Offering new insights into the political economy of contemporary India, this book considers how and why unequal patterns of economic growth have taken shape within the context of a democratic and decentralising political system, and how this has impacted upon the processes of economic development.

This book provides a vantage point of comparison, of the actual reality of decentralisation in India with Gandhi’s vision of decentralised democracy, or what he referred to as Gram Swaraj. It looks at the historical evolution of panchayats from ancient times to India’s independence, and critically discusses the developments after. It examines the functioning of the present Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) and the performances of urban local bodies. The basic thrust of this work is the need for constitutional reforms meant to strengthen and deepen democracy. The book will be useful to those in political studies, policy studies, public administration and development studies.

This book is an analytical examination of financing and public service delivery challenges in a decentralized framework. It also provides critical insights into the effectiveness of public expenditure, through benefit incidence analysis of education and healthcare services in India. The benefits of decentralization always come with conflicts and trade-offs. By unpacking the process of decentralization, the authors identify that 'unfunded mandates', arising from the asymmetry between finances and functions at local levels, are a major challenge. The analysis is carried out by distilling the existing studies in this area, and through an empirical investigation of public finance data at different public sector levels in India, as well as in some selected developing countries. Using the household survey statistics of consumption expenditure, an analysis of utilization or benefit incidence of public spending on social sectors in India is achieved, covering education and health sectors. This title is available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

This book is an in-depth empirical study of four Asian and African attempts to create democratic, decentralised local governments in the late 1980s and 1990s. The case studies of Ghana, Cote d'Ivoire, Karnataka (India) and Bangladesh focus upon the enhancement of participation; accountability between people, politicians and bureaucrats; and, most importantly, on whether governmental performance actually improved in comparison with previous forms of administration. The book is systematically comparative, and based upon extensive popular surveys and local field work. It makes an important contribution to current debates in the development literature on whether 'good governance' and decentralisation can provide more responsive and effective services for the mass of the population - the poor and disadvantaged who live in the rural areas.

Institutional models, fiscal arrangements, and politics of decentralization -- Future directions.

Nearly all countries worldwide are now experimenting with decentralization. Their motivation are diverse. Many countries are decentralizing because they believe this can help stimulate economic growth or reduce rural poverty, goals central government interventions have failed to achieve. Some countries see it as a way to strengthen civil society and deepen democracy. Some perceive it as a way to off-load expensive responsibilities onto lower level governments. Thus, decentralization is seen as a solution to many different kinds of problems. This report examines the origins and implications decentralization from a political economy perspective, with a focus on its promise and limitations. It explores why countries have often chosen not to decentralize, even when evidence suggests that doing so would be in the interests of the government. It seeks to explain why since the early 1980s many countries have undertaken some form of decentralization. This report also evaluates the evidence to understand where decentralization has considerable promise and where it does not. It identifies conditions needed for decentralization to succeed. It identifies the ways in which decentralization can promote rural development. And it names the goals which decentralization will probably not help achieve.