Question map
Which of the following statements is/are correct regarding Smart India Hackathon 2017 ? 1. It is a centrally sponsored scheme for developing every city of our country into Smart Cities in a decade. 2. It is an initiative to identify new digital technology innovations for solving the many problems faced by our country. 3. It is a programme aimed at making all the financial transactions in our country completely digital in a decade. Select the correct answer using the code given below :
Explanation
The correct answer is option B (Statement 2 only).
Smart India Hackathon 2017 was an initiative by the Ministry of Human Resource Development to discover new, disruptive digital technologies that could solve India's most pressing problems through an open [2]innovation model[1]. It was a 36-hour non-stop digital product development competition[3] where the Prime Minister addressed students across 26 locations in India on April 1, 2017[4].
Statement 1 is incorrect because Smart India Hackathon was not a scheme for developing Smart Cities. It was specifically a hackathon competition focused on digital innovation solutions.
Statement 3 is also incorrect as the hackathon was not aimed at making financial transactions digital. While one document mentions digital financial transactions, this reference is unrelated to the Smart India Hackathon initiative itself.
Therefore, only statement 2 accurately describes the Smart India Hackathon 2017.
Sources- [1] https://www.indiabudget.gov.in/budget2019-20/economicsurvey/doc/echapter.pdf
- [2] https://www.indiabudget.gov.in/budget2019-20/economicsurvey/doc/echapter.pdf
- [3] https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleseDetail.aspx?PRID=1485484
- [4] https://www.meity.gov.in/static/uploads/2024/02/34-1.pdf
PROVENANCE & STUDY PATTERN
Guest previewThis is a classic 'Term Definition' question disguised as a policy question. The key was not memorizing the event details, but understanding the English word 'Hackathon' (a coding marathon) versus a 'Scheme' (long-term policy). It punishes those who confuse similar-sounding names (Smart India Hackathon vs Smart Cities Mission).
This question can be broken into the following sub-statements. Tap a statement sentence to jump into its detailed analysis.
- Statement 1: Was Smart India Hackathon 2017 a centrally sponsored scheme to develop every city in India into Smart Cities within a decade?
- Statement 2: Was Smart India Hackathon 2017 an initiative to identify new digital technology innovations to solve problems faced by India?
- Statement 3: Was Smart India Hackathon 2017 a programme aimed at making all financial transactions in India completely digital within a decade?
- Describes Smart India Hackathon 2017 as a 36-hour nonstop digital product development competition.
- Frames SIH as an event-focused, product-development contest rather than a centrally sponsored urban development scheme.
- States SIH was initiated by the Ministry of Human Resource Development as an open innovation model to discover disruptive technologies.
- Characterizes SIH as a product development competition to solve pressing problems, not as a centrally sponsored Smart Cities rollout program.
- Notes the Prime Minister addressed students of Smart India Hackathon 2017 across 26 locations, indicating a nationwide event format.
- Emphasizes SIH as a student-centered national hackathon rather than a centrally sponsored decade-long city development scheme.
States that the Smart City Mission is operated as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) with central and state/ULB matching contributions.
A student could use this to check whether the named programme in the statement (if it refers to the Smart City Mission) is indeed a CSS and then compare programme scope/targets to the claim about 'every city'.
Explicitly gives the aim of the Smart City Mission: to develop 100 smart cities and names the implementing ministry.
A student could contrast the official target of 100 cities with the statement's claim of 'every city' to judge plausibility.
Describes AMRUT as a separate Centrally Sponsored Scheme selecting 500 cities and notes Smart Cities Mission and AMRUT were launched simultaneously and are interlinked but have different approaches.
A student could infer that multiple central schemes targeted different (and limited) city sets rather than a single scheme covering 'every city', and could map the numbers (100, 500) against the total number of Indian cities to assess the 'every city' claim.
Shows institutional design of Smart Cities (city-level SPVs, joint state/ULB equity) implying project-level, city-specific arrangements rather than a one-size-fits-all nationwide programme covering all cities.
A student could reason that the SPV model is suited to selected cities and therefore use that pattern to question whether a single 2017 event would be the CSS for all cities.
States the objective of Smart Cities Mission: promote cities that provide core infrastructure and be a replicable 'lighthouse' model focused on compact areas.
A student could use the 'lighthouse/replicable model' concept to argue the Mission targets demonstrative pilot cities (limited number) rather than immediate development of every city within a decade.
This statement analysis shows book citations, web sources and indirect clues. The first statement (S1) is open for preview.
Login with Google to unlock all statements.
This statement analysis shows book citations, web sources and indirect clues. The first statement (S1) is open for preview.
Login with Google to unlock all statements.
This tab shows concrete study steps: what to underline in books, how to map current affairs, and how to prepare for similar questions.
Login with Google to unlock study guidance.
Discover the small, exam-centric ideas hidden in this question and where they appear in your books and notes.
Login with Google to unlock micro-concepts.
Access hidden traps, elimination shortcuts, and Mains connections that give you an edge on every question.
Login with Google to unlock The Vault.