Decentralisation and People’s Participation

Decentralisation to local government bodies, by definition, means that these bodies take on greater authority and responsibilities that are relevant to them and that were previously with the central government; in effect, becoming centres of authority themselves. Local governments in the country are responsible for providing public services, promoting socio economic development, framing and enforcing rules consistent with national laws, and promoting culture and protecting cultural sites among others.

In this distribution of competencies from the central government to local governments, the notion and expectation is that decision-making processes are brought closer to the people. In other words, people should have greater opportunity to take part in decisions affecting their village or municipality. Looking at whether these theoretical constructs apply to people’s participation in decision-making processes in villages and counties within India shows trends of achievements as well as incomplete processes.

A local leader once explained the role of local governments: ‘If a person stands outside and shouts, the blue sky may or may not hear him. Local governments help to bring the blue sky closer to the people’. This corresponds with the ‘bridge between the people and the Centre’ imagery that local government leaders often evoke when speaking of their roles. What is striking in these imageries is that local governments do not seem to perceive of themselves as decision makers but as links to those who do.

Notwithstanding the fact that these priorities have to fit within specified parameters (contribute to the country’s five-year plan objectives, and within the budget ceiling as determined from the center), having the authority to make these decisions is indeed a big step that decentralisation has provided.

However, with respect to important aspects such as financing, staffing, and policy- making, there are noteworthy limitations to the scope for decision-making by local governments, and in effect, by citizens. For example, local governments can raise revenues through taxes within nationally defined scope and scale, some fines and user fees etc; however, these revenues make up, on average, less than one percent of overall expenditures.

Using these examples, it may be argued that the form of decentralisation in the country is largely de-concentration and delegation: de-concentration in that specified decision-making and financial and management authority are transferred to local authorities under the supervision of central ministries; and delegation in that delivery of specified public services is now also through community centres, which are institutions not wholly under the government but ultimately accountable to it.

The core point, however, is to ensure that local concerns and interests are not undervalued and left out. Other forms of participation could also be strengthened, such as engagement through community-based organisations and regular citizen feedback surveys. The knowledge and skills of civil society organisations in community mobilisation is another avenue.

Whatever the form, it will be important for citizens to be able to see the results of their participation without which their confidence in the processes and decentralisation itself could be undermined.

Question for Assessment

Observe the Financial activities of the nearby Panchayath of your residence and prepare a blog article in not more than 1500 words