You probably have a good sense of what makes a policy work.

After all, any policy would either help people, make things worse, or do nothing at all. Policymakers just have to pick the ones that help and avoid the ones that cause problems. Easy. Aasaan. Nissaaram!

But how well can you actually tell the difference?

Below is a small exercise. For each of these real policy interventions, your job is to decide whether it had a positive, negative, or neutral outcome.

Let’s see if your instincts match reality.

Right to Information • 1 of 6

The Right to Information Act (RTI), enacted in 2005, lets citizens access information held by public authorities, aiming to boost transparency and accountability. When it was introduced, some hailed it as a democratic tool, while others, including bureaucrats, feared misuse and administrative chaos.

Minimum Support Price • 2 of 6

The Minimum Support Price (MSP) is a guaranteed price set by the Indian government to protect farmers from market fluctuations and ensure stable incomes while encouraging food production. After its introduction in the 60s, MSP has evolved into a key mechanism for income and food security, covering 22 essential commodities through the Food Corporation of India (FCI).

Drug Price Control • 3 of 6

The Drug Price Control Order (DPCO) 2013 was rolled out to regulate the prices of essential medicines and make healthcare more accessible and affordable for India's poorest. Enforced by the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority, the policy capped prices based on the weighted average of market prices of the drugs under the National List of Essential Medicines (NLEM).

Economic Reforms • 4 of 6

The Indian government introduced sweeping economic reforms to remove licensing barriers, open up trade, and attract foreign investment in an attempt to reduce the state's role in industries and allow private enterprises to compete more freely in the market. This policy received a lot of criticism, with many arguing that it would lead to job losses and foreign domination, hurting both the workers and the local industries alike.

Make in India • 5 of 6

The government launched the Make in India initiative to turn India into a global manufacturing powerhouse. The policy aimed to boost domestic production, attract foreign investment, and generate millions of manufacturing jobs. It was heavily promoted as a way to reduce dependence on imports and strengthen the economy.

Alcohol Prohibition • 6 of 6

In multiple Indian states, alcohol prohibition was introduced to curb consumption and reduce social harms like domestic violence and drunk driving, in line with Article 47 of the Constitution. Rooted in Gandhian ideals, it aimed to improve public health and social order.

Complete the exercise to continue.

How was the quiz? What did you notice about the outcomes of these policies? Were you able to accurately pick the good policies from the bad?

All these policies had good intentions. No doubt. But if good intentions were enough, every policy intervention made by the government would be a success, unlike the glaring examples we saw before.

Most people, including policymakers, tend to make this mistake and evaluate policies by their intentions rather than their track record, even though history is littered with well-meaning policies that backfired spectacularly.

They forget that policies don't operate in a vacuum. Instead policies interact with markets and society, often leading to consequences nobody anticipated.

If we don’t train ourselves to think in terms of consequences rather than intentions, we risk endorsing policies that sound good but make problems worse. As the wise crow from The Nitopadesha says:

… in all matters of public interest, one must judge things from the calculation of consequences.