Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Local Governance in Rural India: Tracing Institutional Voids

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Governance and Governed

Abstract

This paper, with broad-brush strokes, portrays the contours of governance practice and challenges, focusing on the local governance process and service delivery in rural India. Looking at the structural and institutional issues from a political economy perspective, the paper is less an attempt to draw policy lessons than to understand what has happened and under what constraints. It draws on insights from research by the author in local governance and service delivery in rural India and highlights issues that are often overlooked in current debates on local governance and service delivery, such as the role of informal institutions, multi-level governance, and political realities of relationships at people’s level.

The field research for this study was jointly conducted by the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) in Mumbai, the Institute of Social and Economic Change (ISEC) in Bangalore, and the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), in Washington, DC, with financial support from the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and the World Bank.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Wolfensohn, James D (1999). “A Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Framework”. URL-http://web.worldbank.org/archive/website01013/WEB/0__CO-87.HTM. Accessed on 18 January, 2017.

  2. 2.

    In India, the local government institutions have been an institutional reform from above, provided by the state to the people. There was no movement of the people, demanding local democracy and devolution of power to the elected local government institutions. Besides, the Constitutional Amendment only provides the overall framework for local governance in the country, leaving the specific details of the local government system to the decision of the state governments.

  3. 3.

    Lord Ripon’s well known resolution on local self-government passed in 1882 had a series of enactments in which larger powers of the Local self-government were given to the rural and urban bodies and the elective people received some wider rights.

  4. 4.

    For details of the survey, refer—World Bank and IFPRI (2010).

  5. 5.

    Approachability here refers to the receptiveness and responsiveness of the local government functionaries to the locals and their needs.

References

  • Arikan, Gulsun G. 2004. Fiscal Decentralosation: A Remedy for Corruption? International Tax and Public Finance, 11, 175–195. URL: http://www.socsci.uci.edu/~jkbrueck/course%20readings/Econ%20272B%20readings/arikan.pdf. Accessed on 22-04-2017.

  • Aziz, A., N. Sivanna, M. Devendra Babu, Madhushree Sekher, and C.C. Nelson. 2002. Decentralized Governance and Planning: A Comparative Study in Three South Indian States. New Delhi: Macmillan Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bardhan, P. 2002. Decentralization of Governance and Development. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 16 (4): 185–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardhan, Pranab, and Dilip Mookherjee. 2000. Capture and Governance at Local and National Levels. The American Economic Review 90 (2): 135–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardhan, P., and D. Mookherjee (eds.). 2006. Decentralization and Local Governance in Developing Countries—A Comparative Perspective. Cambridge, Massachusetts, England: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergh, Sylvia. 2004. Democratic Decentralisation and Local Participation: A Review of Recent Research. Development in Practice 14 (6): 780–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birner, Regina, Madhushree Sekher, and Katherina Rabee. 2012. Reforming the Public Administration for Food Security and Agricultural Development: Insights from an Empirical Study in Karnataka. IFPRI Discussion Paper 01175, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington D.C. URL: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp01175.pdf.

  • Blair, H. 2000. Participation and Accountability in the Periphery: Democratic Local Governance in Six Countries. World Development 28 (1): 21–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheema, G.S. 2007. Devolution with Accountability: Learning from Good Practices. In Decentralizing Governance: Emerging Concepts and Practices, ed. G.S. Cheema, and D.A. Rondinelli, 170–188. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crook, Richard C., and James Manor. 1998. Democracy and Decentralisation in South Asia and West Africa: Participation, Accountability and Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crook, Richard, and James Manor. 2000. Democratic Decentralisation, OED Working paper Series, No. 11. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank. http://lnweb90.worldbank.org/oed/oeddoclib.nsf/DocUNIDViewForJavaSearch/2365D3D73CFE619D8525697700729143/$file/Demcratc.pdf. Accessed on 18-01-2017.

  • GoI. 1978. Report of the Committee on Panchayati raj Institutions. New Delhi: Government of India.

    Google Scholar 

  • GoK. 1993. Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act (Act No. 14) of 1993. Bangalore: Government of Karnataka.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goyal, Jaya, and Madhushree Sekher. 2015. Accountability, Nutrition and Local Institutions in India. Development 58 (1): 79–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Litvack, Jennie, Junaid Ahmed, and Richard Bird. 1998. Rethinking Decentralisation in Developing Countries. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank. http://www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/decentralization/Rethinking%20Decentralization.pdf. Accessed on 18-01-2017.

  • Mathew, George, and Anand Mathew. 2003. India: Decentralization and Local Governance. How Cleintelism and Accountability Work. In Decentralization and Democratic Governance: Experiences from India, Bolivia and South Africa, ed. A. Hadenius, 13–62. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niikawa, Tatsuro. 2014. Decentralisation and Local Politics. Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS). In Government and Politics, vol. 1, 378–397. Developed under the Auspices of the UNESCO. Eolss Publishers, Paris, France. URL: https://www.eolss.net/Sample-Chapters/C04/E6-32-03-05.pdf. Accessed on 18-02-2017.

