used to help minimise similar challenges for newer schemes such as PMUY and SBM.

Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MNREGS)

This scheme is implemented by gram panchayats under the aegis of the Ministry of Rural Development with the primary goal of providing livelihood security in rural areas. The rules under it are deliberately intersectoral with a view to improve financial inclusion, gender equality and environmental protection. The scheme has been used to build infrastructure for natural resource management such as dams and irrigation channels as well as assets such as anganwadis, schools and health centres. MNREGS funds have also been used to build assets to support small farms and SC/ST farmers.

8 There are currently nearly 270 million registered workers under the scheme with over 7 million active workers (Department of Rural Development, 2019). Following the 14th Finance Commission recommendations, the government of India devolved social welfare to state governments except those considered to be national priorities, such as MNREGS. The scheme has run out of money nearly every year forcing increased budget allocations demonstrating the demand for employment under the scheme (Business Standard, 2016). Beyond budget allocations, the government has also successively improved the scheme through geo-tagging of assets created under the scheme and improved transparency in its administration. Rising unemployment and rural distress have further increased the salience of MNREGS benefits for large sections of the population. With droughts and climatic variability wages from MNREGS may be the only thing keeping farmers and the rural economy afloat (Reuters, 2019). The MNREGS was also widely believed to have helped mitigate rural distress due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic leading to calls for a similar scheme catering to the urban poor (Jaipuria, 2020).

Project completion rates have been consistently low, however. Between 2006 and 2013, only one third of the MNREGS projects were completed (Department of Rural Development, 2013). Many structures built under the scheme are known to remain unfinished or degrade due to lack of maintenance. In addition, the scheme has been unable to provide the promised minimum 100 days of employment. The spending can be more effective by better project management along with alignment of the region's need for ownership and utilization of projects under the scheme.

MNREGS also suffers from several wage-related issues. The less- than- minimum wage rates have led to lack of interest from workers leaving way for middle men to take control (Nandy, 2018). Workers are often penalized for administrative lapses by holding back payments. Even when everything is in order, payment delays are common. Additionally, excessive dependence on a centralized payment system leads to diminishing of local accountability for implementation and redress of grievances.More recently, linking MNREGS payments to the Aadhar identity card has added another layer of technical complication and unintended payment delays (Nandy, 2018).

Despite the challenges, MNREGS remains an unsung hero in the broader context of climate change. The program, when well-implemented, not only sustains the livelihoods of those lost due to climate change but some of the projects themselves are great tools for climate mitigation and adaptation - which has the potential to positively impact livelihoods, health and quality of life (Center for Science and Environment, 2021). For example: In the Bandlapalli village of Telangana, MNREGS related water projects have enabled the village to become drought proof and led to stemming of distress migration. There are similar stories reported from other parts of the country where MNREGS activities have led to water security in drought prone regions leading to water-surplus and increased agricultural productivity. However, there are no formal records of the sustainability aspect of the projects. As a metric, the scheme counts the number of people employed and structures constructed.

9 Table 2 - Successes and Challenges associated with selected policies

Scheme Successes Challenges

Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala 1. Increased coverage of 1. Refill rates remain low Yojana (PMUY) initial LPG connections 2. LPG connections do not 2. Met its target of ~100% readily translate to LPG household connections use before time (Sep 2019) 3. High cost of refills 3. Electorally popular 4. Not all households have 4. Spotlight on sustained access to home delivery clean fuel use 5. Gender norms

Swachh Bharat Mission 1. Significant increase in rural 1. Increase in toilet coverage (SBM) toilet ownership does not correspond to 2. Brought the issue to reduction in open mainstream defecation 3. Encouraged better solid 2. Waste segregation not fully waste management in realized cities 3. Manual scavenging persists

Mid-day Meal (MDM) 1. Increased school 1. Lack of consistent enrollment and retention accountability mechanisms especially for girls 2. Biased media coverage 2. Positive impact on nutrition and learning outcomes

Mahatma Gandhi National 1. A climate 1. Poor record keeping: no Rural Employment Guarantee adaptation/mitigation records of program program in disguise sustainability Scheme (MNREGS) 2. Long term change in 2. Success Metric is # of attitude where the program people employed and # of is pursued zealously. structures constructed. 3. Inadequate and delayed payments

Pathways to policy integration

The key difference to the strategies towards policy integration adopted by these schemes compared to the HiAP approach is that the outcomes of interest associated with these policies themselves are not sectoral in nature. Unlike the HiAP approach which prioritises public health goals, these schemes define their objectives with respect to the needs of the population of interest rather than any sectoral interests. e.g. The MDM is targeted to school-going children, the MNREGS focuses on the rural poor.

