💥Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Donor Agencies

  • Aid may be dead. Long live international development

    Why in the News

    International aid flows fell by over 23% last year, and a further fall is projected this year. The old aid architecture was already failing, so the Global South needs new routes to international development rather than a return to aid.

    Why are aid flows collapsing?

    1. What international aid is: Grants, cheap loans and technical help that richer countries and agencies give poorer ones for development. It works like a scholarship the donor can withdraw at will.
    2. US trigger: The US President’s decision to axe 80 to 85% of the projects and contracts of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) set off the decline.
    3. Other donors’ cuts: Other donors are also cutting aid, for three reasons:
      • changing political priorities;
      • fiscal constraints;
      • domestic discontent.
    4. Hardest hit: The poorest recipients lose most and have little time to find alternatives. For some, losing aid threatens basic survival, an existential shift whose human costs must be addressed.
    5. The takeaway: Aid is shrinking fastest for the countries with the fewest fallback options.

    Was the old aid system worth saving?

    1. No golden age: The old aid regime was never as good as it is remembered, so golden-age thinking about it misleads.
    2. Distance from the ground: Donors stayed disconnected from local people and practised excessive, misguided management, which hurt even well intended aid packages.
    3. Strings attached: Less scrupulous deals tied aid to donors’ geopolitical goals. Recipients paid with their strategic autonomy, their freedom to set their own policy.
    4. Creaking architecture: The system already suffered from problems of legitimacy, efficiency and accountability, so a fundamental rethink is overdue for donors and recipients alike.

    What four routes does the column propose for international development?

    1. Weaponised interdependence: Major powers now use trade and supply links as pressure, which pushes states to turn inward and rearm. Developing countries can offer critical minerals and ports for technology transfer, training and jobs, not mere extraction.
    2. Revamping multilateral bodies: Developing countries should jointly reform bodies such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) to serve development. Eg. The WTO’s Doha Development Agenda, and the shift from “trade not aid” to “aid for trade”, meaning aid that builds poor countries’ capacity to trade.
    3. Deep ecology: This view treats human, species and planetary well-being as one, an idea rooted in Indigenous and Southern traditions. It can replace aid models that were West-centric and anthropocentric, meaning human centred.
    4. People and planet: “Demand-driven” and “bottom-up” reform follows what communities ask for, so it leaves out other species, which cannot speak. India’s G20 presidency treated all existence as interconnected and advanced the well-being of people and planet.

    Challenges

    1. Bargaining gap: Many poor countries lack the capacity to turn mineral wealth into fair contracts. Eg. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) loans, criticised as “debt-trap diplomacy”.
    2. Weak multilateralism: WTO negotiations rarely conclude now. Eg. The Yaoundé ministerial (2026) closed without consensus.
    3. Immediate human cost: Structural reform takes years, but health and food programmes stop at once.
    4. Donor driven agendas: Recipients often bend their priorities to donor preferences, distorting national needs.
    5. Vague ecological framing: Deep ecology has no agreed measures, so it can stay rhetoric in negotiations.

    Way Forward

    1. Value added deals: Critical mineral agreements should require local processing, training and technology transfer.
    2. Southern coalition at the WTO: Developing countries should table a joint development package at the next ministerial.
    3. Aid effectiveness: Donors should follow the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (2005), which puts recipient ownership and mutual accountability first.
    4. Domestic resources: Recipients should raise their tax to GDP ratio to cut aid dependence.
    5. Bridge funding: South-South funds should sustain essential health programmes during the transition.

    Conclusion

    The fall in aid exposes a system that had lost legitimacy long before its funding dried up. What remains unresolved is whether developing countries can turn their resource leverage into partnerships that build capability rather than a new dependence.

    What are donor agencies?

