By Manvi Khanna,
Over the past couple of months, significant attention has been drawn to the prowess of Digital Public Infrastructures (DPIs), a key G20 buzzword and an emerging linchpin in solving some of the societal problems facing us today. The G20 Digital Economy Outcome Document under India’s Presidency is testament to this success. In a first, twenty jurisdictions have agreed to a working definition of DPIs and a set of technology, governance, and community-based principles to harness the opportunities offered by DPIs.
The Indian DPI ecosystem, commonly known as the India Stack, built one layer at a time, has been transformative in unlocking the power of identity through Aadhaar, enabling seamless payments through Unified Payments Interface and unbundling the value that data-sharing may generate across sectors. As we navigate further, digital pathways such as Account Aggregators, Open Network for Digital Commerce, Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission, and Agristack promise to propel the Indian digital economy further into a future defined by inclusivity and innovation.
Taking stock of this journey so far and looking ahead to what’s on the horizon, a critical cog appears missing—a coordinating avenue to ensure these DPIs talk to each other. As we experiment with these infrastructures in sectors like finance, commerce, health, and agriculture, it is important to take a step back and prevent each sectoral DPI from developing in a silo. Though the lack of a coordinating body in the DPI ecosystem may not present immediate and visible concerns, the imperative to integrate DPIs with the wider digital Indian economy is undeniable. Amidst the intricacies associated with inter-regulatory and inter-authority consultations in India, a coordinating body established at a central level would be peremptory in bringing together key governance institutions responsible for operationalising various DPIs and facilitating cross-sectoral regular information exchange.
The idea of setting up a coordinating body may sound novel. However, is not unprecedented in India. Back in 2010, the Financial Stability and Development Council (FSDC) was established by the government of India to enhance inter-regulatory coordination and institutionalise the mechanism for maintaining financial stability. It includes representation from the ministry of finance and each of the financial sector regulators—Reserve Bank of India, Securities and Exchange Board of India, Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority, and Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India. Over time, the FSDC evolved to include representatives from the ministry of corporate affairs and the ministry of electronics and information technology as well as other regulators like the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India and the International Financial Services Centres Authority.
On the global stage, the benefits of having a centralised coordinating body for DPIs are well-documented. For instance, the UK has established a Smart Data Council this year to leverage upon the success of open banking. The Council will work on smart data initiatives across sectors to foster healthy competition as well as drive down costs for the consumers. With the aim of bringing together all bodies steering the delivery of smart data initiatives, including energy and telecom sectors, this Council comprises key players from government departments, regulators, industry and consumer groups.
In Australia, Consumer Data Right (CDR) is the national data portability initiative that gives consumers the right to access their own data or share it with an accredited data recipient based on consent. Spearheaded by the Treasury along with the competition regulators, CDR is an economy wide right being actively rolled out across sectors including banking, energy and telecommunication. The Statutory Review of the CDR unveiled a governance hiccup resulting from lack of cross-sectoral functions in the present governance arrangement which led to back and forth between regulators.
This journey towards building for billions and promoting financial and social inclusion across sectors has garnered wide-scale acceptance on a population scale. To sustain this momentum rather amplify it, embracing a ‘whole-of-government’ approach—one that encourages collaboration between different institutional mechanisms responsible for various DPIs through a coordinating body warrants merit for several reasons. First, in the evolving DPI ecosystem, a coordinating body is crucial to establish consensus on key shared elements common across a spectrum of DPIs.
These elements include but are not limited to user privacy, consumer autonomy, strategies for building trust and design inclusively. Second, this coordinating body, with the flexibility to broaden membership to include representatives from sectors slated for DPI deployment in the future, will facilitate cross-sectoral convergence. This adaptability can ensure alignment in the strategy for the roll-out of DPIs, both nationally and internationally. Third, through enhanced and regular information exchange, the coordinating body becomes an avenue for sharing findings and learnings. Without this, it becomes nearly impossible to unlock and draw synergies, avoid duplication of efforts, identify opportunities to allay interoperability concerns and paint a more interconnected picture of the capabilities and challenges of the DPI ecosystem.
Based on The State Shall- Trust, Innovate, Protect, Deliver, published by Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy
(The author is Former research fellow, Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy) Views are personal.
