In The Wake of Aadhar The Digital Ecosystem

IN THE WAKE OF AADHAAR
THE DIGITAL ECOSYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE IN INDIA

Editor:
Ashish Rajadhyaksha
Centre for the Study of Culture & Society

No. 302 Pramoda
70/ 1, Surveyor Street
Basavanagudi
BANGALORE - 560 004
Project supported by The Ford Foundation, New Delhi
AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 1
6/18/13 4:53 PM
9.
Ration Card Digitisation and the PDS in Kerala: A brief history ....335
The Public Distribution SystemDossier Prepared
by Swagato Sarkar/Nandini Chami ...................................................340
10. The RSBY and Enrollers: A Field Report Arun Menon ..................353
11. Issues in Financial Inclusion S. Ananth .........................................360
THREE: THE DIGITAL ECOSYSTEM TECHNOLOGY ISSUES
12. Technologies In Aadhar: A Sociotechnical View Ravi Shukla .......372
Encryption Standards and Practices Elonnai Hickok ...................400
FINO: A case study S. Ananth ........................................................407
13. Legal Legacies of Identity Production Malavika Jayaram ............412
FOUR: THE DIGITAL ECOSYSTEM MIGRANT LIVES
14. Counting the Migrant in India: Forced Migration
and the Identification Project Sahana Basavapatna......................432
15. Migration and Financial Exclusion In AP S. Ananth .....................468
FIVE: THE DIGITAL ECOSYSTEM THE HOMELESS
16. Shelter, Enumeration and Homelessness:
Historical And Contemporary Contexts
For Delhi Diya Mehra......................................................................480
17. Being Singular: Figuring the Homeless Ecosystem
in the Shadow of the UID Akshaya Kumar ....................................497
SIX: THE DIGITAL ECOSYSTEM THE FINANCIALLY EXCLUDED
18. Issues in Credit to the Poor: Following the
Microfinance Crisis in Andhra Pradesh S. Ananth ........................514
Faction Wars S.V. Srinivas ..............................................................541
Extended Bibliography ..........................................................................546
In the Wake of Aadhaar
6/18/13 4:53 PM
CHAPTER 12
Technologies in Aadhaar :
A sociotechnical view
Ravi Shukla
Centre for Studies in Science Policy, New Delhi
The author, himself a software programmer now working on

how technologies can be better comprehended as sociotechnical processes, inquires into the scaling-up process
that a project as large as Aadhaar needed to have done.
He also looks at the various RTI applications filed to ask
questions on whether or not standard checks and balances
have been followed on the technology deployed.
IDENTITY SYSTEMS IN CONTEXT

Before getting specific, let me make a few general points: on identity systems
in general and on Aadhaar in particular.
A commonly cited study on the implementation of biometrics-based
national identity systems has been the independent study undertaken by the
London School of Economics in 2005 to study the feasibility of a project in
the UK. Famously, that project found the proposal too complex, technically
unsafe, overly prescriptive, and [having] a lack of foundation of public trust
and confidence.1 Other countries in the European Union that have a successful
electronic Identity Management Systems (eIDMS) include Germany, Spain,
Austria, Belgium, Estonia, Finland, Italy, and Portugal. A study in 2007 made a
comparison of these seven systems with Germany as the reference point. It is
summarised below:
372 In the Wake of Aadhaar
6/18/13 4:56 PM
Table 1: European Union eIDMS comparison.
Kubicek Herbert, Introduction: conceptual framework and research design for a

comparative analysis of national eId Management Systems in Selected European
Countries, in Identity in the Information Society, Springer, Vol 3, 2010, page 23.
Apart from Austria and Italy, the other six countries have an ELD card which
is mandatory in all but two countriesGermany and Spain. Biometric data
is stored on the card only in Germany and Spain. At the time of publication
(2010), the inclusion of biometrics on the card has been contested, and in the
view of the author, biometrics has not yet become relevant for authentication
in online services (ibid, pg. 11).
In India, the first initiative towards a unique nationalised digital identity
was the approval of a Multipurpose National Identity Card (MNIC) in 2003
by the NDA government. Focussing on national security and ways by which to
deter illegal immigration, the project had proposed different coloured cards for
citizens and non-citizens. The pilot project, taken up in April 2003, and covering
29 Lakh people in 13 states2 appeared to have undergone some change during
the course of its implementation, notably in the addition of biometrics for all
adults and in the doing away of different coloured cards. Several organisations
led by the NIC helped to set up an infrastructure that included 20 centres to
handle the citizen database. Unlike the current scheme that involves private
enterprise, the card was designed by the National Institute of Design (NID)
with back-end management being done by Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL).3
The period was also marked by efforts at bringing both computerisation and
In the Wake of Aadhaar 373
6/18/13 4:56 PM
CHAPTER 12
eGovernance under a common umbrella.4 With the change in the governing

party to UPA, an empowered group of ministers (EGOM) headed by Shri
Pranab Mukherjee was formed. The proposal to set up the UIDAI was mooted
in August 2008; and soon after, the decision to notify the UIDAI as an executive
authority under the planning commission was taken (Ibid, pp. 6-8). The current
avatar of the UID scheme or Aadhaar, as it has been called, as a centralised,
biometrics based database took shape under the guidance of Nandan Nilekani,
erstwhile head of the IT major Infosys, who took over as the first Chairperson
of the UIDAI.5 The scale and scope of the UID project has been compared to
earlier development initiatives of the government.
However, while the outcomes and fallouts of most industrial projects in
the past have been there for all to see, the artefacts and outcomes of projects
involving the storage and processing of information such as the Aadhaar
project have tended to be more intangible and less visible. According to the
Communicating to a Billion document (May 2010), the Aadhaar team sees
the scheme as the programme to make a difference to other programmes.
The basic mandate outlined in the document is one of providing each
resident of the country an Aadhaar number linked to their demographic and
biometric information. The developmental mandate of the scheme is aimed
at increasing the reach and efficiency of services like PDS and other banking
and financial services.6
From a social standpoint, given the concerns from European countries
that have preceded this project, the question of interest is this: is the present
scheme fundamentally different from previous developmental projects, and if
so, how? Secondly, what would such a shift in emphasis mean for the statecitizen relationship and the country as a whole? Are we, as one essay (elsewhere
in this Reader) suggested, at the cusp of a new bureaucratic moment?
This essay approaches the above two problems from a slightly different
perspective, that of software processes, and will attempt to infer what
conclusions drawn from such a perspective may mean to larger social
processes.
6/18/13 4:56 PM
OVERVIEW OF SOCIOTECHNICAL SYSTEMS
Let us start with a conventional setting: how are technological systems in

