An earlier version of this article appeared as IDS Working Paper no 226, June 2004. This research has benefited from suggestions and inputs at different points of time from Professors Mick Moore, V. K. Natraj, James Manor and John Gaventa, and from Dr Mark Robinson. I am also grateful to two anonymous referees for their insightful comments. Research was supported by the Development Research Centre for the Future State at IDS, University of Sussex. The usual disclaimer applies.
1467-7660/asset/DECH_left.gif?v=1&s=22286c90d6a08281dd1935c32b25818c0834817b)
1467-7660/asset/DECH_right.gif?v=1&s=a8dee74c7ae152de95ab4f33ecaa1a00526b2bd2)
Rivalry or Synergy? Formal and Informal Local Governance in Rural India
Article first published online: 23 MAY 2007
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-7660.2007.00417.x
Additional Information
How to Cite
Ananth Pur, K. (2007), Rivalry or Synergy? Formal and Informal Local Governance in Rural India. Development and Change, 38: 401–421. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7660.2007.00417.x
Publication History
- Issue published online: 23 MAY 2007
- Article first published online: 23 MAY 2007
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
ABSTRACT
Informal local governance institutions (ILGIs) are prevalent at the village level in rural India. Generally perceived by urban Indians to be ‘oppressive’, ILGIs also have progressive features and often perform a range of useful collective functions at the village level. Instead of fading away in the face of modernity, ILGIs have found ways to interact, often in a positive manner, with the newer, elected local government institutions, the Grama Panchayats. Based on field research in Karnataka state, this article tries to present a more holistic picture of ILGIs, including their role in village governance and service delivery; the ways in which they interact with Grama Panchayats, and the implications of their existence and role for local democracy. It also presents a tentative theoretical framework towards explaining why ILGIs in Karnataka particularly, and in India generally, seem to be less repressive, more functional and more likely to survive than in some other countries of the South.