|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Development in Karnataka: Challenges of Governance, Equity and Empowerment Paradoxically, though Karnataka is a fast developing state, the fruits of growth have not percolated to the rural areas. There are regional and social disparities. The state is going through rapid urbanisation, but the poverty headcount ratio (HCR) in urban Karnataka is much higher than its neighbouring states like Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Kerala and the country average. This is cause for concern for economists and planners.
There is widening rural-urban divide. A major portion of the rural workforce is engaged as casual labour, earning minimal wages and depending upon agriculture for employment and income. Official reports acknowledge the glaring disparities in wages, education and health indicators and access to basic services. The rural infrastructure is in a mess. According to the last census, almost two-thirds of rural houses in the state are in a deplorable condition. Open-air defecation and improper drainage have triggered many diseases in the villages. North Karnataka suffers from long years of neglect and discrimination as against South Karnataka. Only 35 per cent households in the state have access to safe drinking water, electricity and toilets. In this, eight out of nine districts are in North Karnataka. The same is the case with urban infrastructure. No urban centre in the state can boast of good roads. Bangalore, the state capital, is an important global centre on information technology. But consider its problems — narrow roads with potholes, traffic chaos, congested streets, power shortage, water crisis, noise and air pollution and so on. Karnataka’s bane is that industrialisation and urbanisation are largely seen only in areas around Bangalore. This has led to proliferation of slums, inadequate infrastructure, glut of unskilled labour, environmental degradation and income disparities. The government’s A Vision For Development (December, 2008) envisages three broad concerns — improving linkages between the city and its hinterland; making the towns a productive setting for growth; and developing a distinctive approach to issues of urban poverty. Despite all these problems, Karnataka is a front-ranking state. According to the National Human Development Report 2001, it ranks seventh among major Indian states on HDI. Its HDI has improved from 0.54 in 1991 to 0.65 in 2001. Interestingly, at the international level, Karnataka does better than India. In HDI, the state’s position is at 120 while that of India is 127 (0.621). In GDI ranking, the state is at 99 as against 103 (0.609) rank of India. The state’s biggest strength is the success of the panchayati raj system. Much before the enactment of the 73rd and 74th Constitutional amendments, the then Chief Minister Ramakrishna Hegde and his Rural Development Minister Abdul Naseer Sab had introduced a model that many states sought to replicate. Significantly, the proportion of elected women representatives in the state is as high as 45 per cent. IT revolution and e-governance have truly empowered panchayats. Development in Karnataka: Challenges of Governance, Equity and Empowerment is a collection of 17 scholarly articles on various facets of growth in the state. It is perhaps after a long time that Karnataka, which is on the fast track of development, has been covered in an important research project by the Academic Foundation. The book is divided into three sections: politics and policy; civil society and governance; and sectoral perspectives and interventions. The article, "Federalism, urban decentralisation and citizen participation", by Ramesh Ramanathan is illuminating and full of examples drawn from his experience in Janagraha, a civil society institution co-founded by him on urban governance reforms in India. Citizen participation is not just a "moral argument" but a "strong accountability mechanism" for local governments, he says. Maintaining that citizen involvement in urban areas is "very indirect" at present, he calls for urgent correction of this anomaly by making suitable changes in the laws at the state and municipal levels itself without having to change the Constitution. By creating appropriate institutional mechanisms for citizen participation in urban areas, the people can derive substantial benefits, he says. In her article, "Corruption and local governance", V. Vijayalakshmi, who works for Oxfam International, says that corruption is a big problem facing Karnataka’s panchayats. While devolution of powers has been limited to the political sphere, there is less of fiscal and administrative decentralisation. Accountability and transparency have not got sufficient importance and adequate emphasis in various Acts and amendments, she avers. While examining the panchayats’ role, she laments that the gram sabhas have not achieved the goals of enhancing transparency, accountability and people’s participation. Accounts audit of the taluks and zila panchayats have been irregular, often only once in three years, and their effectiveness in checking the misuse of funds has been limited, according to Vijayalakshmi. In their piece, "The political economy of gram panchayats in South India", editors Gopal K. Kadekodi, Ravi Kanbur and Vijayendra Rao call for a serious debate about political geography and institutional means to guarantee that all villages (not just the Pradhan’s) get an equal share of resources. Redrawing panchayat boundaries to create more panchayats or rotating the Pradhan’s chair could be the best possible solutions, they suggest. They want gram sabhas to meet regularly. Policies here could include effective monitoring from above or finding means to enhance the citizens’ power to call gram sabhas. Kripa Ananthpur, Assistant Professor, Madras Institute of Development Studies, Chennai, writes that local governance in Karnataka is a "complex and contested site" where formal and informal governance institutions complement each other in some instances and are in conflict at others. She examines the working of the elected gram panchayats and the customary village councils and makes a case for strengthening the local institutions. Neema Kudwa’s piece, "Conceptualising NGO-State relations" examines the fast expanding NGOs’ role in the state’s development over the years. A teacher in the Department of City and Regional Planning at Cornell University, she says that NGOs have emerged in response to "specific problems" such as the lack of urban citizen engagement, poor or non-existent urban services or the problems of low-income settlements. She has stressed the need for NGOs and their donors to understand the possibility of "simultaneous conflict and collaboration". G. Ananda Vadivelu, Doctoral Fellow, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore, in his article, "Choosing ‘not’ to participate", says that the drought relief programmes need restructuring as the current modes of implementation are "na`EFve" and " to the farmers’ concerns. The book is a must for students of social sciences. Its main focus is on the imperative need for good governance for growth. It has larger implications for the poor who depend heavily on public finances. Clearly, good governance alone can help plug leakages, streamline the administrative system and expedite development.
|
According to the state
government’s figures, over one crore people in rural areas live on
less than Rs 12 per person per day. Their urban counterparts — 60 lakh
persons constituting 30 per cent of the urban population — are
slightly better. They live on less than Rs 19 per person per day.