Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
Decentralisation, the transfer of planning, decision-making, and resource allocation to lower levels of government, has been a cornerstone of governance reforms in India since the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendment Acts of 1992. Prior to these amendments, the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) and Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) lacked constitutional recognition and were largely dependent on state governments. These amendments aimed to establish a three-tier system of governance – village, intermediate, and district levels for PRIs, and municipal corporations, municipalities, and nagar panchayats for ULBs – with regular elections and devolved functions. The extent to which this decentralisation has transformed the governance landscape at the grassroots is a complex question, marked by both significant progress and persistent challenges.
Pre-Decentralisation Governance Landscape
Before 1992, local governance was largely ad-hoc and lacked constitutional sanction. PRIs were often dissolved or superseded by state governments, and ULBs suffered from limited financial autonomy and functional responsibilities. Development planning was largely top-down, with limited participation from local communities. This resulted in a disconnect between the needs of the people and the policies implemented.
Changes Brought About by Decentralisation
Empowerment of Local Bodies
- Constitutional Recognition: The 73rd and 74th Amendments provided constitutional status to PRIs and ULBs, ensuring regular elections every five years.
- Devolution of Functions: A schedule of functions was transferred to local bodies, encompassing areas like water supply, sanitation, education, health, and social welfare. (Article 243G & 243W)
- Reservation for Marginalised Groups: Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and women in local bodies ensured greater representation and participation of marginalized communities.
- State Finance Commissions: Establishment of State Finance Commissions (SFCs) to recommend principles governing the distribution of funds between the state and local bodies. (Article 243-I)
Impact on Governance at the Grassroots
- Increased Responsiveness: Local bodies, being closer to the people, are more responsive to local needs and priorities.
- Improved Service Delivery: Decentralisation has led to improvements in the delivery of basic services like water supply, sanitation, and primary education in some areas.
- Local Resource Mobilization: PRIs and ULBs have been empowered to raise local taxes and user charges, enhancing their financial autonomy.
- Enhanced Citizen Participation: Regular elections and the involvement of local communities in planning and implementation have fostered greater citizen participation in governance.
Challenges to Effective Decentralisation
Financial Dependence
Despite the SFCs, PRIs and ULBs remain heavily dependent on state governments for funds. The lack of adequate financial resources hinders their ability to effectively implement development programs. According to the 15th Finance Commission (2020-2026), untied funds to local bodies need to be increased significantly.
Capacity Deficits
Many PRIs and ULBs lack the necessary administrative and technical capacity to effectively discharge their functions. There is a shortage of trained personnel and a lack of infrastructure.
Political Interference
State governments often interfere in the functioning of local bodies, undermining their autonomy. Delays in conducting elections and superseding elected bodies are common occurrences.
Lack of Effective Monitoring & Accountability
Weak monitoring mechanisms and a lack of accountability hinder the effective implementation of decentralisation initiatives. Social audit mechanisms are not consistently implemented.
Uneven Implementation Across States
The implementation of decentralisation varies significantly across states. Some states have devolved more functions and resources to local bodies than others. Kerala and Karnataka are often cited as examples of states with relatively successful decentralisation initiatives.
Examples of Successful Decentralisation
Kerala’s People’s Plan Campaign (1996-97): This initiative involved extensive participation of local communities in the preparation of development plans, leading to significant improvements in service delivery and poverty reduction. Madhya Pradesh’s Gram Swaraj Abhiyan (2018): Focused on strengthening PRIs and promoting citizen participation in governance.
| Aspect | Pre-Decentralisation | Post-Decentralisation |
|---|---|---|
| Constitutional Status | No constitutional recognition | Constitutional recognition through 73rd & 74th Amendments |
| Financial Autonomy | Highly dependent on state governments | Increased, but still largely dependent |
| Citizen Participation | Limited | Enhanced through elections and planning processes |
Conclusion
Decentralisation in India has undoubtedly changed the governance landscape at the grassroots, fostering greater responsiveness, citizen participation, and local resource mobilization. However, the full potential of decentralisation remains unrealized due to persistent challenges related to financial dependence, capacity deficits, and political interference. Strengthening the financial autonomy of local bodies, investing in capacity building, and ensuring greater political independence are crucial steps towards achieving effective decentralisation and realizing the vision of truly empowered local governance. A continued focus on monitoring, accountability, and equitable implementation across all states is essential for sustained progress.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.