general understood? The commonly held understanding of technology suggests that
it is the application of science to industrial or commercial objectives.7 Its general
outcome is to produce manufactured articles or artefacts. This normative view of
technology sees it as a tool that may be used to achieve different objectives, or in
other words, as a means to an end.8 More engaged perspectives tend to be broadly
aligned along two divergent vantage points: those arguing from a technologically
determinist view, who see technologies as actively shaping, if not actually
determining, society.9 The opposing vantage point suggests that technologies may
be shaped by forces within society. Originating roughly in the 1980s, possibly as an
attempt to contest the autonomy of technology argument, the Social Construction
of Technology (SCOT) perspective broadly suggests that social, cultural, political,
and economic situations influence the meaning given to artefacts, and shape the
direction of technologies.10
In general, most technological systems are placed somewhere in between
these two extreme positions. Further, their definitions are not static but
change at different stages of the process. It is evident that few systems can
be either completely autonomous or completely socially determined at any
stage in the process. More recently, it has been proposed that the distinction
between what was social and technical and what was human and nonhuman was itself disrupted through the process of technical change. It was
not therefore possible to give a purely social explanation of technical change
because technical objects (facts, artefacts, devices) themselves formed a
critical part of the social.11 It may best therefore to describe these processes as
sociotechnical so that while there may be similarities between such processes
and the technologies themselves, the specific forces at play may be different
at different places in the overall process, making any sociotechnical analysis
of each system a unique one.
6/18/13 4:56 PM
CHAPTER 12
AADHAAR AS A SYSTEM
When attempting to review a large technological system such as Aadhaar,

we begin with the salutary fact: it is a centralised database of biometric and
demographic information that will extend to each and every resident of the
country.12 Given the scale and scope of the project, it follows that the technological
choices and processes that have been made in the project will affect people,
institutions and society as a whole in various complicated ways. One theorist
suggests that technology is not a thing in the ordinary sense of the term, but an
ambivalent process of development. Inherent in technology, he says, is the role
it attributes to social values in technological design, and not merely in the use, of
technical systems.13
This somewhat philosophical contention, of a non-instrumental
technology extending beyond physical objects and systems of technology
to the social realm, seems to be nevertheless directly reflected in the more
practical thumb-rules and guidelines offered by The Software Engineering
Institute (SEI), at Carnegie Mellon University. One of the pioneering
institutions for research in the field, the SEI was initially setup to optimise
procurement processes for Defence projects in the United States. While the
focus of SEI has historically been on large organisations, as its success has
shown, its suggestions and guidelines are scalable and may be relevant to
a diversity of software systems. The SEI has traditionally seen processes,
people and technologies, as the key elements in what has been called the
process triangle of process improvement initiatives. In recent times, there
have been efforts to add another element, culture, to the triad. Here, culture
has been described as the environment in which process, technology and
people interact. Researchers at SEI have also suggested that viewing process
improvement activities in the larger context may provide insights into the
meanings of activities, artefacts and behaviour in these systems.14
In SEI literature, culture and context generally refers to the
organisation under consideration. Thus, when applying SEI-type criteria
to understanding the Aadhaar project, it may be necessary, while looking at
6/18/13 4:56 PM
information technologies from a social standpoint, to also and parallelly look

at other social processes at play.
Some theorists have made the suggestion that the analytical approach
required to understand the issues, practices, and outcomes of informationcentric technologies may be somewhat different from those of other
technologies. According to Sandra Braman of the University of Minnesota,
whose primary work has been on the social implications of digital
technologies, any past learning from what she calls industrial technologies
may not suffice in grappling with the diversity of possible inputs and the
virtually infinite range of possible outcomes that meta-technologies such as
these open up.15 In Bramans opinion, the adage knowledge is power seems
to have acquired a new meaning in todays information-intensive society;
information, in effect, she says, has become a form of power in its own right,
overshadowing other forms of power and changing how these forms come
into being and are exercised. This is extended by Karen Litfins view that
new technologies have two kinds of political and social implications: first,
they empower or dis-empower social actorsstates, groups, classes, and
institutions; and second, perhaps more fundamentally, they can influence the
self-understandings and identities of social actors, perhaps even the nature
of power itself.16 Both positions lead us to ask this question: from a social
perspective, how may we understand and assess a system that possesses less
visible artefacts but has subtler and more direct associations with power
and identity?
Among the almost infinite range of outcomes to which Braman alludes,
there is the specific one of privileging some technological systems and
networks over others, and thereby certain possibilities over others: in effect,
closing certain possibilities and leaving others open. Technologies often mask
the historicity of both interest and politics, given that each technological
system embodies particular peoples decisions and is a reflection of relations
of power. Both the engineering design and the choice of technologies used
may end up enabling certain social paths and directions over others, and these
choices may not be either innocent or independent of power structures or
6/18/13 4:56 PM
CHAPTER 12
social hierarchies. A more sociotechnical process of technology may therefore

usefully seek the involvement of lay users and other non-technical inputs
at important stages in the development and evolution of the technology.
Such an involvement necessarily entails an active engagement with questions
of who determines choices, at what cost, to what end, and by what institutional
or social process.17
Such a larger social involvement is hardly unknown in software
engineering, and has already been reflected in Joint Application and Design
(JAD) sessions and other similar efforts.18 It therefore becomes especially
relevant in the case of systems such as Aadhaar that attempt to address issues
of social inequality.
Specifically, this essay attempts to review the Aadhaar scheme along the
three axes of the process triangle as specified by SEI, namely in terms of the
processes, technologies, and people involved in the scheme.
MODELLING AND DESIGN IN INFORMATION

SYSTEMS
In more traditional forms of engineering or architecture, modelling

involves the making of physical scale models in the design of buildings and
machinery. The main advantage of doing this is that it helps in understanding the
requirements and complexities of a system without having to go through the cost
and effort of implementation. Models enable the gradual, incremental move, from a
simplified, abstract model to a fully functional one without the burden of reworking.
They also help in communicating design ideas to diverse groups of people. Perhaps
due to its non-physical nature, software modelling has had its share of sceptics,
especially during the early days of software engineering. Historically, the making of
physical scale models has formed an important element of engineering design, and
has proven to be especially useful in the design of buildings and machinery. Today,
however, it is considered an important way to approach software development,
largely because it may not be physically possible to retain all elements of even
6/18/13 4:56 PM
moderately complex systems without some degree of abstraction. To quote a