  • Olsen, Hans Bjørn. 2007. Decentralisation and Local Governance Module 1: Definitions and Concepts. Berne: Eidgenössisches Departement für auswärtige Angelegenheiten (EDA), Swiss Development Council (SDC). URL: https://www.eda.admin.ch/content/dam/deza/en/documents/publikationen/Diverses/167288-decentralisation-local-governance_EN.pdf. Accessed on 11-02-2017.

  • Palanithurai, G. 2009. Decentralisation in India: Critical Issues from the Field. New Delhi: Concept Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raut, M.K., and T.V. Sekher. 2013. Decentralization of Health Care Systems: Findings from Odisha and Gujarat, India. Journal of Health Management 15 (2): 235–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romeo, Leonardo. 1999. System Experimentation in Support of Decentralisation Reforms: Reflections on Local Development Funds. Regional Development Dialogue 20 (2): 134–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romeo, Leonardo. 2003. The Role of External Assistance in Supporting Decentralisation Reform. Public Administration Development 23: 89–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy, Aruna, N. Dey, and S. Singh. 2001. ‘Demanding Accountability’ (Reproduced from ‘India 1996’, Seminar 449, January 1997). Seminar Magazine, Issue No. 500 (April) New Delhi. URL: http://www.india-seminar.com/2001/500/500%20aruna%20roy%20et%20al.htm. Accessed on 11-05-2017.

  • Sekher, T.V. 2003. Sensitizing Grassroots Leadership on Health Issues: Experiences of a Pilot Television Project. Economic and Political Weekly 38 (46): 4873–4879.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sekher, T.V., S. Bhide, M.N. Islam, and M. Das Gupta. 2006a. Public Health and Panchayati Raj Institutions in Karnataka, Monograph No. 11, 1–149. Bangalore: Institute for Social and Economic Change.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sekher, Madushree, K.V. Raju, Amit Upadhaya, Ashwini Shanikodi, Regina Birner, and Nethra Palaniswamy. 2006b. Interim Report on Case Study of Two-Gram Panchayats in Karnataka. In Making Decentralisation and Local Governance Work for the Rural Poor, CEENR/ISEC-IFPRI Research Project. Mimeo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, Geeta, ed. 2006. Fiscal Decentralization to Rural Governments in India. New York: Oxford University Press for the World Bank, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, Nirvikar. 2008. Decentralization and Public Delivery of Health Care Services in India. Health Affairs 27 (4): 991–1001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanzi, Vito. 1996. Fiscal Federalism and Decentralisation: A Review of Some Efficiency and Macroeconomic Aspects. In Proceedings of the Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics, 1995, 295–315. Washington D.C.: The World Bank. URL: https://www.mef.gob.pe/contenidos/pol_econ/documentos/Fiscal_Federalism_Decentralization.pdf. Accessed on 19-01-2017.

  • Tanzi, Vito. 2001. Pitfalls on the Road to Fiscal Decentralization. Working Paper No. 19, Economic Reform Project, Global Policy Program. Washington D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. URL: http://carnegieendowment.org/files/19Tanzi.pdf. Accessed no 22-04-2017.

  • von Braun, Joachim, and Ulrike Grote. 2002. Does Decentralisation Serve the Poor? Paper presented in the IMF-conference on fiscal decentralization 20–21 November in Washington D.C. URL: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/seminar/2000/fiscal/vonbraun.pdf. Accessed on 22-01-2017.

  • Vyasulu, P., and V. Vyasulu. 1999. Women in Panchayati raj: Grass Roots Democracy in Malgudi. Economic and Political Weekly 34 (52): 3677–3686.

    Google Scholar 

  • Widmalm, S. 2005. What are Decentralisation and Panchayti Raj Reforms and Who Likes Them? In Decentalization and Local Governance, ed. L.C. Jain, 31–62. New Delhi: Orient Longmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank and IFPRI. 2010. Gender and Governance in Rural Services: Insights from India, Ghana and Ethiopia. Washington D.C.: World Bank and IFPRI (Book was written by an author team of IFPRI staff and country collaborators).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Policies, Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai, India

    Madhushree Sekher

Authors
  1. Madhushree Sekher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Madhushree Sekher .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Policies, Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai, India

    Madhushree Sekher

  2. Director, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, India

    S. Parasuraman

  3. India Observatory, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, United Kingdom

    Ruth Kattumuri

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sekher, M. (2018). Local Governance in Rural India: Tracing Institutional Voids. In: Sekher, M., Parasuraman, S., Kattumuri, R. (eds) Governance and Governed. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5963-6_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation