Sir Joshua Reynolds once remarked—in a quote famously posted by Thomas Edison around his laboratories—that “there is no expedient to which a man will not resort to avoid the real labor of thinking.”
Inspired by this insight, I kept a small plaque reading simply “THINK” on my desk throughout my public service career. It served as a daily reminder never to let routine administrative inertia dull my creative capacity.
Creative, critical thinking is not a luxury in public administration; it is a necessity for effective policymaking.
Consider a prime example from environmental policy: In 2009, Elinor Ostrom was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics for demonstrating that local and indigenous communities can effectively prevent forest degradation when given a direct stake in resource management. Yet, long before this theory gained international acclaim, Odisha had already validated it in practice. Administrators observed that tribal villagers who harvested firewood consistently spared certain trees—specifically those yielding direct, long-term benefits.
Translating this insight into action, the state pioneered social forestry initiatives. Vacant government wastelands were allotted to local communities to cultivate for firewood, granting them full usage rights over the output. The results were transformative:
- Forest Preservation: Encroachment and illicit logging in deep forests declined significantly.
- Community Stewardship: Local residents actively protected and maintained the social forests.
- Economic Upliftment: Rural livelihoods and living standards improved.
This principle of incentivizing community participation was later successfully adapted to safeguard mangrove ecosystems, protect sea turtle habitats, and boost reservoir fisheries by granting local fishermen harvesting rights.
To systematically foster this brand of creative problem-solving across government, I advocate for a simple yet powerful structural tool: continuous, framework-driven project evaluation.
By establishing dedicated core teams to evaluate projects across four key parameters—Input, Output, Outcome, and Impact—at every stage of execution (formulation, implementation, and completion), policymakers gain the agility to make timely course corrections. This analytical framework applies equally to social sectors like health and education as it does to regulatory functions.
When leadership sets an ambitious policy goal, a dynamic bureaucracy should not merely execute orders mechanically; it must devise creative, cost-effective pathways to achieve them. To cultivate this mindset, I recommend a simple habit: senior officials should set aside at least one quiet hour each day purely to think—reflecting deeply on innovative, more effective ways to serve the public good.
✍️ About the Author
Dr. U. Sarat Chandran is a retired IAS officer, former Additional Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Odisha, former Advisor to the IMF, former Secretary-General of the Colombo Plan (Sri Lanka), and former Private Secretary to Dr Manmohan Singh during his tenure as Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission.
⚖️ Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial stance of Pragativadi.com. Pragativadi remains committed to providing a platform for diverse perspectives while upholding its editorial independence and integrity.