Examining these policies, it is important to note that none of these entailed a substantial increase in convergence or coordination between multiple sectors. While the policies have intersectoral goals, they do not create any new structures or mechanisms for intersectorality. No new policy instruments or organisational mechanisms are created to achieve intersectoral goals, which is relatively unusual (Jacob, Volkery, & Lenschow, 2008; Jordan & Lenschow 2010). While the PMUY, SBM and the MDM were intersectoral in their conception, the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MNREGS) incorporates intersectoral considerations in the development of norms. The MNREGS focuses on convergence - meaning

10 that wherever possible the objective of jobs and assets creation under MNREGS should be aligned with the schemes rolled out by other departments (Vasudevan et al. 2020).

While each of the four schemes analysed here take on board existing evidence on the most effective interventions available, the policies themselves were articulated in the form of ambitious political announcements. In other words, the policies are evidence-based but not necessarily technical interventions spearheaded by experts. The goals of the schemes were clearly articulated and disseminated to all stakeholders right at inception. Further the implementation of all four schemes has been fully decentralised in such a way that the implementing authority is located as close to the beneficiary as possible.

Key features for effective intersectorality

One of the key factors that have led to effective implementation of intersectoral schemes was the political will demonstrated at the highest levels. This political push facilitated the prioritization of these schemes by the various government departments as well as non-governmental stakeholders. For example, PMUY was launched and supervised directly by the Prime Minister ensuring prompt cooperation and close coordination between the implementing ministry and ministries of rural development, women and child welfare as well as state government agencies. International development aid has supported the scaling of the MDM scheme in many states and the SBM goals were incorporated in many corporate social responsibility (CSR) projects in the private sector.

Another important feature of all effective schemes is the clarity of benefits and modes of delivery for ease of administration and implementation. Intersectorality cannot mean piling on of multiple sectoral bureaucracies or complicated administrative processes. Beneficiaries need to be able to clearly understand their entitlements and know whom to hold accountable for the delivery of the scheme benefits. Administrators need straightforward implementation procedures that build on existing institutional arrangements.

A well-designed scheme should also avoid duplication of efforts and muddling of scheme objectives with implementation. This is only possible when the government as a collective sets clear priorities for itself that are followed through across all ministries and departments. In other words, priority-setting in public policy should be done at the whole-of-government level even as line ministries convert those priorities into implementable policy actions. For example the PMUY is administered by the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas along with oil marketing companies (OMC) even though its core objectives are aligned with the environment and health sectors. Clean energy was identified as a national priority and the petroleum ministry was simply the best placed to undertake the policy action. Similarly it was recognized that the nature of the sanitation problem was somewhat different in rural versus urban areas. The ministries that were best suited to implement the policy solutions in each of these geographies were made responsible for administering corresponding components of a single scheme.

Mobilisation of local authorities to enable direct engagement with the community, non-governmental agencies as well as governmental stakeholders is a significant step to successful intersectoral policy action. Local authorities who are the managers of programmes on the ground have a crucial role in consolidating departmental silos to deliver social services. They are uniquely placed to lead intersectoral action by leveraging disguised interlinkages that already exist at the level of programme implementation. For example, gram panchayats are

11 responsible for overseeing most rural development schemes. Identification of BPL beneficiaries in several government schemes is done through the same socio-economic caste census.

Key Challenges for Policy Intersectorality

Despite the demonstrated success of intersectoral schemes, India has yet to institutionalise intersectoral policy-making. The reasons for this are of two kinds. One set of problems are those of coordination - between governments (central/state/local), different sectors, ministries or departments. The other kind of barrier to intersectoral policy-making are problems of collective action.

The government think-tank, NITI Aayog is meant to facilitate coordination between state governments and the central government but is not adequately equipped to make operational changes that can serve as long-term mechanisms to achieve intersectoral goals. The current political configuration where the Bhartiya Janata Party has power in a majority of states as well as in the central government offers an opportunity to ensure better coordination between the states and the centre.

The collection and availability of appropriate data for monitoring by stakeholders in various sectors to evaluate progress under intersectional parameters is also poor. The OMCs providing LPG cylinders under PMUY for example may not maintain information on LPG usage by beneficiaries. Available data is often scattered across various sources and not disaggregated by geographies, gender or other factors that can help evaluation and course-correction if necessary.

There are also many practical challenges for integration and cooperative action between departments, especially those under different ministries. The lack of a unified database and homogeneity of definitions is one. For example the lack of a single definition of ‘village’ across ministries may create challenges for planning, budgeting and assessment for rural development schemes (Verma, 2017).

