India’s Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) system—one of the world’s most ambitious digital welfare initiatives—channels subsidies directly into bank accounts via biometric and mobile platforms. While hailed for reducing corruption and improving efficiency, it often imposes new barriers for the poor, elderly, women, and marginalized groups. Fingerprint mismatches, network failures, and banking errors translate into exclusion, routinely dismissed as technical glitches. This chapter argues that DBT represents not mere reform but the rise of technocratic rationality, which prioritizes efficiency and auditability over justice and dignity. Drawing on Weber, Scott, Eubanks, and Morozov, it situates India within global debates on digital welfare and social justice. Comparative cases from Brazil, Estonia, Kenya, and Jamaica reveal that empowerment depends less on technology than on institutional design. The chapter concludes by proposing reforms to reorient digital welfare towards rights, care, and democratic accountability.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Digital States, Analog Lives: Technocratic Rationality and the Politics of Exclusion in India’s DBT Welfare Regime

  • Rejitha Nair,
  • T. Kannan

摘要

India’s Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) system—one of the world’s most ambitious digital welfare initiatives—channels subsidies directly into bank accounts via biometric and mobile platforms. While hailed for reducing corruption and improving efficiency, it often imposes new barriers for the poor, elderly, women, and marginalized groups. Fingerprint mismatches, network failures, and banking errors translate into exclusion, routinely dismissed as technical glitches. This chapter argues that DBT represents not mere reform but the rise of technocratic rationality, which prioritizes efficiency and auditability over justice and dignity. Drawing on Weber, Scott, Eubanks, and Morozov, it situates India within global debates on digital welfare and social justice. Comparative cases from Brazil, Estonia, Kenya, and Jamaica reveal that empowerment depends less on technology than on institutional design. The chapter concludes by proposing reforms to reorient digital welfare towards rights, care, and democratic accountability.