A 2021 study of the factors behind delays in construction projects across multiple countries found that most could be classified into four primary categories: supply management, workforce management, project management and management of climatic conditions. Together, they account for nearly 70% of project delays.
The implications extend far beyond missed deadlines. Delays trigger cost escalations, litigation, loss of profit and diminished service quality, ultimately affecting the broader economy. In developing countries, particularly, the effects can be more intense as delays often exacerbate budget problems and resource shortages.The delays have identifiable causes that fit into these four primary factors, including poor procurement planning, inadequate labour productivity, weak project oversight and adverse weather conditions. Addressing them requires granular analysis of projects: tracking which sectors are most affected, which projects are slipping, and what corrective measures have been attempted or need to be tried. This is where data availability and data that lends itself to analysis become critical.
In India, however, such an analysis of infrastructure projects is becoming increasingly difficult to conduct, thanks to what can only be described as a bureaucratic masterclass in target management. Over the past year, the government has made significant changes to how infrastructure project progress is reported, changes that, whether by design or default, have obscured rather than illuminated the true scale of the problem.The headline numbers are still there: total projects, total costs and total overruns. What has disappeared is the crucial distinction between “ongoing” and “delayed”. The actionable details are vanishing.The scale itself is daunting. As of April 2026, the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) reported that 1,981 ongoing central sector infrastructure projects, each valued at ₹1.5 billion or more, had experienced a cumulative cost overrun of ₹5.65 trillion, approximately $60.4 billion.Total revised costs had ballooned to ₹42.78 trillion, about $457.5 billion, from original estimates of ₹37.12 trillion, about $397 billion. The transport and logistics sector dominates this portfolio, accounting for 1,459 projects valued at ₹23.34 trillion, roughly $249.6 billion. Yet these alarming figures are now harder than ever to scrutinise.Earlier, the ministry’s monthly Flash Reports would explicitly state how many projects were delayed. This changed with the launch of PAIMANA in September 2025, replacing the older Online Computerised Monitoring System.Under PAIMANA, the language has changed: projects running behind schedule were reclassified from “delayed” to merely “ongoing”. The word “delay” has disappeared. While PAIMANA offers advanced analytics and integration with other government portals, this semantic shift is more than cosmetic. It makes it nearly impossible to determine at a glance how many projects are running behind schedule. This represents a classic case of obscuring rather than illuminating, and it undermines public accountability.In an episode of Yes Minister, Sir Humphrey Appleby, the archetypal Whitehall mandarin, observes that the guaranteed way to meet a government target is to announce it retrospectively, after it has already been achieved. It is hard to avoid concluding that this logic can now be applied to the very definition of “delay” too.The importance of the change can be seen in the context of the two departments responsible for the maximum number of delayed projects: Railways and Roads. In the case of Railways, the opacity is near-total. In the case of Roads, however, a different story emerges, one that shows what is possible when data is actually analysed.
