Failed state

• Failed state is unable to project authority over its territory and peoples, and it cannot protect its national boundaries. 
• The governing capacity of a failed state is unable to fulfill the administrative and organizational tasks required to control people and resources and can provide only minimal public services. Its citizens no longer believe that their government is legitimate, and the state becomes illegitimate in the eyes of the international community.
• A failed state is composed of feeble and flawed institutions. Often, the executive barely functions, while the legislature, judiciary, bureaucracy, and armed forces have lost their capacity and professional independence. 
• A failed state suffers from crumbling infrastructures, faltering utility supplies and educational and health facilities, and deteriorating basic human-development indicators, such as infant mortality and literacy rates. 
• Failed states create an environment of flourishing corruption and negative growth rates, where honest economic activity cannot flourish.
• A strong state provides core guarantees to its citizens and others under its jurisdiction in the three interrelated realms of security, economics, and politics. State failure comes in degrees and is often a function of both the collapse of state institutions and societal collapse.
• A failed state cannot maintain a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence and minimize internal conflict. It cannot formulate or implement public policies to effectively build infrastructure and deliver services or effective and equitable economic policies. 
• It cannot provide for the representation and political empowerment of its citizens or protect civil liberties and fundamental human rights. State failure manifests itself when a state can no longer deliver physical security, a productive economic environment, and a stable political system for its people.
• The total collapse of the state marks the final, extreme phase of state failure, and very few states can be described as completely failed or collapsed. 
• Many states suffer from various degrees of weakness and are therefore potential candidates for failure. Weak states were failing with increasing frequency, most of them in Africa but also a handful in Asia and the Middle East, and failed states are known to be hospitable to dangerous warlords and groups that commit terrorist acts. 
• Somalia and Afghanistan under the Taliban regime, are examples of states failure completely.
• Understanding the dynamics of state failure and strengthening weak nation-states in the developing world assumes new urgency.
• 25 Most failed states in the world are:

Read the source article

India qualifies many aspects of 'failed state' but not yet failed. But if you look from view point of poorest man it is definitely a failed state.

Public policy implemetation

Conservatives are always scary about the increase in the size and scope of government. If the pitfalls and costs of implementation were properly understood, many policies would not be authorized, no matter how well intentioned. Recognize that central programs must be implemented locally. Implementation costs money and money is especially important politically when tax payers are in revolt.

Conservatives distrust governmental authority and wish to minimize the scope and cost of governmental activities. They are inherently suspicious of governmental bureaucracy. Liberals propose public policy solutions to a wide range of social problems, often ignoring the questions of the feasibility of implementation. Keep the government's hands off. Let the local level control and implement policy wherever feasible. Minimize and localize the activities of government and the scope of public policy. A policy may face unforeseen problems and must come with enough flexibility to allow government to change the course.

This is how governmental programs should be put into effect: 

1. When in doubt, stay out.
2. If something must be done, understand the behavioral dynamics and change the rules of the game without spending money.
3. Hire a private contractor and do not try to produce the good or service directly through government. 
4. When government must finance something, make sure that the money goes directly to the beneficiaries, not through indirect channels.
5. If government must finance and administer, competition must be permitted as a yardstick to gauge success and cost.
6. When government must obtain resources, it should purchase them in markets.
7. When government produces a good or service, it should, when possible, charge the users a pro rated cost, not give away the good or service free of charge.
8. Only as a last resort, when all the above has failed, should government finance, administer, and deliver the good or service free of charge.

Increased governance stresses the cost of government. And taxes depress other forms of spending, such as consumption and investment. A public policy will necessarily spend money, and money is central to this subject. 

Any policy is as good as it is administered

Authoritarian regime of Modi believes in majoritarianism and not secular at all. Ambedkar has rightly described as 'democracy in India is only a top-dressing on an Indian soil, which is essentially undemocratic'. Opaqueness in administration is increasing and none of the principles of democracy are being followed by Modi regime and institutions are getting reduced to nothing. None of the above rules are being followed in public policy administration. Whims are in the forefront.

