Chapter 13 – POLITICAL PARTICIPATION, CLIENTELISM AND TARGETING OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS: Results from a Rural Household Survey in West Bengal, India[1]

Pranab Bardhan[2], Sandip Mitra[3], Dilip Mookherjee[4] and Abhirup Sarkar[5]


ABSTRACT

This paper provides evidence concerning political participation (turnout, awareness, attendance at meetings, campaign involvement, voting) and its relation to local governance (targeting of public services) in a developing country, based on a rural household survey in West Bengal, India. We find that reported participation rates varied remarkably little with socio-economic status, with the exception of education and immigrant status. Within villages, benefits disbursed by local governments displayed no relation to wealth, caste, education, gender or political affiliations. In contrast, allocation of benefits across villages by higher-level governments displayed bias against the poor; these biases were larger in villages with more unequal landownership and lower participation rates in village meetings. Political support among voters for the dominant Left party was positively correlated with receipt of recurring benefits and help provided by local governments in times of personal need, but not long-term one-time benefits or local public goods provided.

References

Baiochhi, Gianpaolo, Patrick Heller, Shubham Chaudhuri and Marcelo Silva. 2006. “Evaluating Empowerment: Participatory Budgeting in Brazilian Muncipalities,” mimeo, Department of Politics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Bardhan, Pranab and Dilip Mookherjee. 2000. “Capture and Governance at Local and National Levels”, American Economic Review, May, 135-139.

Bardhan, Pranab and Dilip Mookherjee. 2004. “Poverty Alleviation Efforts of West Bengal Panchayats”, Economic and Political Weekly, February 28, 965–974.

Bardhan, Pranab and Dilip Mookherjee. 2010. “Ideology Versus Electoral Competition in Redistributive Politics: Land Reform in West Bengal”, Working Paper, 2005, Boston University; revised version published in American Economic Review, September 2010.

Bardhan, Pranab and Dilip Mookherjee. 2006. “Pro-Poor Targeting and Accountability of Local Governments in West Bengal”, Journal of Development Economics, 2006.

Crook, Richard and James Manor. 1998. Democracy and Decentralisation in South Asia and West Africa. Cambridge University Press.

Gaviria, Alejandro, Ugo Panizzia and Jessica Seddon. 2002 “Economic, Social and Demographic Determinants of Political Participation in Latin America: Evidence from the 1990s”, Working Paper #472, Research Department, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington DC.

Ghatak, M. and M. Ghatak. 2002. “Recent Reforms in the Panchayat System in West Bengal: Towards Greater Participatory Governance”, Economic and Political Weekly, January 5, 45—58.

Krishna, Anirudh. 2006. “Poverty and Democratic Participation Reconsidered: Evidence from the Local Level in India”,Comparative Politics, July.

Przeworski, Adam. 2006. “Constraints and Choices: Electoral Participation in Historical Perspective,” mimeo, New York University Department of Politics, 2006.

Ruud, A. 1999. “From Untouchable to Communist: Wealth, Power and Status among Supporters of the Communist Party (Marxist) in Rural West Bengal,” in B. Rogaly, B. Harriss-White and S. Bose (Ed.) Sonar Bangla? Agricultural Growth and Agrarian Change in West Bengal and Bangladesh, Sage Publications, New Delhi and Thousand Oaks, London..

World Development Report. 2004, Making Services Work for Poor People, Washington DC: World Bank.