Concerns over the effectiveness of industrial policies in Jammu and Kashmir have intensified, with stakeholders pointing to a systemic collapse of monitoring and implementation mechanisms over the past decade.
Experts and industry insiders warn that despite multiple policy announcements and incentive schemes, the absence of accountability and oversight has severely undermined outcomes on the ground.
At the core of the issue lies a widening gap between policy intent and execution.
While the Government of India has consistently emphasised the importance of structured monitoring, periodic reviews, and institutional accountability in policy frameworks, Jammu and Kashmir has witnessed a steady erosion of these mechanisms.
Historically, the region maintained a multi-tier oversight structure comprising committees at the state, provincial, district, and industrial estate levels.
These bodies ensured coordination, resolved bottlenecks, and enabled real-time feedback. At the apex, the Industrial Advisory Council under the Chief Minister provided strategic direction and periodic reviews.
However, over time, this framework weakened and eventually became non-functional, leaving policies without effective supervision.
Industry observers note that the consequences of this breakdown are now evident across sectors.
The Industrial Policy 2016-26, which aimed to promote local industry through fiscal incentives and protections such as a 15 percent price preference in government procurement, was significantly diluted following a 2019 directive mandating procurement through the Government e-Marketplace (GeM).
This effectively nullified the intended advantage for local enterprises, exposing them to direct competition without adequate safeguards.
Further complications arose with the introduction of the Industrial Policy 2021-30 while the earlier policy was still in force.
The coexistence of overlapping frameworks created confusion among stakeholders, with no clear mechanism to reconcile provisions or track implementation.
Industrial units were left navigating uncertain and often contradictory policy environments.
Adding to the challenges has been the inconsistent disbursement of incentives. Benefits such as turnover incentives were curtailed due to budgetary constraints, eroding trust among investors and businesses.
Analysts argue that when promised incentives are not delivered, policy credibility suffers, discouraging both existing enterprises and potential investors.
The situation was further compounded by the launch of the Government of India’s Central Sector Scheme for Industrial Development of Jammu and Kashmir in 2021, with an outlay of Rs 28,400 crore. While the scheme was designed to provide long-term financial support, its limited registration window and lack of coordination with Union Territory policies created additional layers of complexity.
“What we are witnessing is not just administrative inefficiency but a deeper systemic failure,” an industry expert said, noting that there is no evidence of structured monitoring at any level – be it District Industries Centres, the Directorate, or the Administrative Department.
There are no publicly available performance reviews, measurable targets, or accountability benchmarks to assess policy outcomes.
Equally concerning is the absence of an effective grievance redressal mechanism. Industrial units facing delays or denial of benefits have no formal platform for resolution, leading to inconsistencies and discretionary interpretations at various administrative levels.
Stakeholders have also expressed concern over the lack of urgency in reviving these systems, even after the restoration of an elected government.
More than a year into its tenure, there has been little visible effort to reconstitute oversight bodies or reactivate monitoring frameworks.
The result, experts say, is predictable: policies exist on paper, but tangible outcomes remain elusive.
Incentives are announced but not realised, and schemes are notified without meaningful implementation.
With the government reportedly considering a revised industrial policy, industry leaders stress that addressing these structural deficiencies must be a priority.
They argue that without clearly defined monitoring systems, enforceable accountability, and time-bound implementation, any new policy risks repeating the same trajectory.
As Jammu and Kashmir seeks to improve its ease of doing business and attract investment, stakeholders underline a simple but critical lesson: policies alone are not enough – execution, oversight, and accountability are key to delivering real impact.
