Tapping New Rural Elite for Local Governance

The nation went through General elections in the months of April-May, followed by Assembly polls in two states, recently. Other than anti incumbency, the predominant shift which was pronounced in the outcomes was the preference of electorates for developmental issues over the archaic conventional dogmas of caste, religion etc. The said trend was equally prevalent in rural India that holds the key to development of the nation. Relative enhancements in the standards of education and awareness amongst rural youth have enabled a new category of ‘rural elites’ to come in reckoning, replacing the old guard. This article underscores the rise of this class and tremendous potential that they possess to re-invigorate local governance; thus actualising the desired inclusive growth and pacifying mutinies that are rampant at grassroots.

For rural India, the state has been distant in both physical and cognitive terms. Since the Government organisations appear distant and forbidding, a class of intermediaries has been usually involved when individuals need to make contact with the state; a phenomenon dating back to colonial era. These ‘expeditors’ do not wield any official power but are familiar with the intricacies of administration. These two themes – a ‘distant state’ and ‘mediated interactions’ – provide important insights into the nature of politics at grassroots level[1].

People functioning as intermediaries acquire influence and amass political capital. One’s standing in local politics is defined by what one does as an intermediary – who bridges rural man and the state. The said distance has been the biggest impediment to implementation of Government’s schemes that originate from superb ‘ideation’. Benefits not reaching the intended beneficiaries have led to dissatisfaction that is going to get more widespread with proliferation of information.

As far as the mediation is concerned, erstwhile upper caste and landed peasantry has been replaced by young and literate intermediaries with widespread representation from marginalised caste and class. Political domination in the rural landscape, based on caste affiliations is becoming uncommon and socio-economic equations are seeing a changeover.

As the state expenditure in rural areas increase and welfare schemes are formulated; villagers as well as Government officials are keen to find intermediaries who could help transact on their behalf. These new leaders have immense potential and are looked upon, irrespective of their castes or economic backgrounds. The issues related to development have emerged as major criteria for voting and age-old shibboleths are under demolition. Where the political parties previously relied on caste or patronage – based voting, they are now finding it useful to forge links with this rising leadership. Another factor that has fostered rise of this particular category of leadership is ‘market activity’ expanding in rural areas; leadership based on outside connection (with official set up and agencies beyond village boundaries) has gained importance, overshadowing, in many instances, other forms of leadership that derived inspiration from ethnic or religious groupings.

The great demand of their services amongst fellow villagers gives the new leaders, a position of influence. And unlike the old patrons, the new leaders cannot easily use their special connections with state, for their own benefits at the expense of community. The spread of education and information has given rise to more widespread capacity for independent actions. Leaders can no longer deceive a significant percentage of rural population. Instead of dividing the village community on lines of castes or religion, these new leaders build on wide ranging social networks that bring the villagers together, unified on developmental issues. The villagers too, are increasingly associating themselves with these new political entrepreneurs, outgrowing parochialism of any kind[2].

Political parties are not distinguishable from each other in terms of essence of various developmental programmes, as enunciated in their manifestos. With relatively weaker organisations at grassroots and local levels, these parties are driven to seek alliance with men of influence in the villages. Where these parties previously contacted traditional patrons i.e. landed and upper caste; with changing dynamics, officials and politicians are increasingly striking bargains with the evolving new leadership. The phenomenon of political competition based on development is likely to change for better. By leveraging the advantages that new leadership possess, there exists an unique opportunity to decentralise the local governance, than hitherto fore.

Notwithstanding the above, building institutions at levels below districts remain an unfinished task of state building and democracy. Although, emergence of new leadership is a welcome phenomenon towards democratisation at grassroots, it can represent a sustainable solution to the challenge of institutional distance, only when this leadership is co-opted into the folds of governance at local levels. On the contrary, if the said potential is left untapped, the rural elites would have the entire wherewithal at disposal, to capture the local economy of the state by blocking others’ access to it[3]. In view of vacant political space in villages, until institutions at local levels are empowered and state is extended downwards to cover the last mile – implementation of ideation shall remain a farfetched dream, infested by non inclusive growth breeding dissatisfaction and unrest amongst the ‘have-nots’. This is the void that secessionists and extremists exploit, for their ulterior motives.

The prospects of making India’s growth process more inclusive has not been encouraging and one of the prime factors is weak and ineffective local governance, which could be energised by tapping the emerging rural leadership that is forward looking. If rapid growth (on which the Government has optimum emphasis as a measure of economic success and performance) is achieved and sustained, some of this would necessarily ‘trickle down’ and help poor[4]. Beyond that however, the scope of hastening this ‘trickle’ via deliberate redistribution is limited owing to absence of vibrant local governance. The three-tier Panchayati raj system of India is the largest experiment in grassroots democratisation in the history of humanity. There are around 4 million elected representatives at all levels of the Panchayat system. They represent more than 250,000 gram Panchayats, 7,500 intermediate tiers (block Panchayats) and more than 700 district Panchayats. The fact that the Indian system of local governance -- the Panchayat system -- has its roots in the cultural and historical legacy of India makes it different from many other initiatives of decentralisation of governance[5].

The present Government will do good to focus on implementation of welfare schemes through asset redistribution and basic shift in growth model which is labour intensive and does not merely chase GDP figures. The said shall remain a dream, if not accompanied by effective and participatory local governance, with Panchayats and Gram Sabhas playing the key role- in areas of all hue – scheduled or otherwise. On the whole, so far, past performance of Panchayats as agents of redistributive development has been discouraging[6]. One of the major factors that help explain this poor show has been the indifferent attitude of rural elites which comprised of traditional vested interests with feudal hangover. As these gentry were not adversely affected by vagaries of backwardness, they could neither comprehend the issues on ground nor identify with the same.

As brought out, the rural landscape has been evolving with reigns of influence now with the forward looking and aware youth that is beyond any parochial framework and is singularly focused towards development. This class has emerged as bridge between the rural poor and the state and needs to be tapped for participating in local governance which should be one of the Key Result Areas, for the Government – in order to convert ‘ideations’ into ‘implementations’. The Prime Minister, during his interaction with MPs on 26 October, underlined the facet of implementation of various welfare schemes of the Government when he said, “The schemes should reach the grassroots level in a more planned manner so that they have some impact on the lives of the people. The implementation should be more focused and organized”[7]. This focus in an organized manner cannot materialize without local governance, around Panchayat bodies, playing a crucial role.

The author is Senior Fellow at CLAWS. Views expressed are personal.