Since the outcomes are only achieved through ‘joint’ action among multiple sectors/ departments, the absence of one or more of the sectors/departments/agencies may deter others from being the ‘first movers’. For example, the lack of leadership at the district level may prevent village authorities from implementing MNREGS at the grassroots level. The human resource shortages in community creches (anganwadis) administered by the Women and Child Development ministry may hamper the provision of mid-day meals by the Ministry of Human Resource Development.

There may also be conflicts or concerns about the sequencing of sector-specific interventions in particular geographic areas or target groups. For example, should provision of water sources precede the building of toilets under the SBM? Is increasing coverage of bank accounts the first step to enrolling beneficiaries under PMUY or MNREGS?

Problems of collective action are varied and can range from lack of leadership, free-riding, penalties for those who take initiative and disproportionate power in the hands of vested interests. Each of these problems manifests itself in various contexts within India’s distributed policy-making architecture. Many potentially transformative policies are jettisoned because no authority wants to take initiative. Central governments shift responsibility to provincial governments who in turn complain about other authorities or budgetary constraints. These types

12 of challenges are hardly unique to India and can only be addressed iteratively through incremental strengthening of overall governance.

Conclusions

This analysis uncovers some key features of intersectoral policy-making in practice. The first is an overarching framing of the policy as addressing well-defined population needs. This is done by politicians rather than implementers or technical actors in the system to ensure widespread buy-in and popular support for the policies. The second key feature is to focus on specific evidence-informed interventions that are simple to deliver. The third is to clearly establish accountability; in other words identify the policy targets or outputs, who has to deliver on them and by what time frame. Finally the effectiveness of the policies require transparency in monitoring and evaluation to help amplify early gains through involvement of additional stakeholders.

We also note that achieving intersectoral goals may not always require creation of intersectoral processes or mechanisms. Discrete interventions implemented sectorally can have substantial intersectoral impacts even on wicked problems such as sanitation, pollution, nutrition and poverty as seen in the above examples from India. This is important to emphasise especially for practitioners in LMIC where resources including human resources are constrained. However, this model is inadequate for ongoing issues requiring coordination such as significant behaviour change, incremental intervention processes or managing competing policy interests. Getting around problems of collective action and coordination, requires articulation of crucial outcomes or values (e.g. good health and healthy environment) as normative goals for all of public policy. This enables priority-setting among competing outcomes of interest and alignment among policy actors regardless of their sectoral positions. There are examples of contexts where such priorities have been defined in the past e.g. of defence goals during time of war. It may well be argued that in current conditions of impending climate crisis and social inequality, these should be take priority in public policy. It may also be argued that public popularity of intersectoral social development schemes such as those discussed in this article is an indication of societal priorities. And in a democracy, societal priorities ought to be critical inputs into the definition of normative goals for public policy.

Declaration of Interests: We declare no conflicts of interest.

13 References

Afridi, F. (2010). Child welfare programs and child nutrition: Evidence from a mandated school meal program in India. Journal of Development Economics, 92(2), 152–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JDEVECO.2009.02.002 Afridi, F. (2011). The Impact of School Meals on School Participation: Evidence from Rural India. The Journal of Development Studies, 47(11), 1636–1656. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2010.514330 Afridi, F., Barooah, B., & Somanathan, R. (2013). School meals and classroom effort: Evidence from India. International Growth Centre. Retrieved February, 25, 2017. AirVisual, Iqa. (2018). World Air Quality Report. Biermann, F., Davies, O., & Van Der Grijp, N. (2009). Environmental policy integration and the architecture of global environmental governance. International environmental agreements: politics, law and economics, 9(4), 351. Business Standard. (2016). 10 years on, Centre hails MGNREGA as “national pride” | Business Standard News. Retrieved July 29, 2019, from https://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/10-years-on-centre-hails-mgnre ga-as-national-pride-116020200037_1.html Briassoulis, H. (2004). Policy integration for complex policy problems: What, why and how. Greening of Policies: Interlinkages and Policy Integration, Berlin, 3-4. Cabiyo, B., Ray, I., & Levine, D. I. (2020). The refill gap: clean cooking fuel adoption in rural India. Environmental Research Letters, 16(1), 014035. CEEW. (2018). Clean Cooking Energy Access. New Delhi. Centre for Science and Environment. (2021).World Water Day: How harvesting the raindrop is transforming lives: a special ground-report on villages using employment under MGNREGA not for drought relief, but for relief against drought. https://www.cseindia.org/world-water-day-how-harvesting-the-raindrop-is-transforming-live s-10745. Chaturvedi, H. (2019, February 12). PM Modi serves food to students at Vrindavan, asks if he turned up late. Hindustan Times. Dabadge, A., Sreenivas, A., Josey, A., Parchure, R., Darak, S., & Kulkarni, V. (2018). Fuelling the transition: Costs and benefits of using modern cooking fuels as a health intervention in India. Pune. Department of Rural Development. (2013). 42nd Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development Department of Rural Development. (2019). The Mahatma Gandhi Natural Rural Employment Guarantee Act. Retrieved July 29, 2019, from http://164.100.129.6/netnrega/app_issue.aspx?lflag=eng&fin_year=2015-2016&source=nat ional&labels=labels&Digest=+WYLWwx19OhhVOg6q39p/g DNA (2019) Ujjwala to the fore - Evident link between successful politics & effective welfare. https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/editorial-dna-edit-ujjwala-to-the-fore-evident-link-betwe en-successful-politics-effective-welfare-2786988 Dreze, J., & Goyal, A. (2003). Future of Mid-Day Meals. Economic & Politcal Weekly, 38(44), 4673–4683.