pioneer in the developing of programming languages, I have a very small head and
I had better learn to live with it and respect my limitations. In addition, modelling
allows for relatively easier ways of exploring system behaviour and constraints
without the actual implementation of the system.19
Most contemporary software systems follow the object-oriented (OO)
paradigm of development. While details of such an approach may be outside
the scope of this essay, it may be relevant to note that objects in the OO
paradigm are software abstractions of real-world entities, described by a set
of attributes and behaviours relevant in the problem space. Conceptually,
OO techniques has been described as a shift from computer programming to
software engineering, with the design metaphor changing from Software is
a sequence of steps to software is a collection of objects.20 Perhaps the most
popular tool for Object-oriented design and documentation has been the
Unified Modelling Language (UML). A working definition of UML describes
it as a family of graphical notations backed by a single meta-model, which
collectively help in both describing and designing software systems. UML
may be used for to create a blueprint of the design or even just an informal
sketch; while there are no mandated requirements or hard and fast rules in
the use of UML, some diagrams such as use-case diagrams for recording use
cases, and class diagrams and sequence diagrams for describing the main
entities and relationships and the sequence of operations, are generally seen
as fitting in with the SDLC phases.21 A brief description of some of these
diagrams that could have been the interim deliverables of to the Aadhaar
system is described below.
Reviewing Aadhaar
Since the software-based Aadhaar system may be expected to go through the
typical stages of software development, let us begin by outlining the main
phases of the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC).
Phases of Development
The general understanding behind the phased approach is to have a set of
intermediate deliverables that act as mileposts along the way to the end
6/18/13 4:56 PM
CHAPTER 12
product. A review to check that the choices and decisions made are in tune
with the expected outcome and to take corrective action if required, are
generally seen as an inherent part of the process.
Figure 1: Phases and Deliverables of the typical SDLC.22
The deliverables for each phase are also shown in the figure. While the precise
list of deliverables mentioned as the outcome of the different phases may
depend on the specific nature of the projects and the methodologies followed,
those mentioned in the figure are general enough to be applicable to most
software projects. The Systems Planning phase for instance may include
activities such as project initiation, resource planning, and risk analysis with
deliverables such as project statement, draft or preliminary project plan, list of
deliverables, and others that may be included in the Preliminary Investigation
Report. There seems to be general agreement on the need for requirements
specifications, though some projects see it as an outcome of a separate
requirements phase and combine the analysis and design phases together.
Requirements documentation come in different formsfrom textual
descriptions and diagrams to prototype displays representing the various
screens and reports of the developed system; however, they are notorious
more for their inadequacy than for their clarity. Inadequately documented
requirements and a lack of communication, continues to be the fly in the
6/18/13 4:56 PM
ointment for most software projects.23 Apart from JAD sessions mentioned
earlier, various frameworks such as I have cited, have attempted to address
this gap. The design documents that are the outcome of the design phase also
depend on the nature of the project and the methodology followed. While
most software projects are expected to provide a rationale of the list of design
documents they expect to produce, depending on the methodology, there are
some generally accepted documents, and diagrams that one may expect to
see. In addition to the deliverables listed in the figure, other deliverables that
also act as tools for keeping the project on course may include a requirements
traceability matrix, to trace the requirements through the development and
testing process to ensure that are adequately addressed; it may also include
test cases and test plans apart from pre-defined acceptance criteria.
INTERMEDIATE DELIVERABLES IN AADHAAR
Some
software development approaches tend to view requirement

specifications for products as different from that of software services or projects.
In these cases, the product functionality and features are decided by a group of
experts who are familiar with the domain area. These experts are either directly
involved in the development process or else are readily available, and they work
closely with the development team. While this approach may provide some
degree of flexibility, the thumb-rule of having reasonably frozen or unchanging
requirements has generally been accepted as a good practice. For instance, the
Institution of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), seen as being a key
influence in deciding Engineering standards, does not recognise the need for a
difference in approach for software products and services.24 While there may be
a wide diversity of valid use case documents, one typical UML usage scenario for
a project like Aadhaar is shown below.
6/18/13 4:56 PM
CHAPTER 12
Figure 2: Typical UML Use Case.
UML use cases may also be typically accompanied by a textual description

such as the one below:
Use Case: Resident Enrollment
Primary Actor: Any Resident of the Country.
Stakeholder and Interests:
1.
User: Wants to be enrolled into the CIDR.
2.
Enrollment Agency: Educates and brings the resident to the registrar.
3.
Registrar: Validates and enrolls the resident.
4.
Introducer or Undertaking Registrar: Endorses the identity and

address of the resident.
Precondition:
1.
The resident should not already have an Aadhaar card or number.
Success Condition (Post conditions):

2.
The residents biometric data is successfully recorded and the Aadhaar

card is delivered to them.
6/18/13 4:56 PM
Main Success Scenario (Basic Flow):

1.
The residents identity is verified or endorsed.
2.
The residents biometric data is recorded.
3.
The residents data is de-duplicated.
4.
A unique Aadhaar number is generated and delivered to the user.
Extensions (Alternative Flow):

1.
The users biometrics cannot be recordedin this case a manual

check is performed.
2.
The users Aadhaar number cannot be deliveredin this case it may

be held by the registrar for a duration of six months.
The diagram and the text together describe one usage scenario. Depending
on the size of the system, the number of use cases could range from a dozen
to hundreds for a system of medium complexity. Recording of use cases after
interaction is generally considered a useful exercise, even if not absolutely
necessary. This is of course not intended to be an accurate representation as
much as indicative of the kind of documentation that can be expected from
a phased software delivery. Apart from usage, other specifications such as
performance or conditions of use may also form a part of the requirement.
What is worth noting is that the use case described above is not a part of
documented Aadhaar requirements specifications. It would appear therefore
that such a comprehensive set of requirements have not been released by the
UIDAI in the public domain. It is not clear if they do in fact exist.
DESIGN DELIVERABLES
As suggested above, the spirit of UML does not mandate a set of UML diagrams
to be used to describe the design blueprint of a system, and designers and engineers
6/18/13 4:56 PM
CHAPTER 12
are usually free to add their own diagrams. However it is certainly unusual if no
part of the standard UML is used. The list of diagrams that constitute valid UML
diagrams is shown below:
Figure 3: UML Diagrams. From Fowler, Martin, UML Distilled: A brief guide to
the Standard Object Modelling Language, Addison-Wesley, Boston, New York, San
Francisco, 2004. Page 12.
An overview of a class diagram for a project such as Aadhaar is shown below.
Figure 4: Sample Class Diagram.
6/18/13 4:56 PM
Class designs are generally considered among the key diagrams in software
design. The figure above outlines some hypothetical object-types and their
relationships that may be used to represent the current system. As with the
requirements, it is only a sample subset of what a class diagram looks like
and is not reflective of the class hierarchies and relationships in the actual
Aadhaar implementation. The readily available documentation at the UIDAI
website does not seem to include either any documented use cases or any
design documents.
VALUES IN INFORMATION SYSTEMS
The lack of any mechanism to seek the views of the intended beneficiaries
of the Aadhaar scheme, supposedly each and every resident of the country, or to
understand their requirements, seems to be in contrast to established software
engineering practices. In other words, society at large appears to have no role but
to come across as a passive receptor of the governments development agenda. This
tendency seems to be reflected in the Concept paper on Social inclusion published
by the UIDAI in April 2012, two years after the first strategy overview document
was released in April 2010. The paper describes some of the fundamentals to be
adhered to as a result of field experience with Mission Convergence an NGO in
Delhi that undertook the task of enrollment for the UIDAI. Of the lessons learnt
from that experience, one suggestion is that it is the choice of the institutional
partner that determines the success of such camps; another that a focus (be) on
the needs and concerns of the enrollee.25 The notion that the needs and concerns
of the enrollee can and may have a role in deciding the system requirements and
design seems at best to be a passing insight gained late in the implementation
process with little attempt to translate it to practice. In this situation, one can
only question whether a system that fails to include the voices of the intended
beneficiaries in deciding requirements or design can lead to social inclusion upon
implementation. Or perhaps the more relevant question would be, who decided
what social inclusion is? Clearly, the views of technologists and decision makers
may be quite different from those of other residents or intended beneficiaries.
6/18/13 4:56 PM
CHAPTER 12
Similar questions may be asked about transparency, and empowerment. Is it