IAS should be abolished. Why?

In India, no person from well to do family will aspire for job. They either continue family's existing businesses or start new enterprises. It is mostly middle & lower classes with meager disposable money look for jobs. IAS, without any doubt remains most preferred job ever since independence.

• Around half a million youngsters across the country attempt the preliminary test of the Civil Services Examinations conducted by the UPSC every year. The final recruitment is for 1000 officers in Central and All-India Civil Services. Out of which 100 officers are for IAS.
• Considering the difficulty levels of the exam, and the tiny proportion of applicants who make it as final recruits, the exam is considered one of India’s toughest. The ones who clear it are hailed as India’s brightest.
• Hard work through a long period of slogging for the exam helps but sheer luck is not ruled out.
• The recruitment system is a legacy of the colonial ICS that gave way to the IAS and over the years, the exam pattern was updated to make it more inclusive.
• The bureaucracy in India continues to be a relic. It is an archaic system designed for a poor colonial state and definitely not for a modern democracy and a major economy. 
• There have even been a few calls for the abolition of the IAS. There is no doubt that it needs urgent reforms. 
• The exam is not designed to recruit for the specific needs of various services. It is a generalist selection for specialist roles.
• Other than successful IAS candidates, for all others it was neither their first choice nor the line of career that they were best suited for. 
• As a generalist service, the IAS offers a variety of work and powers than the other specialist services. Early in their careers, IAS officers are entrusted with administrative powers for the maintenance of law and order, revenue collection, implementing development works and social schemes and performing quasi-judicial functions in districts with huge perks & privileges, attractive for an average Indian youth.
• The District Collector, post reserved exclusively for the IAS, is the Chief Executive of a district entrusted with immense responsibilities and commensurate powers. Collector for a district or Commissioner for a Municipal Corporation is similar to CM of a state and PM of the Union but without any accountability to the electorate and enjoys job security and promotions despite poor performance.
• After a decade in the districts, IAS officers move into Secretariats, where they run the Ministries and Departments of the State and Union governments and it is the IAS, with its historical advantage in pay and promotions, that is able to monopolize the most senior roles.
• A non-IAS officer can never become secretary of a department even after serving for full life time.
• IAS leadership of the bureaucracy had always scuttled administrative reforms for lateral entry of domain experts that threatens their monopoly, so far. Non-specialist IAS officers have retarded the progress of  the nation, so far.
• It is assumed that the common generalist exam looks for trainability so that any service-specific skills and knowledge required for the job can be imparted during training or picked while working.
• The UPSC would do well to conduct separate exams for each service, with candidates having desired skills and interest in the job. This will have our youth entering, say, the Indian Police Service because they really want to become IPS officers, and not because they missed the IAS by a few marks.
• A maturing democracy must further devolute powers to districts, cities and towns, strengthening elected representatives and reducing the discretionary powers of bureaucrats. The State government which doesn't want to lose its control over local bodies and IAS will fight tooth and nail to preserve its present powers. It is evident that any desirable administrative reform would not be possible because of the mere existence of the IAS. 

Power is thrilling only when misused especially for corruption. 

Otherwise it is a huge liability and burdensome.

Learning by working is a slow process and prone for errors and mistakes with depth of knowledge restricted. The fastest and easiest way to learn is through is university graduation, post graduation and doctorate courses. Today IAS officers are mostly jack of all trades and master of nothing and yet commands immense power on people & society. Their half knowledge is often disastrous. The minister and his secretary have no expertise and yet direct departments with specialists in performance of its duties. Very often IAS officers assist ministers indulging in corruption subverting rules, of course for a cut. Otherwise ministers have no knowledge of procedures and rules. During past twenty years private sector salaries are so high, some bright IAS officers are leaving govt to join corporates. Yet youth aspires for IAS because of power, perks and corruption money. In order for our country to progress as a nation, administrative reforms are a must; and for reforms IAS is stumbling blockade; hence IAS must be abolished even if it is disruptive. Otherwise we will be progressing rather slowly.