14 Economic and Political Weekly.(2015). Editorial. Mid-day meal and food politics. 23(50) Engler, J. O., Abson, D. J., & von Wehrden, H. (2021). The coronavirus pandemic as an analogy for future sustainability challenges. Sustainability Science, 16(1), 317-319. Geerlings, H., & Stead, D. (2003). The integration of land use planning, transport and environment in European policy and research. Transport policy, 10(3), 187-196. Gupta, J. (2013, June 18). Why Bihar serves poor quality meals to school kids. Down To Earth. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/why-bihar-serves-poor-quality-meals-to-school-kids-4 1692. Gupta, A., Khalid, N., Desphande, D., Hathi, P., Kapur, A., Srivastav, N., ... & Coffey, D. (2019). Changes in open defecation in rural north India: 2014-2018 Gupta, A., Khalid, N., Hathi, P., Srivastav, N., ..., & Coffey, D. (2019). Coercion, construction, and ’ODF paper pe’: Swachh Bharat according to local officials. The India Forum. International Institute for Population Sciences. (2017). National Family Health Survey (NFHS-4) 2015-16 India. International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) and ICF. https://doi.org/kwm120 [pii]10.1093/aje/kwm120 Jacob, K., Volkery, A., & Lenschow, A. (2008). Instruments for environmental policy integration in 30 OECD countries. In A. Jordan & A. Lenschow (Eds.), Innovation in environmental policy? Integrating the environment for sustainability (pp. 24–48). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Timsy Jaipuria. (2020, August 28). MNREGA-like scheme needed to assist urban poor overcome COVID impact: ISI to panel. cnbctv18.com. https://www.cnbctv18.com/economy/mnrega-like-scheme-needed-to-assist-urban-poor-ove rcome-covid-impact-panel-6765511.htm. Jordan, A., & Lenschow, A. (2010). Environmental policy integration: a state of the art review. Environmental policy and governance, 20(3), 147-158. Khayatzadeh-Mahani, A., Sedoghi, Z., Mehrolhassani, M. H., & Yazdi-Feyzabadi, V. (2016). How Health in All Policies are developed and implemented in a developing country? A case study of a HiAP initiative in Iran. Health promotion international, 31(4), 769-781. Kar, A., Pachauri, S., Bailis, R., & Zerriffi, H. (2019). Using sales data to assess cooking gas adoption and the impact of India’s Ujjwala programme in rural Karnataka. Nature Energy, 4(9), 806-814. Khera, R. (2006). Mid-day meals in primary schools: Achievements and challenges. Economic and political weekly, 4742-4750. Khera, R. (2013). Mid-day meals: Looking ahead. Economic and Political Weekly, 12-14. Kohler, G. (2011). The challenges of delivering as one: overcoming fragmentation and moving towards policy coherence. International Labour Organization. Le Blanc, D. (2015). Towards integration at last? The sustainable development goals as a network of targets. Sustainable Development, 23(3), 176-187. Mohan, R. R. (2017). Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin). Economic & Political Weekly, 52(20), 15. Nandy, D. (2018, November 5). Why linking MGNREGA payments to Aadhaar is a mistake. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/agriculture/why-linking-mgnrega-payments-to-aadhaar- is-a-mistake-63680 Nandy, D. (2019, March 21). MGNREGA is failing: 10 reasons why. Down To Earth.