possible, for instance for a system that is itself opaque in its functioning to provide
transparency as an outcome? In an attempt to see how abstract questions of
means and ends manifest themselves in practice, let us consider a typical software
project that generally goes through the stages of development, maintenance and
support. The result of an ethnographic study of software engineers suggests that
the majority of them see these processes as either overlapping or else as part of the
same process. The responses of people who had been involved at some level with
software development to the question Do you think the software development,
maintenance and support are distinct processes needing different mechanisms
for handling? are summarised below. It should be noted that while the number
of respondents may not be statistically significant, the general trend seems to be
borne out by the literature on the subject.26
Option
Votes
% of Total
There is commonality such as knowing the

basics of the platform and the application, but
they are basically different processes
19
Development work is more challenging and

demanding, followed by maintenance and
support
11
There are overlaps, a maintenance activity

could lead to development, similarly, support
could lead to maintenance or development
19
They are part of the same continuum, a good

process development/maintenance or support
would take the others into consideration
17
46
Unable to comment
37
100
Total
Table 2: Software Development, Maintenance and Support Processes.
6/18/13 4:56 PM
The significance of this notion is that the values and mechanisms at the
development stage tend to gradually extend to the maintenance and then the
support phase. Often, the development team also does the maintenance and
support at least during the initial stages. Information systems, depending on
their level of accountability, may also store information about their internal
processes, evaluation and audit trails for example, as part of the system. This
must, therefore, also form a part of the development process, showing that
such systems also tend to be reflexive making it anomalous for outcomes to
be in contradiction to the systems own ways of functioning.
FROM PROCESS OPTIMISATION TO SOCIAL

RE-ENGINEERING
Software processes in general necessarily attempt to understand and

automate real-world workflows and processes in order to arrive at a functional
model. However, there may also be systems that create altogether new processes
or affect changes for existing ones. These new initiatives or changes are generally
the outcome of deliberations and consultations with domain experts. The SEI at
CMU, created for the purpose of process improvement, from its earliest reports
in the 1980s, has suggested that these optimisations entail a combination of
processes, people, technologies, and culture. This seems to have manifested in the
1990s as Business Process Reengineering (BPR) efforts suggesting that apart
from introducing faster and more efficient technologies, organisations could also
be more competitive and efficient by streamlining their internal processes. In
the recent past (2004), there seems to have been some resurgence in BPR efforts
that focus largely on reducing waste, integrating with legacy system and across
organisational boundaries. Effective BPR, however may only be built on an
understanding of the larger environment within which the organisation functions;
it has also been suggested that there exist some consistency between the process
design and implementation.27 The fallout of extending this largely organisational restructuring to the broader social level could lead to a change in social relationships,
structures and ways of interaction.
6/18/13 4:56 PM
CHAPTER 12
Consider some of excerpts from the UIDAIs introduction and concept

paper on social inclusion brought out in April 2012, after two full two years
of implementation. The concept paper seems to acknowledge the need for a
rethinking of its strategy, suggesting that the heart and soul of the project
needs to be examined both from the point of its capacity and its limitation
in effectively delivering to the marginalised.28 Proposing that the Introducer
concept has only rarely been used, it cites the efforts of Mission Convergence,
a UNDP and Delhi government initiative, as one of its successful endeavours,
and suggests that one of the learning experiences from the exercise was that
Undertaking Agencies may need to let potential enrollees use their official
address in the resident address field (Ibid, pp. 6-15). However, it is of the
view that Undertaking Agencies should not be an additional technology
object in the UIDAI model of enrollments, since it will put a load on UIDAI
technology infrastructurewithout clarifying either the nature or extent of
the load on the infrastructure. What does seem to be clear is that excluding
the real-world object from the technology model not only brings about a gap
in the software abstraction, but also precludes any possibility of keeping
track of which undertaking agency is responsible for which enrollment (ibid,
pg . 8). What the paper also fails to mention is that another participating NGO,
the Indo-German Society for Social Services (IGSSS) chose to withdraw from
the project after their officials pointed out that the scheme was being used
to clandestinely initiate cash transfers without informing the other partners.
It also pointed out serious gaps in the enrollment procedure.29 Jean Dreze,
one of the architects of the MNREGS and others have suggested that the
setting up of new social entities such as introducers, undertaking agencies
and business correspondentsagents who provide doorstep banking
services to people using a micro-ATM30are likely to have far reaching social
consequences. While the nature and implication of these changes may be
debated, it appears that changes in the social structure, interactions and
patterns of behaviour are impacting residents of the country to the extent
that what we may be seeing may be veritably a virtual social re-engineering. It
is suggested that this fundamental restructuring of this nature, affected by
6/18/13 4:56 PM
a small group of technologists however brilliant they may be, might well be
cause for concern.
AADHAAR IN PRACTICE: RESPONSES ON THE

