Panchayati Raj in India. the Evolution Between 1947 and 1992
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
RUPRECHT-KARLS-UNIVERSITÄT HEIDELBERG FAKULTÄT FÜR WIRTSCHAFTS-UND SOZIALWISSENSCHAFTEN Panchayati Raj in India The Evolution between 1947 and 1992 Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Dr. rer. pol. an der Fakultät für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften der Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg vorgelegt von: Kai Fabian Fürstenberg Februar 2015 Erstgutachter: Professor Subrata K. Mitra, PhD (Rochester) Zweitgutachter: Professor Dr. Dietmar Rothermund Content List of Figures and Tables iv 1. Introduction 1 1.1 State of Research 10 1.2. Why Evolutionary Institutionalism? 13 2. Theory 16 2.1. Rational Choice Institutionalism 17 2.1.1. The Role of the Equilibrium 19 2.1.2. Structured and Unstructured Institutions 21 2.2. Historical Institutionalism 23 2.2.1. Path Dependence and Critical Junctures 25 2.2.2. Critique on Path Dependency 29 2.3. Sociological Institutionalism 30 2.3.1. Isomorphism 31 2.3.2. Change and Legitimacy 34 2.4. Three Institutionalisms – A Critique 35 2.4.1. Oversimplifying Reality: Rational Choice Institutionalism 35 2.4.2. No Change from Within: Historical Institutionalism 36 2.4.3. What are Institutions Exactly? Sociological Institutionalism 38 2.5. Evolution and the Origins of Universal Darwinism 40 2.5.1. Evolutionary Thought: An Overview 41 2.5.2. What is Darwinian Evolution? 44 2.5.3. A Short History of Evolutionary Theory in the Social Sciences 47 2.5.4. Sociobiology and Meme-Theory 48 2.5.4.1. Sociobiology 49 2.5.4.2. Meme-Theory 54 i 2.6. Evolutionary Institutionalism 58 2.6.1. Change: The Analogy between Genes and Institutions 59 2.6.2. Change: Human Preferences and Cognition 66 2.6.3. Schemas and Ideas – The Replicators and Mutants of Institutional Evolution 72 2.6.4. Stability of Institutions and Institutional Arrangements 74 2.6.5. Methods of Evolutionary Institutionalism 76 2.6.6. Concluding Remarks 79 3. Methodology 83 3.1. The Parameters 85 3.2. Application and Selection of Cases 89 3.3. Sources 91 4. The Evolution of Panchayati Raj between 1947 and 1992 92 4.1. India between 1947 and 1992 94 4.2. Panchayats before 1947 107 4.3. The First Decade 113 4.3.1. Uttar Pradesh 115 4.3.2. Assam 122 4.3.3. Madhya Bharat 124 4.3.4. The Constituent Assembly and Panchayati Raj 128 4.3.5. Conclusion 129 4.3.6. Community Development 132 4.4. The Zenith of Interest in Panchayati Raj 135 4.4.1. The B.R. Mehta Committee Report 136 4.4.2. Uttar Pradesh 147 4.4.3. Assam 153 4.4.4. Madhya Pradesh 156 4.4.5. West Bengal 162 ii 4.4.6. Conclusion 165 4.5. Decline 168 4.5.1. Assam 170 4.5.2. West Bengal 175 4.5.3. Conclusion 180 4.6. Reforms 182 4.6.1. The Asoka Mehta Committee Report 185 4.6.2. Madhya Pradesh I 192 4.6.3. The G.V. Rao Committee Report 195 4.6.4. The L.M. Singhvi Committee Report 197 4.6.5. Assam 199 4.6.6. The R.S. Sarkaria Commission Report 200 4.6.7. The 64th Amendment Bill 201 4.6.8. The 74th Amendment Bill 205 4.6.9. Madhya Pradesh II 206 4.6.10. The 73rd Amendment Act of 1992 208 4.6.11. Conclusion 212 5. Conclusion 215 5.1. An Analogy to Biological Evolution 217 5.2. The Advantages of Evolutionary Institutionalism 218 5.3. A Brief Recapitulation of Institutional Evolution 223 5.4. Evolution within the Ecological Systems 229 5.5. Ideational Evolution - The Government Committee Reports 234 5.6. Final Remarks 238 5.6.1. Prospects for Future Research 242 Bibliography 243 iii List of Figures and Tables Table 1: Indicators of Parameters (In Case of Local Governments) 87 Table 2: Methodological Key 87 Table 3: Period-wise Ecological Systems in India 112 Figure 1: The Institutional Arrangement within its Ecological Niche 88 Figure 2: The Institutional Arrangement Responding to Ecological factors by Institutional Variation 88 Figure 3: Methodological Key 113 Figure 4: Hierarchical Relation between Gaon Sabha and Gaon Panchayat 120 Figure 5: Panchayati Raj according to the B.R. Mehta Committee 144 Figure 6: A Genealogical Tree of Panchayati Raj Legislations 222 Figure 7: Genealogy with Government Committee Reports and Constitutional Amendment Bills 237 iv 1. Introduction Panchayati Raj1, the system of local governments in India, is one of the most challenging topics when it comes to institutional change, a quintessential issue that underpins politics in changing societies. In the Indian case the period from independence in 1947 to the 73rd Amendment Act in 1992, which unified the relevant legislation, is a case in point. It is, for serving as the empirical foil to my work on Evolutionary Institutionalism (EI), highly interesting. This period of development and change is, from an institutional point of view, not well researched. Understanding the institutional changes demands a theoretical approach that takes into account many possible influences on institutions, either external or internal, either socio- economic or