PM Modi’s inauguration strategy

PM Modi’s inauguration streak is well known. He inaugurates frequently and across scales, from railway stations and highways to housing clusters and redevelopment projects. Critics argue that this risks voter fatigue. More than that, it magnifies political exposure. When a Prime Minister associates himself with hundreds of projects, the likelihood that a single defect, delay or quality failure will reverberate nationally increases. Why concentrate reputational risk at the very top?

Defying political risk

In most political systems, leaders minimise exposure. They reserve landmark projects for themselves and delegate most other ribbon cuttings. They preserve distance from granular execution and retain plausible deniability. Narendra Modi appears to do the opposite.

The branding explanation is obvious: permanent campaigning, credit consolidation. Yet this reading is incomplete because it treats inaugurations as spectacle rather than as incentive design. The deeper question is structural. If exposure carries asymmetric downside, why persist? Why repeatedly link the highest office to assets whose execution cannot be personally supervised? The answer lies in his economics of governance.

A state built on diffused responsibility

India’s execution challenge has rarely been a shortage of announcements. There has been a shortage of disciplined completion. Projects pass through ministries, state governments, regulators, public sector undertakings, consultants and contractors. Responsibility is widely distributed. Coordination is layered.

This constraint intensified as public capital expenditure expanded at a scale India had not previously attempted. Infrastructure spending as a share of GDP doubled over the past decade. In nominal terms, annual infrastructure outlays multiplied several times over.

The Economic Survey estimates the infrastructure investment multiplier at roughly 2.5 to 3. Every rupee of public capex can generate multiple rupees of output over time. But that multiplier fires only if the asset functions. Sanctioned funds do not produce growth. Completed infrastructure does. When allocations grow at this pace, the binding constraint shifts decisively from funding to execution. The Prime Minister cannot inspect every foundation or audit every tender file. He cannot eliminate discretion across thousands of decision nodes. But he must ensure that rising public investment translates into functioning assets. In such a system, incentives must be deliberately engineered.

Taking political risk to make administrative pressure

Frequent Prime Minister-level inaugurations alter the payoff matrix inside the state. A project inaugurated quietly by a lower authority remains locally bounded. When the Prime Minister inaugurates the project, it carries national salience. If quality falters or timelines slip, scrutiny widens. Media attention intensifies. Opposition attention intensifies. The expected cost of negligence rises.

Here, the strategy becomes clear. Political risk is not being avoided. It is rather concentrated. By attaching his office to a broad set of assets, the Prime Minister raises his own reputational exposure. That exposure becomes leverage. Officers and contractors internalise that failure will not remain buried in administrative silence.

The inauguration functions as a public commitment device, compressing accountability in a system long accustomed to diffused responsibility. There is also a time-binding dimension. Modi has repeatedly stated that he intends to inaugurate the projects whose foundation stones he lays.

In many political systems, foundation ceremonies generate immediate credit, while delays are quietly absorbed by future administrations. Linking the foundation to the inauguration narrows that escape route. The benefit of promising is no longer detached from the cost of delivering. Files move differently when completion is tied to visible expectation.

This visibility strategy is supported by institutional architecture. The PRAGATI platform, launched in 2015, institutionalised direct Prime Ministerial review of major infrastructure projects, bringing together central secretaries and state chief secretaries in a structured digital forum. As of 2026, PRAGATI has reviewed projects worth over`85 lakh crore and resolved nearly 3,000 systemic bottlenecks. Complementing this, PM GatiShakti integrates geospatial data layers across ministries and states to reduce planning friction and coordination delays. These platforms constitute the administrative backbone that makes exposure credible rather than symbolic. The empirical record reflects this combination of fiscal scale and monitoring discipline. Highway construction accelerated sharply over the past decade. Rail electrification expanded to cover nearly the entire broad-gauge network. Metro networks multiplied across cities. Airport and port capacity rose while turnaround times fell. Train accident-related deaths declined significantly compared to the previous decade. These gains occurred alongside a massive expansion in project volume. The deeper contrast emerges when viewed historically. In the previous investment cycle, rising project pipelines coincided with stalled assets, banking stress and what was widely described as policy paralysis. Scale exposed institutional weakness.

In the current cycle, the project pipeline is far larger, yet a systemic execution freeze has not re-emerged at a comparable magnitude. Time overruns persist. Land acquisition and environmental constraints remain binding. But the system has absorbed scale without collapsing into gridlock. Visibility can compress the construction phase slack. It cannot repeal geography or regulatory complexity. Yet the absence of systemic paralysis under unprecedented infrastructure expansion is not trivial. It suggests that execution elasticity has improved.

The long game of centralised accountability

Most leaders hedge exposure and retain distance from granular delivery. This model centralises credit and, inevitably, centralises blame.

By publicly committing to inaugurate what he initiates, the Prime Minister narrows his own room for retreat. That is a calculated wager that concentrated accountability strengthens delivery discipline.

Overexposure fatigue remains a political hazard. Governance, however, is not only about applause cycles. It is about incentive alignment within large institutions. In a vast federal state where coordination failure once diluted outcomes, pressure is scarce capital. Concentrated visibility creates pressure.

The economics of PM Modi’s extensive inauguration streak is therefore not about ribbon cutting. It is about risk concentration as a tool of discipline. By accepting exposure, the Prime Minister tightens the loop between promise and delivery. Whether this model ultimately embeds higher standards beyond individual leadership will determine its durability. But the structural principle is clear.

In large systems, outcomes follow incentives. And incentives sharpen when someone at the top chooses to be seen.

The writer is an Associate Professor at SPJIMR, Mumbai. He holds a PhD from IIM Calcutta, an MBA from IIM Calcutta, and a BTech (H) from IIT Kharagpur; views are personal