    1. About: Bilateral, multilateral or private organisations that give financial aid, technical assistance and policy support to recipient countries.
    2. Multilateral and bilateral donors: Multilateral donors include the World Bank and UN bodies. Bilateral donors include USAID and the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).
    3. Private and climate funds: Foundations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Green Climate Fund, also finance development.
    4. USAID’s end: Set up in 1961, USAID was formally closed on 1 July 2025, and its surviving programmes moved to the US State Department.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2024, GS2, 10 marks] Public charitable trusts have the potential to make India’s development more inclusive as they relate to certain vital public issues. Comment.”

  • How temples deal with donations

    Why in the News?

    Allegations of embezzlement of offerings and donations at the Ram Janmabhoomi Temple in Ayodhya have brought temple donation-handling systems under scrutiny. The episode has revealed that the Ram Temple trust operates without the statutory audit and oversight structures that govern India’s other major temples. The Ram Temple Construction Committee has sought a professional CEO while the Vishwa Hindu Parishad has demanded that temples across India be freed from government control.

    Why has the Ram Temple donations controversy exposed a broader gap in temple financial oversight?

    1. Trigger: Allegations of embezzlement of offerings and donations surfaced at the Ram Janmabhoomi Temple in Ayodhya. The allegations brought the temple’s donation-handling process into public scrutiny.
    2. Scale of the sector: India has no official count of Hindu temples. Estimates put the number at around 10 lakh.
    3. Common donation chain: Most major temples follow a similar process. Offerings are removed from donation boxes. They are then moved to counting centres for segregation, counting, and recording. Verified collections are deposited into designated bank accounts under CCTV surveillance.
    4. Unaccounted donations: Most temples are small shrines maintained by local communities or hereditary priests. A large share of cash and in-kind donations at these temples remains unaccounted for.
    5. Scale of major temple donations: Tirupati received ₹1,880 crore in annual donations, followed by Vaishno Devi at ₹230 crore, the Ram Temple at ₹150 crore, Siddhivinayak at ₹100 crore, Kashi Vishwanath at ₹80 crore, and Puri Jagannath at ₹18 crore.

    How does the Ram Temple’s donation-handling and governance framework differ institutionally from India’s other major temples?

    1. Ram Temple: The Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust manages donations through a trust deed, a private legal instrument creating and governing a trust, without dedicated statutory backing. No dedicated state statute governs the temple’s administration.
    2. Tirupati: The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams operates under the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act. Its ‘Parakamani‘ system segregates finance, vigilance, and banking functions among separate personnel groups.
    3. Puri Jagannath: The Shri Jagannath Temple Act governs the temple. Hundis are sealed before and after opening, and entries are recorded in statutory forms.
    4. Vaishno Devi: The Jammu and Kashmir Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Act governs the shrine. A Shrine Board, not individual trustees, opens donation boxes through dedicated finance and security departments.
    5. Siddhivinayak: A Maharashtra law governs the temple’s trust. The main hundi is opened weekly in the presence of an executive officer, a trustee, a bank representative, and an auditor.
    6. Kashi Vishwanath: The Uttar Pradesh Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Act governs the temple. A Sub-Divisional Magistrate supervises the opening of its 56 donation boxes.
    7. Key distinction: Unlike these temples, the Ram Temple trust is not subject to mandatory financial audit by the state or central government. Several of its key office-bearers have long-standing associations with the RSS or its affiliates.

    Does statutory governance guarantee that temple donations remain free of controversy?

    1. Tirupati: The temple has tightened access controls, vigilance, and surveillance over the years after instances of theft involving employees and volunteers.
    2. Puri Jagannath: The Ratna Bhandar dispute centred on the custody and inventory of temple valuables. It led to court-directed scrutiny and fresh inventories.
    3. Kashi Vishwanath: Efforts have increasingly focused on routing donations through official channels. This shifts donations away from direct offerings to priests.
    4. Siddhivinayak: The temple has periodically faced scrutiny over governance and financial management.
    5. Implication: Institutional safeguards at older temples were built over time, not overnight. The Ram Temple’s current gap reflects its early stage of institutional development, not a unique failure.

