On January 1 2015, the Government of India replaced
the 64-year-old Yojana Aayog (Planning Commission) with a new institution named
NITI Aayog (National Institution for Transforming India).
The NITI Aayog has a distinctly innovative
structure to enable states to participate in policy making which would help
India become a challenging economic power.
The objective of the NITI Aayog is “to
provide a critical directional and strategic participation into the development
process”. It will act as a “think-tank” and advise the Centre
and states on policy matters.
Structure of NITI Aayog –
i. Chairman – The
Prime Minister will be the chairman of NITI Aayog.
ii. 1 Vice Chairman
– Arvind
Panagariya (eminent
economist) is
the first Vice Chairman of Niti Aayog.
iii. 2 Full
time members – Bibek Debroy, an Economist, and V.K. Saraswat, Former
Secretary Defence R&D, are the full time members of the Aayog.
iv. Ex-officio 4 members – Union Ministers Rajnath Singh, Arun Jaitley,
Suresh Prabhu and Radha Mohan Singh have been named Ex-officio members.
iv. Special Invitees – Union Ministers Nitin Gadkari, Thawar
Chand Gehlot and Smriti Irani are special invitees.
v. It will also have a Governing Council, comprising
Chief Ministers of each of the states and Heads of all Union Territories. The
Governing Council replaces the earlier National Development Council.
Difference
between NITI Aayog and Planning Commission –
– In 1950, the
Planning Commission was set up by the first Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal
Nehru, to formulate Five-Year Plans.
– The Planning
Commission was set up to help formulate a strong Centre-driven plan and frame
policies that would impact each of the states. Under the Planning Commission, the
flow of policy was directed from the centre to the states.
The NITI Aayog has been programmed
for open and ongoing involvement and partnership of every state of India, which
means that now state governments can play a direct and active role in achieving
national objectives while catering to their unique needs. States need not merely be dictated
to by the Centre.
– The big difference, thus, is that States will now have a greater role in
formulating plans.
– Earlier, the Planning
Commission formulated plans and then asked the States to implement them
(provided they agreed); now, the States themselves will be able to actively
participate in planning. Hence, communication gaps would no longer exist and
plans would be implemented more effectively.
.