natural. Evolutionary Institutionalism is such an approach. EI is evidence based evolutionary theory in the Darwinian strain. It applies many assumptions from Darwinian Evolutionary Theory, as far as possible, to institutions. This thesis builds on these assumptions to trace the evolution of Panchayati Raj between 1947 and 1992. This is done by categorising institutions as morphological (institutions of form) and physiological (institutions of function). Taking four Indian States as examples, the comparison morphological and physiological institutions in Panchayati Raj legislations in these States over time can reveal their relation over time and facilitates the identification of evolutionary processes. The various legislations will also be put into relation with their contemporary environments, socio-political and natural, and the ideational developments regarding Panchayati Raj in form of government committee reports on the subject. The main argument of my thesis is that the institutional development of Panchayati Raj between 1947 and 1992 can be analysed as an evolutionary process in the Darwinian sense.2 I base this on the conjecture that Evolutionary Institutionalism (EI) is the appropriate theoretical approach to do this. I am convinced that a biology-based approach to political 1 The term can be loosely translated as ‘the rule of the council of five’. 2 Darwinian Evolution is the Theory of Evolution based on the observations made in On the Origin of Species and developed into the framework used today to explain biological evolution. For more see chapter 2.5.2., pp. 44. 1 institutions and change, which are ultimately outcomes of human, and therefore biological, behaviour, is the most satisfying approach. Besides the investigation of the applicability of Evolutionary Institutionalism, this thesis provides an accessible method for the investigation of institutional evolution. Remaining close to the methods of evolutionary biology, the categorisation into morphological and physiological institutions enables researches to analyse institutional relations over time easily and trace their variations. Putting these institutional variations directly into the natural, political and socio-economic contexts of their times, researches can identify influential factors for institutional changes. Especially by relating institutional variations to ideational developments, a researcher could directly investigate the muting influences of ideas on institutional changes. This work will be the narrative of a Panchayati Raj system, or more precisely, a system of Panchayats. It will be the narrative of the inception and evolution of Panchayati Raj from the formative years of the Indian State and the consolidating years of the Indian Nation to the troublesome times in which the 72nd Amendment Bill became the 73rd Amendment Act of 1992. Narrative is also precisely the correct term to describe this undertaking. I want to follow the evolution of Panchayats to explain how it came to the Act and what happened between 1948, when the Constituent Assembly drafted India’s post-independence Constitution in which the word ‘Panchayat’ is not even mentioned, and 1992, when the Lok Sabha made the Panchayati Raj System an integral part of that Constitution. Such an endeavour as mine, to go back six decades into Indian history and even ending more than two decades ago, may seem to be an unusual procedure for a political scientist. But in my understanding the institutional developments in the 22 years since the ratification of the 73rd Amendment Act and which a present today, have their origins deep in the history of independent India. Therefore, it is essential to have a look into the past. There is of course a great body of literature when it comes to Panchayati Raj in its 1992 avatar and of course, they deal with its history as well. Nevertheless, they devote only a few pages, if any, to it, marking crucial events, which led to the 73rd Amendment Act. Literature before 1992, dealing more extensively with the old system(s), naturally, is missing the connection to the Act. In 2 addition, they are usually more concerned with concepts and regulations and not with the overall evolution of the institutional system. The understanding of Panchayati Raj includes also the understanding of its context. The political, social, cultural and economic environment of any institutional system at any specific time has consequences throughout its whole evolution. Some factors may weigh more at certain times and less at others, but their effects influence an institution even decades later. This insight, which any historian will automatically agree to3, is less spread in political science (see for example Pierskalla et al. 2013). Furthermore, Panchayati Raj is a highly complex system within a highly complex system, influenced by other complex systems, by individuals and ideas. Studying the institution of Panchayats does not only include the Panchayats alone.