Word of caution on rural roads scheme

If successfully implemented, Karnataka government’s Pragati Patha scheme could significantly improve infrastructure, boost connectivity to key services like schools, hospitals and markets, and contribute to overall economic growth in the state’s rural heartland.

The Karnataka government’s Pragati Patha scheme, announced in the 2024-25 budget, promises to bring much needed infrastructure development to rural areas by upgrading 7,110 km of road across 189 Assembly constituencies. The scheme aims to lay 37.6 km of road in each constituency, which would improve connectivity, stimulate rural economies, and potentially uplift local communities. The total estimated cost of the initiative is Rs 5,190 crore, with 70% of the funding expected to come from external sources. Having received approval from NITI Ayog, the state government is now awaiting clearance from the Union finance ministry to begin work. At first glance, Pragathi Patha appears to be a much-needed step forward for rural development, especially given that many roads in these constituencies are in a poor state, having been laid over a decade ago under schemes such as the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana and Namma Grama Namma Raste Yojane. If successfully implemented, this scheme could significantly improve infrastructure, boost connectivity to key services like schools, hospitals and markets, and contribute to overall economic growth in the state’s rural heartland. 

However, beneath the surface of this ambitious initiative lie several concerns. One of the immediate worries is the politics of this scheme. Pragathi Patha seems as much about placating MLAs as about rural development. With the government facing financial constraints due to the launch of various guarantee schemes, several legislators have been complaining about inadequate development funds for their constituencies, and this scheme is being seen as a way to deal with their dissatisfaction. The temptation for these MLAs to use the project as a means to curry favour with the voters and supporters is high. A scheme that was designed to benefit the community could easily be exploited for narrow political gains. There are already several instances of MLAs favouring certain religious groups or supporters when deciding which roads to develop. This could lead to a situation where infrastructure is provided selectively, reinforcing divisions rather than fostering inclusivity. 

There is also a risk of corruption, a common problem with such projects, in the absence of adequate scrutiny. A large portion of the funding comes from external sources at substantial interest cost. It is essential that the contracts are awarded strictly in adherence with the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Act, with utmost fairness and integrity. It should not be a road to political patronage, but a path to progress that connects villages to opportunities and resources. If managed correctly, this scheme could be a catalyst for rural development, benefiting communities across the state.