15 https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/economy/mgnrega-is-failing-10-reasons-why-62035. Nunan, F., Campbell, A., & Foster, E. (2012). Environmental mainstreaming: the organisational challenges of policy integration. Public Administration and Development, 32(3), 262-277. Ollila, E. (2011). Health in all policies: from rhetoric to action. Scandinavian journal of public health, 39(6_suppl), 11-18. Pandey, A., Brauer, M., Cropper, M. L., Balakrishnan, K., Mathur, P., Dey, S., ... & Dandona, L. (2021). Health and economic impact of air pollution in the states of India: the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. The Lancet Planetary Health, 5(1), e25-e38. Panchang, S. V. (2020). Swachh Bharat mission and vulnerable populations. Economic and Political Weekly, 48-48. Paul, V. K., Singh, A., & Palit, S. (2018). POSHAN Abhiyaan: Making nutrition a jan andolan. Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy, 84(4), 835-41. Persson, A. (2004). Environmental policy integration: an introduction. PINTS–Policy Integration for Sustainability Background Paper. Stockholm Environment Institute: Stockholm. Reddy, A. (2018, June 30). How caste is marring mid-day meals. Down To Earth. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/governance/how-caste-is-marring-mid-day-meals-608 98. Reuters. (2019). Monsoon rains seen below normal this year, says Skymet | Business Standard News. Retrieved July 29, 2019, from https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/skymet-forecasts-2019-monsoon- below-normal-does-not-rule-out-drought-119040300484_1.html Sabharwal, N. S., K Naik, A., Diwakar G, D., & Sharma, S. (2014). Swallowing the Humiliation: The Mid-Day Meal and Excluded Groups. Journal of Social Inclusion Studies, 1(1), 169-182. Salvi, S., Kumar, G. A., Dhaliwal, R. S., Paulson, K., Agrawal, A., Koul, P. A., … Dandona, L. (2018). The burden of chronic respiratory diseases and their heterogeneity across the states of India: the Global Burden of Disease Study 1990-2016. The Lancet Global Health, 6(12), e1363–e1374. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30409-1 Singh, A., Park, A., & Dercon, S. (2014). School Meals as a Safety Net: An Evaluation of the Midday Meal Scheme in India. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 62(2), 275–306. https://doi.org/10.1086/674097 Smith, K. R., & Sagar, A. (2014). Making the clean available: Escaping India’s Chulha Trap. Energy Policy, 75, 410–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENPOL.2014.09.024 Ståhl, T., Wismar, M., Ollila, E., Lahtinen, E., & Leppo, K. (2006). Health in all policies. Prospects and potentials. Helsinki: Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. Tosun, J., & Lang, A. (2013, September). Coordinating and integrating cross-sectoral policies: A theoretical approach. In 7th ECPR General Conference, Bordeaux. United Nations General Assembly. (2011). Political declaration of the high-level meeting of the general assembly on the prevention and control of non-communicable diseases. Proceedings of Sixty-Sixth Session Agenda, Item, 117 Underdal, A. (1980). Integrated marine policy: what? why? how?. Marine Policy, 4(3), 159-169. Henam, S. D. and Bandela, D. R. (2020). Segregate, Segregate, Segregate: How to make it work for solid waste management, Centre for Science and Environment , New Delhi

16 Upadhyay , A. (2020, February 17). Swachh Bharat For All? Despite Community Toilets Built, Access Remains An Issue For Slum Dwellers In Delhi: Features. NDTV. https://swachhindia.ndtv.com/swachh-bharat-abhiyan-access-toilets-remains-issue-slums-4 1639/. Van de Pas, R., Hill, P. S., Hammonds, R., Ooms, G., Forman, L., Waris, A., ... & Sridhar, D. (2017). Global health governance in the sustainable development goals: Is it grounded in the right to health?. Global Challenges, 1(1), 47-60 Vasudevan, G., Singh, S., Gupta, G., & Jalajakshi, C. K. (2020). MGNREGA in the Times of COVID-19 and Beyond: Can India do More with Less? The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 63(3), 799–814. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41027-020-00247-0fgtr Verma, R. (2017, August). India Unclear How Many Villages It Has, And Why That Matters. IndiaSpend. Watkins, D. A., Nugent, R., Saxenian, H., Yamey, G., Danforth, K., González-Pier, E., ... & Jamison, D. T. (2017). Intersectoral policy priorities for health. WHO, & Government of India. (2018). Summary of preliminary estimations of potential health impacts from increased sanitation coverage through the Swachh Bharat Mission (Vol. 2015). Yamunan, S. (2019, June 11). Does Akshaya Patra actually serve midday meals in schools for free? Scroll.In.