Examine how the Government e-Marketplace (GeM) has transformed public procurement in India over the last decade. What are its limitations?

Created by inserting Rule 141-A in the General Financial Rules, 2005 and launched on 9 August 2016, GeM was conceived as a one-stop national portal to replace fragmented manual tendering [2]. Completing a decade in August 2026 with cumulative GMV above ₹20 lakh crore across 3.78 crore orders, it has restructured — though not perfected — how the state buys [1].

Scale and efficiency gains

• Annual GMV rose from ₹422 crore (FY 2016-17) to over ₹5 lakh crore each in FY 2024-25 and FY 2025-26; the first ₹10 lakh crore took eight years, the next under two [1].
• An IIT Delhi study (FY 2023-24 to FY 2025-26) estimated ₹1,76,411 crore in net social savings, with GeM prices averaging 74.3% below competitor benchmarks [1].

Transparency and administrative reform

• Rule 149, GFR 2017 made GeM procurement mandatory for Central Ministries, standardising processes and shrinking departmental discretion [2].
• Open catalogues, e-bidding and reverse auction shift purchase decisions from negotiation to visible price discovery [3].

Inclusive procurement

• MSEs fulfilled orders worth ₹9.07 lakh crore — 45.6% of cumulative GMV; 2.24 lakh women-led MSEs secured ₹99,147 crore and 42,242 startups ₹65,633 crore [1].

Limitations

• Coverage is uneven: mandatory use binds Central Ministries, while state and local-body adoption remains discretionary and variable [2].
• Impact claims rest largely on platform-generated data — buyer satisfaction of 92% is self-reported, limiting independent verification [1].
• A marketplace of 25.45 lakh sellers and 1.37 lakh buyers strains quality assurance, grievance redressal and IT resilience [1].
• Digital literacy and connectivity gaps can exclude small rural suppliers, and low-price emphasis risks crowding out quality.

GeM has thus converted procurement from a discretionary back-office function into transparent Digital Public Infrastructure. Extending it to states, enabling third-party audit of savings claims, and strengthening seller grievance redressal would align it fully with the constitutional promise of accountable, equitable public spending.