KERALA RISING · FROM EXPORTING PEOPLE TO EXPORTING IDEAS A. Precisely because you already spend so much. The existing spend buys collection but not the citizen-level behaviour change that makes a place stay clean. This program is a tiny incremental cost that converts the large existing spend into a visible outcome; it does not replace the HKS, it makes the HKS visibly effective. Q. Will poorer wards be left behind on the leaderboard? A. The leaderboard is designed around participation rate, not absolute volume, and HKS workers assist logging for households without smartphones. A small ward that participates fully can top a large ward that does not, which is deliberate. What would make this program fail Honesty requires naming how this program could fail, because a framework that only describes its successes is a sales pitch. Cleanliness fails if the loop never closes. If citizens make a few verified deposits, the points feel pointless, the leaderboard stays empty, and the behaviour decays back to where it started. This is the churn failure, and it happens when the four mechanisms are not all wired together from the first week: rewards without rivalry, or rivalry without an on-ramp. The mitigation is the design discipline of Chapter 2, applied without shortcuts, and the pilot exists precisely to catch this failure cheaply before scale. 124