Karnataka is one of the progressive states in which both economic growth and income inequalities are to be seen. Development disparities are evident between the southern and northern regions, especially in Kalyana Karnataka region. Why are the districts in Kalyana Karnataka region still lagging behind in human development with high rate of poverty and income inequalities? Historically, the development in this region is not on par with other regions in the state. In this backdrop, it is pertinent to explore the contributing factors for the low human development status in the Kalyana Karnataka region. Dr Nanjundappa D M (1976) attempted to analyse the issue of regional disparity in terms of social justice, Regional Social Justice (RSJ), as he calls it. There is a strong theoretical basis for RSJ.
A district is where the Union and state government welfare programmes and schemes get distributed to the people through block and village administrations. There is an increasing perception among policy makers, particularly in India, that smaller states have better prospects for development due to administrative convenience. India has doubled the number of districts from 310 in 1951 to 640 in 2011. Similarly, Karnataka, which had 19 districts in 1961, had 30 in 2011 and 31 in 2021. In decentralised governance, taluk panchayats are being underutilised and there is a need for a better co-ordination among the three tiers of panchayats to improve developmental outcomes.
The role of local governments in delivering development outcomes needs to be highlighted. The Gram Panchayat Human Development Index (GPHDI) across the panchayats in the state found that the HDI in the panchayats of Bagalkot, Bidar, Gadag, Kalaburagi, Raichur, Vijayapura and Yadgir districts is less than the state average.
Among the 2,174 gram panchayats in the Kalyana Karnataka region, only 170 GPs are performing above the state’s average HDI (0.4392). The remaining 2,004 GPs are performing below the state’s average GP-HDI. In Yadgir district, the GP-HDI in all the 118 GPs is below the state average, depicting a poor plight of local governments. In addition to Yadgir, nine other taluks in other districts have a GP-HDI ranking below the state average. The nine taluks are Aurad, Bhalki, Aland, Chincholi, Chitapur, Kushtagi, Devdurga, Lingsugur and Manvi. In all, GPs in 12 taluks are performing below the state’s average GP-HDI.
The role of panchayats is critical in discharging the functions of the Eleventh Schedule under Article 243G. The primary reasons for the underperformance of panchayats are lack of adequate finances and functionaries. The overall governance in the state and its declining trend is hindering equitable development of the state. This requires personnel, and building institutional capacities of the local governments. If they are to be enabled to function as institutions of self-government as envisaged in the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendment Acts of 1992-93, devolving power and authority is necessary. Ghosh (2017) finds that “Karnataka represents a typical model of administrative decentralisation under which the state government may go far with delegation, but runs short of political will in considering the issue of devolution”.
The slow implementation of development initiatives in Kalyana Karnataka can be attributed to inadequate staff and weak institutional capacities. The issues in the effective implementation of the provisions of the Article 371 (J) need immediate attention to hasten the development process and also to assuage the rising statehood demand for the region.
It is interesting to note that although in all the 31 districts, the District Planning Committees (DPCs) were constituted at least in principle, their functionality is highly unsatisfactory when it comes to preparing a comprehensive district development plan (DDP). The GP-HDI data and the comprehensive district human development reports of 2014 provide the necessary platform for strengthening the DPC to make them more robust and vibrant to facilitate the decentralised planning process. There is a need to utilise GP-HDI data in the policy formulations, programmes and schemes. All gram panchayats, more so in the most backward taluks, have to be motivated through performance-linked incentives to improve the overall status of human development in a time-bound manner.
Strengthen local governance
In the context of Kalyana Karnataka, we must ask whether we need more public policies or better implementation mechanisms and institutional arrangements to achieve better development and governance outcomes. Karnataka’s decentralised reforms journey since the mid-1980s, especially in the post-economic reforms period has seen progressive outcomes in inclusive growth, equitable development and social justice; but a few core issues such as inequality, unsustainability and uneven development, are yet to be addressed. While the policies that have enhanced the growth levels in some cases, have failed to arrest the growing economic and social inequalities. The measurement of backwardness needs a holistic framework to include indicators such as political under-representation and environmental sustainability with the existing HDIs. The economic growth indicator must be refined by including income disparities and adjusting growth rate with inequality and inflation. Such an approach potentially captures the deeper aspects of backwardness.
The weak governance -- local state capacity and top-down approach of the administration -- is the main reason for poor development outcomes in Kalyana Karnataka. The institutional efficacy of the panchayats is directly dependent upon the knowledge, skills and attitude of the staff working in the PRIs. Improving the institutional capacities and empowering the local governments is the way forward for hastening the development in the region. A critical factor is ‘political will’ and commitment to the ‘principle of subsidiarity’.
(The writer is a PhD Fellow in Political Science, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bengaluru)