Reform in Practice: Manjushree RM (Vidhi) on Strengthening India’s Reform Pipeline

What is one area of regulation in India that should be deregulated?

You know, I really tried to think about this question for the last couple of days and I realized that all the economists that we've heard from during the course of this conference are much better placed to tell you what specific area or what specific rule or what specific law requires, you know, relaxation. I think the thing that I would rephrase this to mean is beyond thinking about areas or rules or laws that require deregulation, what are the components in the public policy pipeline that it takes to pull off a successful deregulation exercise? And I think the thing that I have begun to see value in over the last six and a half years at working at Pithi is between the best ideas and who is supposed to be the ideal receptor of those ideas, there is a bridging exercise or a pipeline that needs to be able to translate the best ideas available on how something ought to be done to who is actually doing it. And the lesser distortion there is in the way, the better those ideas ultimately reflect in how they take shape.

So for instance, at Pithi, the work that we do specifically is drafting laws. And the feeling that I'm sort of, you know, getting as I'm hearing a lot more conversations on deregulation is that there is a lot of ideas in the room in terms of what needs to be relaxed, etc. But it is equally important for us to ensure those ideas travel in a way that they're baked into the final legal documents that are going to effectuate deregulations, which are going to happen through either new laws or amending some existing laws, amending existing rules.

So that is an entire process in and of itself. And I think in India, that translational layer between the best ideas and who are the implementers of ideas is a muscle that could use some more strengthening. And if there is one thing that I think I'd like for young researchers to think about is that translation is equally important as the ideas themselves.

And more capacity in translation just means better ideas that travel through the pipeline, lesser chances of a distortion, noise-to-signal ratios as we like it to be. And they ultimately take the shape that we want them to.

Strengthening the reform pipeline

I think when we talk about the government who is going to ultimately be implementing these ideas, there's a tendency to think about the government as a bit of a monolith.

But when we actually get into the business of carrying out a reform of this nature, what we end up realizing is that you're talking to everyone from that's a principal secretary to an undersecretary to line officers to the law department that will finally vet a draft and send it across. And often you're also dealing with a revolving situation of, you know, bureaucrats moving around and, you know, catching up with continuity and the like. So there is an understudied complexity to the process that is beyond just having the right ideas in that when we approach the org structure of the government, there is a lot that we can do to ensure that the best ideas are not lost in coordination, because coordination is one of the biggest challenges that I think that we try and solve for it with heat.

And what I'm trying to get to is that there is meaningful work that needs to be done to ensure that that doesn't happen. And we've done it enough to know that there is also complexity in that part of the pipeline. And if we start paying more attention there, so much of what we want to say will travel without disruption.

What role can young researchers play?

I've often thought about it, even in terms of what is the best way a lawyer like myself can be useful in a deregulation exercise, like parts of me wants to think that the reason a bunch of this, you know, laws exist is because lawyers have a way of speaking or making things very, very complex, and I'm sure legally is being a complex body and inaccessible body of like, you know, work is, you know, a bit of a pervasive sentiment. But having said that, how can we be part of the larger solution in deregulation is a question that I've often asked myself too. And that's where I think this becomes very interesting in that the path to idea to execution, I think has space for a lot of actors.

And I think it might be helpful for young researchers to think about not where they can shine the brightest, but where their value has the most utility for this entire pipeline of deregulation. And I think as lawyers, or hopefully, if there are any lawyers watching what I'm saying, a good way that we can all be part of the solution is to take and understand and have to develop our instincts about deregulation with the best ideas that exist out there, ensure that the, you know, we are very fair and meritocratic in the way where we evaluate what is the best idea to take to the bureaucrat, be selective about that, present a range of options that are going to be, you know, political economy problems that is not going to end up as not choosing the best solution at all points in time, but it is still worth trying. So let us keep at it and ensure that something will come out of that.

But at least for young lawyers, and if that's who I would hope to reach through something like this, there is value and there is definitely merit in being in the last mile of this pipeline. And I hope that more lawyers are able to look at their role in public policy or deregulation.