gully2globalinnovativeservices@gmail.com

Introduction The debate surrounding the privatisation of public healthcare has intensified in recent years. Governments and academics alike are assessing the pros and cons of private versus public healthcare systems. The rise of the for-profit sector has introduced market-driven principles, such as variable insurance pricing, which have disrupted the public sphere. The increasing influence of privatisation and liberalisation has also limited the state’s ability to formulate independent policies across various sectors, including healthcare. Right to Health The World Health Organization (WHO) defines the right to health as encompassing physical, mental, and social well-being. According to WHO, health is not merely the absence of disease but a positive state of well-being that includes a joyful attitude and acceptance of life’s responsibilities. In India, while the Constitution does not explicitly guarantee health as a fundamental right, it mandates the state to provide healthcare to its citizens. Articles 39, 41, and 47 of the Constitution impose an obligation on the state to create sustainable models ensuring public health. The National Health Policy (NHP) of 2017 aligns with global healthcare trends, aiming to shift the focus from “sick care” to “wellness” by emphasizing prevention and health promotion through a strengthened public health system. Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Model in Healthcare Despite improvements in India’s public health system, significant challenges persist, primarily due to: To address these challenges, the government, in collaboration with NITI Aayog and the World Bank, has proposed a PPP model. This approach is positioned not as privatisation but as a strategic procurement of secondary and tertiary healthcare services, focusing particularly on non-communicable diseases (NCDs). The Cuban Model: A Preventive Approach Cuba’s healthcare model prioritises prevention over treatment, adopting a social rather than technological perspective. The government assigns doctors or medical teams to specific regions, making them responsible for monitoring and addressing public health concerns. They proactively track high-risk cases, such as diabetes and pregnancies, referring patients to specialized health centers when necessary. While India has a similar model, its implementation remains reactive rather than proactive. The disparity is particularly evident in rural areas, where health centers and medical expertise are scarce. Furthermore, corruption and absenteeism among rural healthcare providers exacerbate the crisis. The Cuban model’s success is attributed to strong political will, substantial government investment, and a commitment to universal healthcare. Concerns Over Privatisation Historical data suggests that market-driven healthcare models often compromise equity. In the United States, for example, healthcare privatisation led to a 30% rise in uninsured individuals in the 1980s and a 15.6% increase in the 1990s. By 1998, approximately 44 million Americans, including ethnic minorities, the poor, and the elderly, were uninsured. The inability to afford insurance directly impacts access to preventive care and chronic disease management. Privatisation in India has similarly created a divide between urban and rural populations. While private healthcare facilities thrive in urban centers, rural areas remain neglected due to lower demand and affordability issues. Private hospitals often deny services to those unable to pay upfront fees, underscoring the need for government intervention. A regulatory framework is essential to ensure affordability, either through subsidies or state-sponsored insurance for economically disadvantaged citizens. Policy Recommendations To ensure equitable healthcare access, the government must: Conclusion Healthcare is a fundamental necessity, not a privilege. While privatisation may improve efficiency, it often overlooks the affordability aspect for lower-income populations. Instead of relying on private models to handle costliest treatments like cardiac and cancer care, the government must assume greater responsibility. A well-structured, publicly funded healthcare system, complemented by a regulated private sector, is essential for ensuring universal access to quality healthcare in India.

Introduction Recently, Karnataka introduced a private-sector reservation policy favoring Kannada-speaking individuals. This move aligns with similar policies in Andhra Pradesh and Haryana, reflecting a rising trend of states prioritizing local employment. However, this policy extends beyond economic considerations and delves into deeper socio-political concerns. The Unemployment Dilemma and Identity Politics Karnataka’s reservation policy is primarily a response to two major issues: Reservation: A Tool for Inclusivity, Not Identity Politics The Role of Private Entities and State Responsibilities Private companies in Karnataka have both legal and moral obligations: Cultural Integration Through Social Change The core issue is not purely economic but deeply cultural. Policy Recommendations Instead of divisive reservation policies, Karnataka should: Conclusion Karnataka’s private-sector reservation policy addresses identity and employment concerns, but it fails to tackle root systemic challenges. Instead of imposing restrictions, the state should foster economic growth, promote cultural integration, and encourage voluntary employment policies. Through inclusive and forward-thinking strategies, Karnataka can set an example for balancing economic growth with cultural preservation, ensuring a cohesive and progressive future for all its residents.

Introduction The issue of slums dates back to the 16th century, where they were initially seen as a solution to large-scale housing for low-income people rather than a problem. Rapid urbanization required cheap labor, leading to the formation of slums. Over time, however, slum dwellers found themselves without legal ownership, facing eviction at the whims of landowners. Even today, large-scale evictions occur under the pretext of “public purpose” projects, such as city beautification and smart city initiatives. According to data from the Housing and Land Rights Network India (HLRN), approximately 46% of recorded evictions have been justified undAn Analysis of Karnataka’s Slum Law er these projects, despite the fact that they displace a significant portion of the urban population. Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1973 In 1973, the Karnataka government introduced the Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act to address slum-related issues. However, instead of safeguarding slum dwellers’ rights, the law treated slums as obstacles to urban development. The original law assumed that slums were illegal occupations by marginalized groups, predominantly Dalits and minorities. The state viewed these areas as overcrowded and unhygienic, justifying eviction rather than improvement. The Shift to the Slum Development Act (2014) Over the decades, changing urban landscapes and growing inequality forced the Karnataka government to amend the 1973 Act multiple times. In 2014, it was renamed the Slum Development Act to reflect a more progressive approach. However, despite the name change: Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (2013-2022) and Its Challenges The Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY), formerly known as Rajiv Awas Yojana, was launched with the vision of creating a slum-free India. It aimed to upgrade slums and assign legal ownership to residents. However, several challenges have hindered its success: Due to these land availability and tenability challenges, PMAY has struggled to gain traction in Karnataka. The Way Forward To effectively address slum-related issues, Karnataka must adopt a well-defined slum policy that prioritizes inclusivity and sustainable development. Key recommendations: Conclusion Karnataka’s slum policies have evolved over the years, but they continue to focus on erasing slums rather than empowering slum dwellers. While initiatives like PMAY offer potential solutions, they remain hindered by land-related challenges and policy inconsistencies. A progressive, human-centric slum policy is needed to truly address the housing crisis for the urban poor. Bibliography