Harnessing social fitness
While looking at the food security status of the people in India as per the FAO report and the remedial measures of the Government of India, providing rice and wheat free of cost to 80 crore people through a public distribution system in a country achieving 7 per cent economic growth, it becomes clear that there is something somewhat wrong in the distributive justice of the governance system in India. When countries can provide basic necessities to all households even with 3 per cent economic growth, why don't we provide all basic necessities and amenities to lead all households to a decent, dignified human life?
It does not mean that both the central and state governments have done nothing. In the last seventy-five years, we have tried our level best by proliferating scheme after scheme and programme after programme to enable people to access all basic facilities. Yet, conditions of life for people have not improved as expected. During the Golden Jubilee celebration of the Indian Independence, a World Bank study indicated that despite the implementation of more than 2,000 welfare and development schemes in rural areas, more than half of the people live in sub-human conditions. There is no dearth of economic resources, scientific and technological support, managerial solutions, governance professionalism, and administrative reforms, and yet the quality and standard of life of the poor have not improved.
The demand for government attention on the poor has continuously increased, and equally, attempts by governments to mitigate the problems of the poor have also increased. In the last three decades, the proliferation of development schemes, coupled with the empowerment of the poor through granting rights, increased the scope of reducing poverty and improving the quality of life. Furthermore, creating governance poverty at the grassroots in both rural and urban areas through amending the Constitution of India and reserving seats for SC/ST and women enabled the marginalised to participate in the process of governance and development and provided yet another opportunity to improve the conditions of the poor in rural and urban areas. After experimenting with the empowerment of the marginalised through development rights, participatory governance studies have been conducted to assess the impact of the new initiatives of the government at the centre. It is unequivocally proved that the new initiatives have all the wherewithal to address the issues of the poor, but state governments have not enabled local governments except in Kerala and Sikkim to act independently in the hands of the local population. Instead, they have been controlled by the bureaucracy, and as a result, the resources devolved directly and indirectly through schemes to local bodies have been conveniently handled by the local bureaucracy with the nexus of the elected representatives or without them.
The central government is attempting to address the problem by providing an improved quantum of economic resources, as recommended by the 15th Finance Commission, and through centrally funded schemes, specifically the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme. They are also insisting the local governments to prepare a participatory perspective development plan for every village, aiming to align the state government's line departments with the felt needs of the people, as indicated in the plan document approved by the Gram Sabha. Since local bodies fall under state subjects, the centre is not in a position to firmly strengthen them. Many public intellectuals suggest that this is a weak excuse from the centre, indicating that it has the capability to act if it wishes to. For instance, when the centre takes away the financial autonomy of states by introducing GST and revoking the special status of J&K, it demonstrates its capacity to strengthen local governments if it chooses to do so. Consequently, corruption has increased and become decentralised, with local bureaucracy and elected representatives acting as partners.
However, continuous studies have indicated that wherever communities are sensitised and mobilised, and local body leaders are empowered, transformative change activities have been carried out, and households have gained many services as rights through their participation. Similarly, where active youth groups are involved in transformative work, local bodies are attentive to the needs of the poor and marginalised. Many village panchayats have emerged as models and have been designated as learning centres by state governments.
Drawing from 75 years of development experience, and more specifically the experience of the last three decades, we have concluded, based on research studies, that we have primarily attempted to solve problems by creating structures, schemes, programmes, managerial, and technological nuances without addressing the fundamental issue of preparing the community and its leadership to seize the new opportunities created to address the fundamental issues of the people, a concept referred to as creating social fitness.
To capitalise on the new opportunities provided by the central government, heavy preparations are needed at the community level. Similarly, a new leadership must be cultivated at the grassroots, characterised by its transformative nature. However, these two activities are severely lacking at the ground level, as training institutions are not adequately equipped to facilitate the necessary actions. These two endeavours are fundamental and imperative.
The profound divide within communities based on caste and political affiliation must be addressed through mass sensitisation and the cultivation of transformative leadership at the community level. Only these initiatives can effectively address the grassroots problem; there are no shortcuts. Overcoming caste divisions and navigating a highly politicised society presents a formidable challenge. Regional political parties often rely on caste factors to secure electoral victories and are unlikely to take action on this front. Moreover, the weak leadership of state governments impedes efforts to empower local communities, as they fear the potential challenges such empowerment may pose. Consequently, they often resort to increasing freebies and making households as constant beneficiaries.
This paradigm must be shifted through robust federal and grassroots action; otherwise, we will continue to squander our resources and time.
The writer is a former Professor and Rajiv Gandhi Chair for Panchayati Raj Studies, Gandhigram Rural Institute. Views expressed are personal