    What traditions of temple management operate independent of statutory government frameworks?

    1. Family management: Temples are often managed by hereditary priest lineages known as pandas or pujaris. Offerings, donations, and ritual responsibilities traditionally belong to these families. Control rotates when multiple families are involved.
    2. Family management example: The Udupi Sri Krishna Mutt in Karnataka is administered by eight monasteries called the Ashta Mathas, founded by the 13th-century saint Madhvacharya. Each matha manages the mutt for two years. The next cycle for a matha comes only after 16 years.
    3. Mahant system: A single spiritual head, called a mahant, a spiritual head holding administrative and successor-nominating authority over a math, holds prime authority over temple assets, offerings, and administration. He typically appoints or nominates his successor.
    4. Mahant system example: The Gorakhnath Math in Gorakhpur is headed by Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath. He was appointed by the late Mahant Avaidyanath. Similar successor-based systems operate in the Shankaracharya mathas.
    5. Akhada system: Akhadas are autonomous organisations of sadhus that function as collective bodies with elected or consensus-based heads. They are also called Panchayati Akhadas, self-governing collectives of sadhus functioning through elected or consensus-based heads.
    6. Akhada system role: Akhadas appoint priests, oversee rituals, and control donations. They are prioritised for the holy dip at the Mahakumbh according to their relative status.

    Why has the Ram Temple donations controversy revived the debate over the extent of state control over religious institutions?

    1. Colonial origin of state control: The British introduced the Religious Endowments Act in 1863. It handed control of temples to committees set up under the Act, but the government retained influence through other legal provisions.
    2. Statutory blueprint: The Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1925 empowered provincial governments to legislate on endowments. Its powers expanded over time to include oversight and takeover of temple management. It became the blueprint for later state laws after Independence.
    3. Constitutional basis: Article 25(2) (The constitutional provision allowing the state to regulate secular activities linked to religious practice) empowers the state to regulate or restrict any economic, financial, political, or other secular activity associated with religious practice. This provision is the basis for state legislation governing temple endowments.
    4. Asymmetry across religions: Muslim and Christian institutions are managed through community-run boards or trusts. Statutory government-linked frameworks of the kind that govern major Hindu temples do not apply to them in the same way.
    5. Rival demands: The Ram Temple Construction Committee has proposed appointing a CEO to manage trust affairs. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad has instead called for temples across the country to be freed from government control.

    Conclusion

    The Ram Temple donations controversy stems from a specific institutional gap. The temple is governed by a trust deed, not a dedicated statute, and is not subject to mandatory financial audit. Bringing it under a statutory or audit framework similar to other major temples would close this specific gap. It would not by itself guarantee immunity from future controversy, since statutorily governed temples such as Tirupati, Puri, Kashi Vishwanath, and Siddhivinayak have all faced their own governance disputes. The unresolved question is political: whether India moves toward greater statutory oversight of temples or toward the Vishwa Hindu Parishad’s demand to free them from government control altogether.

    PYQ Relevance

    [UPSC 2024] Public charitable trusts have the potential to make India’s development more inclusive as they relate to certain vital public issues. Comment.

    Relevance: The PYQ tests the role of religious and charitable trusts in governance, public welfare, accountability, and inclusive development. The article examines how major temple trusts manage donations, institutional governance, transparency mechanisms, and the extent of state regulation, making it a direct case study of public charitable trusts in India.

  • Do you agree with the view that increasing dependence on donor agencies for development reduces the importance of community participation in the development process ? Justify your answer.

    The Indian Constitution envisions a Welfare State under the DPSP. Donor agencies play a vital role in financing and technical support for these welfare measures.

    Increasing Dependence Reduces Community Participation

    Top-Down Project Design, with limited grassroots consultation.

