Bangla podcast: Is Panchayati Raj in crisis?
I loved doing this podcast (in large parts) in Bangla. Do take a look!
I wanted to share some thoughts from a recent podcast chat I had about Panchayati Raj in India, a topic I've been interested in for a long time. I recently wrote an article asking whether the Panchayati movement, which is often considered a model state for decentralisation, is actually in distress. Why do I think that? My motivation was to look at whether the model is still relevant and if the assumptions from the past still hold, as the context has changed significantly.
Highlights from this chat:
While Panchayati elections across the country are still keenly contested, particularly in states where financial flows to Panchayats are higher and there is more discretion. This contestation is, I believe, a net positive for the democratic process, as it allows for opposition.
Another prominent feature is the presence of women leaders in Panchayats. Representation itself has inherent value, and studies in states like West Bengal have shown that over time, the proportion of social schemes more broadly beneficial to people, including women, has increased.
The context has changed dramatically since the 1990s. Rapid urbanisation and migration mean fewer people are living in and engaging with the village economy and its institutions. And while Gram Sabhas might happen on paper, actual participation has been a steady trend of decline across states.
The rise of technology and Direct Benefit Transfers (DBT), influenced by initiatives from previous governments and championed today, has revolutionised the delivery of government services. Payments can now be done via biometric verification. But this isn't a foolproof system; it is easily conceivable that 3-5% of people face exclusion due to issues like disability, biometric problems, or lack of infrastructure.
Our governance philosophy often seems to be: trust technology, trust bureaucracy, but don't trust politicians. The idea is that bureaucracy, overseen by officials like district collectors, will implement everything. While taking out intermediaries isn't inherently wrong, the system isn't infallible, and there's a role for local leadership or a complaints process to help those who are excluded.
The way government services and communication often work now, like DBT or even 'Mann ki Baat', is predominantly a one-way transmission. There isn't a robust, regular feedback loop.
There is a broader trend towards centralising power. It's a form of 'infantilising' both the electorate and the local leaders. If leaders have limited power or scope to actually do things because funds are tied and decisions are top-down, the people who elected them also lose their agency. Power is getting more centralised, communication is predominantly one-way, and people have less opportunity to directly address problems. When power is centralised, the scope of corruption also tilts upwards, becoming harder to watchdog compared to local-level corruption which people can protest.
So, how can Panchayats find a relevant space in this changing context? Since the administrative state isn't likely to roll back its approach to scheme delivery, Panchayats need to be reimagined. They should emerge again as vital spaces for local political dialogue, discussing local issues, solving problems and conflicts, and local resource management.
Panchayats are arguably the only level of government truly incentivised to serve the people, unlike the bureaucracy which may lack incentives. We need to re-emphasise these 'softer' aspects of their role, moving beyond just seeing them as technocratic delivery agents or contractors.
Understanding Panchayats requires looking at this broader framework of governance and the policy impulses that shape the relationship between different tiers of government. This is why local governance is so important.