RIGHT TO INFORMATION
The concern and interest of the public at large in the objectives and
planning of the scheme are reflected in the nature of the Right to Information (RTI)
requests that the UIDAI has received, and from their responses to key requests.
A list of these, as mandated by the RTI act of 2005, is available at the UIDAI
website. While a detailed study of the requests and the responses is beyond the
scope of this essay, a few examples may be worth considering.
General public apprehensions are reflected an early request in December
2009. One Farid Khan from Jogeshwari, Mumbai sends a three-page
questionnaire comprising 40 questions that covers several aspects ranging
from the role of the UIDAI, its budgets, and structures, the need for a
centralised database, security and privacy issues, and so on. The less than
one-page response of the UIDAI clubs the questions into 5 groups, and its
answers broadly fall into two categoriesthose saying that answers may be
found on one of the documents on the UIDAI website, and those saying that
a Detailed Project Report (DPR) is yet to be finalised and all answers will be
known once the DPR will be finalised.31 Apart from the assumption that a
person taking the trouble to file an RTI request, no easy affair, would not be
aware of the other documents on the site, there are other noteworthy aspects
about the response. First, that the generally accepted norm of doing a detailed
study before initiating the project does not seem to be a consideration for
the UIDAI; secondly, that there is no effort to communicate to the person
making the request that the DPR would be communicated to them, once it is
available, and finally, the list of documents in the Publication and Reports
section of the website does seem to list any document that may be seen as a
Detailed Project Report even today.
6/18/13 4:56 PM
CHAPTER 12
The response to another query by one Shri B.N. Murthy initiated around
the same time (Nov. 2009) seems to have several discrepancies that are
difficult to interpret, the receipt date has been listed as 01 April 2010 on
the site, whereas the first response from the UIDAI office is dated 13 Nov.
2009; in a subsequent letter dated 01 April 2010, Shri Murthy thanks the
UIDAI official for the response given, points out several gaps in it and also
points out that quite a lot information is yet to be supplied. The subsequent
response from the UIDAI is of the opinion that the information requested is
not specific enough and cannot be furnished. A copy of the actual information
requested by Shri Murthy is not available in the document making it difficult
to interpret the UIDAIs response.32
As an example of the interest of civil rights groups across the country,
let us take the request of Mohd Asif Ayaz of the Association for Protection
of Civil Rights (APCR), Bangalore, in Jul 2011. Perhaps as a reminder of the
rejection of the similar efforts in other countries, Ayaz asks whether the
UIDAI has reviewed the Identity Card efforts in the UK, US, and Australia,
to which the reply is This information is not available. Although the
response claims that the motivation and rationality for identity system in
different countries are specific to the country and cannot be generalised,
it does not then go on to outline the specifics in India that prompted the
creation of a centralised, biometric database on an unprecedented scale,
using technologies not being used anywhere else in the world. In response
to a question on re-enrollment of biometric data, the UIDAI suggests that
updation facility will be available by Oct 2011. The RTI request also suggests
that iris and fingerprints may be spoofed and asks how the UIDAI proposes
to withdraw and re-assign a compromised biometric. The response to this
is that RTI act does not envisage providing information for hypothetical
instances and hence no information is available.33 However, the fact that
fingerprint spoofing was less than hypothetical at the time of the RTI is well
known; people in the field have indeed been involved in finding techniques
for detecting spoofing.34 The publishing of this and other academic papers
suggests, firstly, that it was well known that spoofing was or could be
done, and secondly, that there could be active ways to detect and avoid
6/18/13 4:56 PM
it. By treating them as hypothetical, or at least communicating so in RTI

responses, the UIDAI also seems to suggest a lack of any attempt to detect
and avoid it. The response to another RTI, filed by one Inderjeet Singh
Sehzra in March 2011, suggests that this information is not available for
public information, as it exposes the UID system to unnecessary risk.35
Regarding the cost of implementation of the project, the response suggests
that the cost of fingerprint readers in PDS outlets need not be included
since the responsibility of purchasing the readers are to be considered
by the registrars appointed by the UIDAI. This seems to suggest that the
UIDAIs cost estimation is only taking its own expenses into account, with
little regard to either the costs of person-hours of effort, technology, and
infrastructure cost of other participating institutions: all of which could
lead to a substantially revised net cost of the project as a whole.
There also seems to be some confusion about the nature of Aadhaar.
Early statements suggested that it is not a card, but a number. While it may
not be a card, in actual practice, Aadhaar is a letter sent to the enrollment
addresses through the post and telegraph office. The letter contains the
Aadhaar number, Name, Date of Birth, Gender, and address along with facial
photograph;36 suggesting that it may not be too different from a smaller,
more robust card. On the ground, there have been reported instances of
lost Aadhaar letters, sometimes in bulk.37 Newspapers have also reported
discrepancies in the enrollment and disbursement process, in Hyderabad
for instance, the total number of enrollments has been substantially higher
than the recorded population and the actual number of cards generated,
higher still.38 This seems to suggest some more institutional form of error
or corruption than that of individuals seeking multiple benefits. Issuing
duplicate Aadhaar for letters that may have been lost in the mail or
otherwise misplaced also does not seems to be possible, at least at till May
2012, nor are there any guidelines of how this will be possible, as indicated
by the response to the RTI request of Ms Kusum Giri.39 Additionally, there
seems to be no procedure for correction of errors during recording as the
response to Mark Quadros query shows.40
6/18/13 4:56 PM
CHAPTER 12
CHANGING BIOMETRICS
The strategy overview document (2010) of the UIDAI outlines some updation
points at which the centralised database may need to be updated by residents.
It suggests that the resident will have to submit their new information at these
updation points with the required documentary evidence. This may also include
a biometric authentication prior to processing the request.41 The reference to
documentary evidence, non-existent for biometric updations, as well as the
inclusion of biometric authentication prior to update reveals an underlying
assumption that biometrics do not change over time. The release of version 1.0 of
the data updation policy, released on 29 June 2011, going by the date included in
the document name and the release of the next version of the document, accepts
that biometric information alters and needs to be regularly updated, but the
cause for the change seems to be either age or unusual circumstances. This seems
to be indicated by the list of reasons that require biometric updation which include
age, events like accidents or disease, facial change due to age, as well as updation
of biometrics due to false authentication failures. Changes due to age seem to
be along two lines, those that occur during ages 5 to 15, during which time the
document suggests an update every 5 years, or for those older than 15 years for
whom an update every ten years is recommended.42 The next release of the update
documentversion 1.1 released on 29 March 2012, does not talk about facial
change due to ageing, but it does talk about the use of biometrics as authentication
for other changes.43 Regarding changes and updates of the biometric data itself, it
suggests that the existing biometrics be used for authentication before updating
with the new biometric (ibid). Described in this way, it seems to be similar to
the familiar change password transaction available with most authenticated
software; however, the difference in the two is that the need for biometric updation,
unless it is part of the regular 5 or 10 yearly update, would arise only if there was
a false rejection of an authentication transaction. That this is likely to happen at
least for some cases is indicated by the changing fingerprints of pensioners that
do not match the recorded biometrics in as short a time span as a few months.44
Recent research has shown that iris scans, generally considered more robust and
reliable than fingerprints, may also be subject to change. Image comparisons of 64
6/18/13 4:56 PM
irises (32 persons) over a three year period 20082011 show an increase in False
Non Match Rate (FNMR) of 153%, with a confidence interval of 95% for a percent
increase of 85% to 307%. A summary of the results is shown below.
Time Period
% change in FNMR (95% CI)
2008-2009
27% (5%, 61%)
2008-2010
82% (38%, 150%)
2008-2011
153% (85%, 307%)
Table 3: FNMR Change with time elapsed.45
Given the magnitude of false non-matches for iris scans and the rapid
nature of the changes in fingerprints (especially for older people), perhaps
an easy way out of the authentication catch-22 would be to use iris scans
to authenticate fingerprint updations and fingerprints to authenticate iris
updations. However, the questionable underlying assumption here would be
that both do not change at the same time.
OPEN SOURCE AND STANDARDS IN SOFTWARE
The response to an RTI request by Neeraj Gaur and Vikram Gaur

regarding the standards and tools used for software development suggests the use
of open source tools, these included the Linux as the operating system, Java as the
programming language, the Eclipse GUI as the Integrated Development Environment
(IDE), Bugzilla for bug tracking, Subversion as the configuration management tool,
Maven as the build tool in the IDE and JUnit for unit testing.46 Keeping aside the
relative merits and demerits of open source, the commitment to open source seems to
be called into question by a document of the UIDAI. The Aadhaar Enrollment Client
Installation and Setup Manual unequivocally requires the Windows operating as a
pre-requisite for the installation.47 In itself, this may simply be a result of oversight,
6/18/13 4:56 PM
CHAPTER 12
or there may possibly be some other explanation for it; however, on the face of it, it
does seem to point to a certain inconsistency in documentation if not in functioning.
The Technical shaping of social possibilities
Langdon Winner, one of the pioneers in the field of technology studies,
writing in the 1970s, has suggested that an increased dependence on
technologies that marks contemporary society may have led to a tendency
to seek technical solutions for human, social, or political problems.48
In effect, the reciprocal relationship that technologies have with human
activity suggests that they may be acting as mediators between the
individual, and the external world.49 Thus, what is humanly possible is
extended or restricted by the technological tools available. In other words,
each technology opens up certain social possibilities and closes others.
The Aadhaar scheme is seen as being instrumental in enabling an entire
digital ecosystem that includes state and market initiatives such as direct
transfers of state subsidies, employment guarantee schemes, banking,
insurance, and financial sectors.
The Panopticon goes virtual
The Aadhaar scheme has been seen as the first, enabling step in the
governmental agenda to implement national eGovernance. Unlike
earlier such initiatives that were based exclusively on information and
communication technologies, the use of biotechnology-based metrics
point to a convergence of technologies that may open up altogether new
possibilities. Biotechnology and information are two of a group of four
technologies, the others being nanotechnology and cognitive technologies,
together called NBIC, that have together been identified as converging
technologies having the potential to transform human life as we know it. A
report (2002) by the National Science Foundation (NSF) titled Converging
Technologies for Improving Human Performance, outlines the goal of this
convergence as that of improving human performance towards a golden
age that would be a turning point for human productivity and quality of
life.50 The combination of nano, bio, and information technology in effect
6/18/13 4:56 PM
offer the human body as one of the sites for assessing performance, making
a case for different forms of observation and surveillance. Together with an
enhanced information processing capability, the new forms of convergence
suggest the capabilities for data mining, new cross correlations for example
between genetics and social categories, or internal interventions.51
In addition to the other three, it has been widely argued that a deeper
understanding of cognitive processes may help in treating brain and related
disorders and also in the development of a range of technological devices to
supplement human efforts.52 While the implications of these convergences
for eGovernance initiatives may not be too clear, the deployment of a scheme
like Aadhaar opens up the possibility of enhancing the disciplinary power of
the state.
REFERENCES
Akshaya, Mukul, Parliamentary Panel Discusses multi-purpose I-card, Times of India,
21 Aug. 2003.
Antonelli A, Cappelli R, Maio D, and Maltoni D, Fake Finger Detection by Skin
Distortion Analysis, IEEE Trans. Information Forensics and Security, vol. 1, no. 3,
pp. 360373, Sept. 2006.
Attaran Mohsen, Exploring the relationship between information technology and business
process reengineering, Information and Management, Vol. 41, 2004.
Barry, Andrew and Don Slater, Introduction: The technological economy, Economy and
Society, Routledge, London, Volume 31 Number 2, May 2002.
Basili Victor R, Viewing Maintenance as Reuse-Oriented Software Development, IEEE
Software, January 1990.
Bhatti, Bharat, Dreze Jean, Khera Reetika, Experiments with Aadhaar, The Hindu, Opinion,
27 June 2012.
Booch, Grady, James Rumbaugh and Ivor Jakobson, Why Requirements Capture is
Difficult, The Unified Software Development Process, Addison-Wesley Longman
Inc., First Indian Reprint, New Delhi 1999, Original Edition, 1999, USA.
Braman, Sandra, Informational Meta-technologies, International relations, And Genetic
Power: The case of biotechnologies in Rosenau James N, Singh J. P. Ed,
Information Technologies and Global Politics: The Changing Scope of Power and
Governance, State University of New York Press, Albany, New York, 2002.
Buttles-Valdez Palma, Svolu Agapi, Valdez Fred, A Holistic Approach to Process
Improvement Using the People CMM and the CMMI-DEV: Technology, Process,
6/18/13 4:56 PM
CHAPTER 12
People, & Culture, The Holistic Quadripartite, Software Engineering Institute,

Carnegie Mellon University, 2006.
Ellul, Jacques, On the Aims of a Philosophy of Technology, in Robert C Scharff and Val
Dusek Ed, Philosophy of Technology. The technological condition. An anthology,
Blackwell Publishing, Malden, Ma, USA, 2003, pp. 182185.
Feenberg, Andrew Critical Theory of Technology, Oxford University Press, New York,
Oxford, 1991.
Fenker Samuel P , Bowyer Kevin W, Analysis of Template Aging in Iris Biometrics, Presented
at IEEE Computer Society Biometrics Workshop, 17 June 2012.
Fowler, Martin, UML Distilled: A brief guide to the Standard Object Modeling Language,
Addison-Wesley, Boston, New York, San Francisco, 2004.
Gerald Doppelt, Democracy and Technology, in Tyler Veak Ed, Democratising Technology:
Andrew Feenbergs Critical Theory of Technology, State University of Albany Press,
Albany, New York 2006.
Gupta Geeta, Aadhaar Letters lost: Phase I was tough says India Post, Indian Express,
New Delhi, 25 Aug. 2012.
Haag Stephen, Cummings Maeve, Management Information Systems for the Information
Age, Mc-Graw Hill, 2010.
Heidegger, Martin The Question Concerning Technology, in Robert C Scharff and Val
Dusek Ed, Philosophy of Technology. The technological condition. An anthology,
Blackwell Publishing, Malden, Ma, USA, 2003, pp. 25264.
J Bonadio et al, Improving Human Health and Physical Capabilties, in Mikhail C Rocoand
William Sims Bainbridge, National Science Foundation, Converging Technologies
for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information
Technology and Cognitive Science, National Science Foundation, Arlington,
Virginia, June 2002.
Kachi Anil, Social Inclusion and Aadhaar: Introduction and Concept Paper, UIDAI,
Connaught Circus, Delhi, 30th April 2012.
Kaptelinin Victor, Nardi Bonnie A, Acting with Technology: Activity Theory and Interaction
Design, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, London, England. 2006.
Kaur Sukhdeep, Smart cards for pension hits hurdle: Changing fingerprints, Indian
Express, 03 Aug. 2012.
Khalap, Kiran, AADHAARCommunicating to a Billion: An awareness and communication
report, Awareness and Communication Strategy Advisory Council (ACSAC),
Unique Identification Authority of India, Planning Commission, Government of
India, New Delhi, May 2010.
Kline, Ronald and Trevor Pinch, The Social Construction of Technology, in Donald
Mackensie and Judy Wajcman Ed, the Social Shaping of Technology, Open University
Press, Buckingham, Philadelphia, Second Edition 1999, First Edition 1985.
Light Ann, The Panopticon reaches within: how digital technology turns us inside out,
Identity in the Information Society, Springer, June 2010.
London School of Economics and Political Science, The Identity Project: An Assessment
of the UK Identity Card Project and Its Implications, The Department of Information
Systems, London, June 2005.
6/18/13 4:56 PM
Manuel, Imaz, Benyon David, Designing with Blends: Conceptual Foundations of HumanComputer Interaction and Software Engineering, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass,
London, England, 2007.
Roco, M.C. and W.S. Bainbridge, Executive Summary, in Mikhail C Roco and William Sims
Bainbridge, National Science Foundation, Converging Technologies for Improving
Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and
Cognitive Science, National Science Foundation, Arlington, Virginia, June 2002.
Seetharaman M S, UIDAI Data Update Policy Ver 1.1, UIDAI, Planning Commission, Govt
of India, 29 March 2012.
Selic B, Models, Software models and UML, in Lavagno Luciano, Martin Grant, Selic
Brian Edited, UML for Real: Design of Embedded Real-time systems, Kulwer
Academic Publishers, New York, Boston, Dordrecht, London, Moscow, 2003.
page 14.
Sethi Nitin, NGO shelters shut after it pointed out flaws, The Times of India, 04 July
2011.
Software Engineering Standards Committee of the IEEE Computer Society, IEEE
Recommended Practice for Software Requirement Specifications, IEEESA,
Standards Body, Approved 25 June 1998, Reaffirmed 9 Dec. 2009.
Special Correspondent, Discrepancies in issue of Aadhaar Cards, The Hindu, 2 October,
2012.
UIDAI, Aadhaar Enrollment Client Installation and Setup Manual, Planning Commission,
Govt of India, 2010.
UIDAI, Strategy Overview: Creating a Unique Identity Number for Every Resident in India,
UIDAI, Planning Commission, Govt of India, Apr. 2010.
UIDAI, UIDAI Data Updation Ver 1.0, UIDAI, Planning Commission, Govt of India, 29 June
2011.
UIDAI, UIDAI Strategy Overview: Creating a Unique Identity Number for Every Resident in
India, UIDAI, Planning Commission, Govt of India, Apr. 2010.
Winner Langdon, Autonomous Technology, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts
and London, England, 1977, pp. 1017.
NOTES
1
London School of Economics and Political Science, The Identity Project: An Assessment of the
UK Identity Card Project and Its Implications, June 2005, page 6.
Mukul Akshaya, Parliamentary Panel Discusses multi-purpose I-card, Times of India,

21 Aug. 2003.
Press Release, First tranche of multipurpose national identity cards handed over to the
citizens, Press Information Bureau, Govt of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, 26 May 2007.
Moily Veerappa M, Chairman, Second Administrative Reforms Commission, Promoting

e-Governance: The SMART way forward, Government of India, New Delhi, Dec. 2008.
pp. 10611.
UIDAI, Strategy Overview: Creating a Unique Identity Number for Every Resident in
6/18/13 4:56 PM
CHAPTER 12
India, Apr. 2010, pp. 15.

