Examine the role of BRAP and D-BRAP in promoting competitive federalism in Ease of Doing Business.

Competitive federalism — States competing on measurable performance to attract investment — found its clearest instrument in DPIIT's Business Reforms Action Plan (BRAP), launched 2014–15, which ranks States/UTs on reform implementation [1]. BRAP and its district successor D-BRAP convert reform into a contest, but their federal impact is uneven.

How BRAP drives competitive federalism

• Ranking-based competition: annual editions (BRAP 2024/2026) grade States on defined reforms, spurring peer emulation and best-practice diffusion [1].
• Standardised benchmarks: aligns States with Reducing Compliance Burden and the World Bank's B-READY framework, creating a common yardstick [2].
• Outcome anchoring: cumulative reforms cut >47,000 compliances and supported strong FDI inflows during 2014–25 [1].

How D-BRAP deepens it

• Localising reform: the D-BRAP 2025 Guidebook identifies 154 reforms with assessment checklists, extending competition below the State to district level [1].
• Administrative responsiveness: districts, the actual point of investor contact, are made accountable, converting State intent into last-mile delivery [1].

Limits

• Reliance on self-certification and feedback risks gaming over real change.
• Poorer States face capacity gaps; rankings may entrench rather than close divides.
• Statutory reform (e.g. Jan Vishwas Bill, 2026, decriminalising 717 provisions) is Centre-driven, not federal competition [3].

BRAP and D-BRAP have institutionalised reform-by-comparison, making governance a shared national race to the top. Pairing rankings with capacity support for lagging States and independent verification would let cooperative and competitive federalism reinforce, not undercut, one another.