KERALA RISING · FROM EXPORTING PEOPLE TO EXPORTING IDEAS OWN S T H E C A P A BI LI T Y ? P RODU C ES BE H A V I OUR C H A NGE ? TRUS TWORT H Y WI TH C I V I C D A TA ? Do nothing differently n/a No and status quo persists n/a Spend more, same approach Partly Weakly. Supply not demand Yes Procure vendor apps No, vendor owns it Maybe, per app, in silos Depends on vendor Startup / private platform No, equity holders Possibly, fast Questionable, private incentives This framework Yes; state, permanent Yes. Closes the loop Yes, public, audited, lawful APPROACH Exhibit 20 – The framework measured against its real alternatives. Read across the table and the framework’s case is not that the alternatives are worthless, several have genuine merits, but that only the institution-andreuse model scores well on all of ownership, behaviour change, and trust at once. The alternatives each sacrifice at least one: the status quo and more-of-the-same fail on behaviour change; the vendor and startup models fail on ownership and, in the startup’s case, on trust. A state that wants durable behaviour change on civic outcomes, owned in the public interest and trusted enough for 305