    Erosion of Local Ownership – Beneficiary communities become recipients, not stakeholders

    Conditionalities restrict local policy space. Eg- IMF’s 1991 Structural Adjustment Programme reduced social sector expenditure

    Dependency Syndrome – Over-reliance on external funding discourages domestic resource mobilization and self-reliance. (A.G.Frank – “development of underdevelopment.”)

    Marginalization of Traditional Knowledge – Donor-driven modern approaches often ignore indigenous practices and local innovation.

    Transparency and Accountability Gaps – lack of clear monitoring frameworks or open reporting mechanisms limits public scrutiny and impact evaluation.

    Foreign Influence – Eg-Concerns were raised about World Vision India allegedly promoting religious conversion using foreign funds.

    Positive Role of Donor Agencies in Development

    Resource Mobilization – World Bank funding for the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM)

    Capacity Building – – DFID’s Bihar Rural Livelihood Project (JEEViKA) strengthened the capacity of SHGs and Panchayats.

    Donor agencies often introduce bottom-up approaches and emphasize stakeholder consultation.

    Catalyzing Policy Reforms – Eg- IMF’s fiscal frameworks encouraged better macroeconomic management post-1991 reforms.

    Promotion of Human Development – – UNICEF and UNFPA have supported India’s Reproductive and Child Health Programme (RCH-II) and Poshan Abhiyaan.

    Strengthening Civil Society – – UNDP’s Disha Project (with IKEA Foundation) enhanced employability of 1 million rural women across 10 states.

    Donor agencies are “integral cogs in the wheel of good governance”. A balanced partnership with government is crucial make development inclusive, sustainable and rapid..

  • Public charitable trusts have the potential to make India’s development more inclusive as they relate to certain vital public issues. Comment.

    Public charitable trusts (PCTs) are non-profit legal entities and act as social capital institutions that complement the government in achieving inclusive and sustainable development.

    Role of Public Charitable Trusts in Promoting Inclusive Development

    Expanding Access to Education – Eg- Azim Premji Foundation Trust – runs 3500+ schools and Azim Premji University to democratize education.

    Strengthening Healthcare Access in underserved areas. Eg-Tata Trusts: Developed Cancer Care Network – 17 cancer centres in Tier-II cities.

    Promoting Rural Livelihoods and Skill Development – Eg- Aga Khan Rural Support Programme benefited 1.5 million rural households through watershed and women’s cooperatives in Gujarat and MP.

    Addressing Social Inequality and Marginalization – Eg-Smile Foundation runs Mission Education and Swabhiman programs benefiting 750,000 underprivileged children

    Environmental Sustainability – Invest in water conservation, renewable energy, and afforestation projects. Eg- Go Green Initiative of Wadia trust

    Disaster Relief and Humanitarian Response – Eg-Akshaya Patra Foundation delivered meals during COVID-19 lockdowns.

    Promoting Democratic Participation and Rights Awareness – Eg- Centre for Equity Studies promotes policy reforms for migrant and urban poor welfare.

    Promoting Research and Policy Innovation – Eg- PRIDE India documents and disseminates data on women’s representation in local governance.

    Challenges in the Functioning of Public Charitable Trusts

    Regulatory Complexity: Multiple laws (Income Tax, FCRA, Trusts Act) create compliance burden.

    Transparency Deficit: Eg- CBI report: <10% NGOs file audited financial statements.

    Urban Bias leaves rural regions underserved.

    Duplication: Overlap among similar welfare programs reduces efficiency.

    Funding Constraints – Heavy dependence on foreign or donor funding.

    Anti Developmental Role – Eg- IB Report – NGO activism leading to loss of 2% of GDP

    Way Forward

    Vijay Kumar Committee Recommendations: ‘Light regulation’ of NGO

    2nd ARC: enact a law to set up an independent National Accreditation Council

    Create formal government-NGO platforms (as in Kerala’s Kudumbashree).

    This can strengthen Public charitable trusts act as agents of equity and inclusion, aligning private philanthropy with public good.