Theorizing participation and social accountability mechanisms in local self-governing institutions
2.7 Summary of the chapter
The aim of this chapter was to examine the established literature on participatory governance.
The chapter tried to examine different sets of literature that explore various factors that impact and challenge participation in general and more specifically beneficiary participation in participatory governance especially in the social accountability mechanisms. Monitoring the implementation of development policies, gender budgeting, social audit are just a few mechanisms that can be utilized by the beneficiaries (the target stakeholders) to contribute to effective participatory governance in the developing countries. This chapter also reviewed the relevant literature on the development programs and schemes like the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme and Indira Awas Yojana to understand how scholars have examined the implementation process and the impact of these government- sponsored schemes on social development in the rural areas. The chapter divided the review of literature into different sections and each section examined factors like patronage politics, social conditions and the existence of cultural norms in greater detail in India and elsewhere in the developing world. The chapter also discussed how these conditions had an impact on
beneficiary participation in governance mechanisms andsocial accountability mechanismsin different rural contexts across the developing world.
The analysis of the literature revealed that strong linkages between the patrons and clients influenced local politics and the distribution of benefits under the social development programs such as the Indira Awas Yojana and the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (Sadanandan, 2012; Maiorano, Das and Masiero, 2018).
Social accountability mechanisms like social audit are intended to monitor the implementation process of the development programs. Given the patronage links and deeply embedded socio-cultural norms, the process of social accountability in local self-governing institutions gets highly politicized and influenced by these pre-existing networks.
Implementation of such schemes and the process of social accountability are influenced by the political ambitions and interests of local political elites (such as representatives elected to gaon panchayats) who can determine and manipulate the findings of social audits. Assam also witnessed a phase of where social audit has encountered problems of institutionalization.
In order to sustain political power at the grass roots level panchayat elections, political parties and politicians distribute the benefits of rural development schemes on the basis of clientelistic links with the beneficiaries. This is an exchange system, where politicians give benefits and the benefit recipients provide the electoral support. This exchange is useful for both the patrons and the clients. Marginalized position of the beneficiaries makes them easy targets of the government sponsored schemes. Political parties and politicians are aware of the necessities of the beneficiaries at the grass roots level. Due to available power and authority, the ruling political parties and the traditional elites tend to distribute scheme-based benefits to selective villagers and beneficiaries. Social accountability mechanisms such as social audit where the people including the beneficiaries can raise issues and ask questions to the representatives of the gram panchayats therefore remain ineffective. Patron-client relationships influence beneficiary participation in social accountability mechanisms.
Social conditions and prevailing cultural norms also challenge beneficiary participation.
Illiteracy and lack of education can put serious constraints on beneficiary participation.
Effective beneficiary participation requires relevant information about rural development schemes and participatory rights. Access to such information is inhibited by structural conditions like lack of education. Gender-norms also challenge the participatory rights of female beneficiaries to effectively participate in social accountability mechanisms. Likewise,
marginalized caste identities acts as a barrier in participatory governance. Due to existing structural conditions and norms, elites act as the key decision makers in social accountability mechanisms.
The literature review helps the study to sketch out its conceptual framework.Reviewing the literature related to participatory governance, social accountability mechanisms, patronage politics, socio-cultural norms, deepening of democracy and development, this study draws the conceptual framework to sketch out the influences of social norms, social hierarchy, social difference, and political patronage on beneficiary participation in social audits and other accountability mechanisms. In order to reduce the governance gap and improve the linkage between the citizens and the local self-governing institutions, social accountability mechanisms were introduced in developing countries including India and Brazil (Brautigam, 2004; Goetz and Gaventa, 2001; Gaventa, 2002; Lakha et al, 2015; Heller, 2012). However, the new participatory spaces created by these social accountability mechanisms become highly politicized by the local level politicians. Politicization of these participatory accountability mechanisms is essential for local politicians to hide irregularities they committed while they implemented the development schemes at the grass roots level (Heller, 2012).
Similarly, Sadanandan argues that decentralized participatory spaces advance patronage politics and thus challenge effective participation of people in the state of Kerala, India (Sadanandan, 2012). Tendency to use resources of state-funded development policies is rampant among the political parties when they face higher political competition as evident in India with the presence of multi-party system. So, they engage in selective benefit distribution to attract higher and constant electoral (Sadanandan, 2012). Analyzing the case of African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa, Beresford argued that instead of being held accountable by the electorate for the lack of public service delivery, political leaders gained political legitimacy by distributing public good such as health and education through informal, deeply personalized patron-client networks built upon mutual expectations of reciprocity (Beresford, 2015).
Marginalized status in terms of education, caste, religion and gender and related socio- cultural norms reinforce ineffectiveness of people to use participatory rights in social accountability mechanisms. Together these create constraints for the people to challenge the
embedded power structures at the local level. Collaboration of the local elites helps them to advance their goals (Mosse, 1994). The institutionalized position of local political elites in local self-governing institutions and well-funded development schemes privilege interests of certain groups at the cost of effective people‘s participation (Goldfrank and Schneider, 2006).
This set of literature helps the study to develop its theoretical framework. Two rural development schemes, the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme and Indira awas Yojana, are implemented by the panchayati raj institutions functioning in rural India. The study explore whether political parties use state-funded development scheme resources to target people, mostly disadvantaged sections of society to establish patronage links for benefit distribution. In doing so, the political elites may use the embedded socio- cultural norms on caste, religion, gender etc. Patronage politics, thus, challenge the scope of beneficiary participation in social accountability mechanisms. Beneficiaries have their own difficulties. For instance, due to lack of education, they may not understand discussion on schemes. When higher level of education promotes participation (Beard, 2005), lack of education reduces capacity of understanding (Wolfinger and Rosenstone, 1980). Likewise, power asymmetry within a household and a society creates constraints for women to effectively use their participatory rights in society (Agarwal, 1997; Phillips, 1991). The study also use this set of literature to understand challenges of beneficiary participation in social accountability mechanisms in the district of Barpeta, Assam.