The implementation of decentralization: A case study of district planning in Agra District, Uttar Pradesh, India
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1002/pad.4230070405 |
| Date | 01 October 1987 |
| Author | Mukul Sanwal |
| Published date | 01 October 1987 |
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT, Vol.
7, 383-397 (1987)
The implementation of decentralization: a case study
of
district planning in Agra District, Uttar Pradesh,
India
MUKUL SANWAL
SUMMARY
Though the literature on decentralization has clarified some issues,
it
has left unsettled the
question of the administrative structure for its implementation:
who
should take what
decisions, and at what level? There are limits
to
the conventional methods of classification.
where answers have been sought
in
terms of Western experience, participation and manage-
ment. and
a
legal perspective has been adopted
with
decentralization seen
in
terms of
fully
elected local governments. semi-autonomous local governments. or coordinating commit-
tees. Rather than stress procedures of participation. the substantive content
of
decision-
making needs to he analysed.
A
classification
of
rural development programmes provides
an alternative model for the reallocation of functions
within
the system of government to
meet development needs. The case of district planning
in
Agra District. India. illustrates the
process of decentralization. underlines its composite character. and shows the importance of
the budget
in
initiating reform
in
the political-administrative system. Since decentralization
is now motivated by different factors than
in
the
past. the requirements of the anti-poverty
programmes
will
move the decision-making process closer to the cutting edge
of
the village
level,
with
even greater responsiveness to demands from below.
Decentralization is one of
the
many strategies for rural development. That decen-
tralization is a major administrative reform for improved implementation of rural
development is widely recognized. Whether decentralization is an end in itself. or
a process
to
reach other goals, is debated. According
to
the dominant tradition
decentralization can be a hierarchical
or
spatial distribution of authority initiated
by the central government or by pressure from below (Conyers,
1984).
The
structure dictates relations
to
local organizations: interventions organized by pro-
gramme content tend to be more responsive to central decision-making while
those organized by area tend to be more responsive to local needs and interests.
Decentralization is generally considered to take four major structural
formsdeconcentration within the central government, devolution
to
locally
elected units outside the central government, delegation to agencies distinct from
the central government, or privatization (Hicks,
1961;
Maddick.
1963).
In the
process
of
decentralization three major decisions are involved: what
to
decentral-
ize, to whom, and how to coordinate implementation. Since administration and
organization is essentially a matter
of
people, decentralization involves factors of
Mukul
Sanwal
is
Director
of
the Administrative
Training
Institute, Nainital. Uttar Pradesh.
India
0
1987
by
John Wiley
&
Sons,
Ltd.
0271-2075/87/040383-15%07.50
To continue reading
Request your trial