6
Khalap, Kiran, AADHAARCommunicating to a Billion: An awareness and communication

report, Awareness and Communication Strategy Advisory Council (ACSAC), May 2010. pp 16.
Technology, The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition,
2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company1) The application of science, especially to industrial or
commercial objectives. 2) The scientific method and material used to achieve a commercial or
industrial objective.
Feenberg, 1991, pp. 56.
See Heidegger, The Question Concerning Technology, in Scharff and Val Dusek Ed, Philosophy of
Technology. The technological condition. An anthology, 2003, pp. 25264. Jacques Ellul,
On the Aims of a Philosophy of Technology, in ibid. pp. 182185. Heidegger sees human beings as
being delivered to it (technology) in the worst possible way; in the effort to be free of the chains of
technology, he suggests, one needs to see beyond the obvious to the how the specific technology is
revealing nature as a resource for human use. He gives the example of a dam on a river revealing
the river as a source of electrical power to illustrate the point. Ellul sees contemporary social life as a
technological society, where technology is like autonomous force, an end in itself, to be regarded
as an organism tending towards closure and self-determination. He describes a technological
society as the summation of all the techniques in a society taken together which is related to every
factor in the life of modern man.
10 Kline and Pinch, The Social Construction of Technology, in Mackenzie and Wajcman Ed, 1985/1999,
pp. 11314.
11 Andrew and Slater, Introduction: The technological economy, Economy and Society, 2002,
pp 177.
12 UIDAI Strategy Overview: Creating a Unique Identity Number for Every Resident in India, Apr. 2010.
pp 1.
13 Feenberg, 1991, pp. 1420.
14 Buttles-Valdez, Svolu, Valdez, 2006, pp. 110.
15 Braman, Sandra, , 2002, page 9194.
16 Litfin, in Ibid, page 65.
17 Doppelt, Democracy and Technology, 2006. pp. 8587.
18 Haag, Cummings, 2009, pp. 301320.
19 Selic B, Models, Software models and UML, in Lavagno, Martin and Selic ed. 2003. page 14.
20 Imaz and Benyon, 2007, pp 12.
21 Fowler, 2004. pp. 128.
22 Haag and Cummings 2010, pp 20.
23 Why Requirements Capture is Difficult, in Grady et al 1999, pp. 112116.
24 Software Engineering Standards Committee of the IEEE Computer Society, IEEE Recommended
Practice for Software Requirement Specifications, IEEE SA, Standards Body, Approved 25
June 1998, Reaffirmed 9 Dec. 2009.
25 Kachi, 2012, pp 78.
26 Basili, 1990, pp. 1925.
27 Attaran, 2004, pp. 585596.
28 Kachi, 2012. pp 1.
29 Sethi, Nitin, NGO shelters shut after it pointed out flaws, The Times of India, 04 Jul 2011.
6/18/13 4:56 PM
30 Bhatti Bharat, Dreze Jean, Khera Reetika, Experiments with Aadhaar, The Hindu, Opinion, 27 June
2012.
31 Jaya Dubey, ADG/CPIO, Farid Khan:A-11016/76/09UIDAI, UIDAI, Planning Commission, Govt
of India, 15 Jan 2010.
32 Jaya Dubey, ADG/CPIO, Murthy B N D-29013/RTI 486(10)/2009C & I, UIDAI, Planning
Commission, Govt of India, 13 Nov. 2009.
33 Ashish Kumar, ADG/CPIO, Mohd Asif Ayaz: F-12013/23/2011/RTI-UIDAI, UIDAI, Planning
Commission, Govt of India, 25 Jul. 2011.
34 An example of some of the detection techniques may be found in a paper by Antolelli et al in 2006,
pp. 360373.
35 Ashish Kumar, ADG/CPIO, Inderjeet Singh Sehzra: F-12013/08/2011/RTI-UIDAI, UIDAI,
Planning Commission, Govt of India, 25 Mar. 2011.
36 Ashish Kumar, ADG/CPIO, Shri Sudhir: F-12013/065/2012/RTI-UIDAI, UIDAI, Planning
Commission, Govt of India, 18 Apr. 2012.
37 Gupta Geeta, Aadhaar Letters lost: Phase I was tough says India Post, Indian Express, New Delhi,
25 Aug. 2012.
38 Special Correspondent, Discrepancies in issue of Aadhaar Cards, The Hindu, 2 October, 2012.
39 Ashish Kumar, ADG/CPIO, Ms Kusum Giri: F-12013/049/2012/RTI-UIDAI, UIDAI, Planning
Commission, Govt of India, 07 May 2012.
40 Ashish Kumar, ADG/CPIO, Sh Mark Quadros: F-12013/55/2012/RTI-UIDAI, UIDAI, Planning
Commission, Govt of India, Aug. 2011.
41 UIDAI, Strategy Overview: Creating a Unique Identity Number for Every Resident in
India, UIDAI, Planning Commission, Govt of India, Apr. 2010, page 20.
42 UIDAI, UIDAI Data Updation Ver 1.0, UIDAI, Planning Commission, Govt of India, 29 June 2011,
pp. 411.
43 Seetharaman M S, UIDAI Data Update Policy Ver 1.1, UIDAI, Planning Commission, Govt of India,
29 Mar. 2012.
44 Kaur Sukhdeep, Smart cards for pension hits hurdle: Changing fingerprints, Indian Express,
03 Aug. 2 012.
45 Fenker and Bowyer, 2012, pp. 6.
46 Dubey Jaya, Neeraj and Vikram Gaur: A-11016/76/09UIDAI, UIDAI, Planning Commission,
Govt of India, 18 May 2010.
47 UIDAI, Aadhaar Enrollment Client Installation and Setup Manual, Planning Commission,
Govt of India, 2010.
48 Winner, 1977, pp. 1017.
49 Kaptelinin and Nardi, 2006. pp. 4446.
50 Roco and Bainbridge, June 2002, pp. 421.
51 Light, 2010, pp. 583585.
52 Bonadio et al, 2002, pp. 179181
6/18/13 4:56 PM

In The Wake of Aadhar The Digital Ecosystem

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

In The Wake of Aadhar The Digital Ecosystem

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

IN THE WAKE OF AADHAAR

THE DIGITAL ECOSYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE IN INDIA

Centre for the Study of Culture & Society

Project supported by The Ford Foundation, New Delhi

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 1

In the Wake of Aadhaar

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 10

The author, himself a software programmer now working on

IDENTITY SYSTEMS IN CONTEXT

372 In the Wake of Aadhaar

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 372

Table 1: European Union eIDMS comparison.

Kubicek Herbert, Introduction: conceptual framework and research design for a

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 373

eGovernance under a common umbrella.4 With the change in the governing

374 In the Wake of Aadhaar

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 374

OVERVIEW OF SOCIOTECHNICAL SYSTEMS

Let us start with a conventional setting: how are technological systems in

In the Wake of Aadhaar 375

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 375

When attempting to review a large technological system such as Aadhaar,

376 In the Wake of Aadhaar

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 376

information technologies from a social standpoint, to also and parallelly look

In the Wake of Aadhaar 377

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 377

social hierarchies. A more sociotechnical process of technology may therefore

MODELLING AND DESIGN IN INFORMATION

In more traditional forms of engineering or architecture, modelling

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 378

moderately complex systems without some degree of abstraction. To quote a

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 379

Figure 1: Phases and Deliverables of the typical SDLC.22

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 380

INTERMEDIATE DELIVERABLES IN AADHAAR

software development approaches tend to view requirement

In the Wake of Aadhaar 381

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 381

Figure 2: Typical UML Use Case.

UML use cases may also be typically accompanied by a textual description

User: Wants to be enrolled into the CIDR.

Enrollment Agency: Educates and brings the resident to the registrar.

Registrar: Validates and enrolls the resident.

Introducer or Undertaking Registrar: Endorses the identity and

The resident should not already have an Aadhaar card or number.

Success Condition (Post conditions):

The residents biometric data is successfully recorded and the Aadhaar

382 In the Wake of Aadhaar

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 382

Main Success Scenario (Basic Flow):

The residents identity is verified or endorsed.

The residents biometric data is recorded.

The residents data is de-duplicated.

A unique Aadhaar number is generated and delivered to the user.

Extensions (Alternative Flow):

The users biometrics cannot be recordedin this case a manual

The users Aadhaar number cannot be deliveredin this case it may

In the Wake of Aadhaar 383

AADHAR_The digital Ecosystem Final.indd 383

An overview of a class diagram for a project such as Aadhaar is shown below.

Figure 4: Sample Class Diagram.

384 In the Wake of Aadhaar