TOPIC: DEMOGRAPHIC AND DEVELOPMENTAL OUTCOMES OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROLIFERATION

THE CONTEXT: Many developing countries have reorganized their subnational administrative boundaries as a part of administrative reforms and decentralization. Theoretically, organisational proliferation can lead to better developmental outcomes by better managing ethnic heterogeneity, bringing public services closer to people, and better matching services to local preferences. This article analyzes the demographic and developmental outcomes of such administrative proliferation in India.

THE OVERVIEW: In a bid to arrive at the optimal population size in a local government unit, many national governments have reorganized their sub-national boundaries and have implemented vast decentralization reforms with the explicit goal of improving governance. The fundamental argument for decentralized administration is that there is heterogeneity in demand for public services. The variance in preferences can be better understood and catered to by a government that is closer to the citizens, thus raising well-being throughout society. Small jurisdictions have an information advantage and can tailor their services, tax appropriately, and raise welfare. In addition, it also enhances the capability of the citizens to monitor their government and hold the responsibility of the public official to better match local preferences.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROLIFERATION:

• Administrative proliferation is the creation of new administrative units by the splitting of existing ones at subnational levels. Although administrative proliferation may be associated with decentralization reforms, it is a distinct policy choice. Decentralization involves the devolution of responsibility, authority, and resources to lower-level governmental units, while administrative proliferation only creates new governmental units without changing the underlying power structure.
• Many developing countries create new districts as a part of their administrative reforms process, also referred to as administrative proliferation or government fragmentation.

WHY ADMINISTRATIVE PROLIFERATION?

• Administrative proliferation may claim some of the theoretical benefits of decentralization as it brings citizens closer to their administrators. Each administrative unit is smaller and more homogeneous—with less heterogeneity in preferences, they are able to provide better services to citizens. Splitting of administrative units also may reduce the bargaining power of each unit.
• Another consideration in the creation of administrative units is the management of ethnic diversity. Ethnic politics constitutes a crucial dimension of public life and serves as an intermediary between public administration and the economic well-being of citizens, especially in cases where multiple hierarchically nested administrative units interact to provide public goods. In ethnically diverse states, it is common to devolve power to subnational units as a compromise between the demands of territorially concentrated ethnic groups and the need to preserve the higher-level territorial integrity.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROLIFERATION IN INDIA

Administrative proliferation in India has been occurring since Independence, but it has picked up pace since the enactment of the decentralization reforms in 1992. India enacted extensive decentralization reforms with a constitutional amendment in 1992. Until the 73rd and 74th amendments to the constitution, the government structure in India was two-tiered, with the union and state governments—and the district level administrators performing such tasks as assigned to them by the state governments, such as rural development programs. With the passing of the 73rd and 74th Amendments, the local government units became the third tier of government. The local government units are of three levels – district level, 220 sub-district (taluka) level and village (panchayat) level.

According to the 2011 Census, between 2001-2011 alone, as many as 46 districts were added. Since the 2011 Census, approximately 100 districts have been added in India.

• In 2021 Punjab created Malerkotla as its 23rd district.
• The surge in several districts is primarily due to the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh into A.P. and Telangana in 2014. Telangana currently has 33 districts and Andhra Pradesh has 26 districts (13 new communities were created in 2022).
• Most recently, in August 2022, WEST BENGAL also announced for the creation of 7 new districts.

ADVANTAGES OF CREATING NEW DISTRICTS IN INDIA

• Better administration and governance: This is one of the foremost advantages stated by state governments during creating new districts. To some extent, it is also true.
• The smaller district ensures better governance: New districts will host a range of administrative machinery in the district. This will result in better implementation of government schemes, proper fund utilization, enhanced coverage of schemes, etc. All this will improve governance in the new district.
• Service to the increased population: Since 1981, the average district area has become 44% smaller in 2019. But, the average number of people in a district has risen from 16.6 lakh to 18.6 lakh in 2019. So the new districts can ensure better service delivery for the increased population.
• Bring administration closer to the people: Bigger districts hinder the administration process in some areas of that district itself. For example, before the bifurcation of the Amravati district, the farthest taluka was around 150 km from the district headquarters. So, administrative officers in taluka have to travel nearly 3 hours to district headquarters. A new district can bring the administration closer to the people.
• District-specific government initiatives: New districts might attract more district-specific schemes. For example, the government can set up an agricultural research and assistance centre or a residential school for gifted children. The state government can provide better funding for backward districts. This will benefit the local population.
• Increase employment: Since the new district will require new officials from the top down, this will increase employment in government directly. It will also spur employment opportunities indirectly. For example, government tender and associated employment for locals, new shops and services near government buildings, etc.

DEMOGRAPHIC AND DEVELOPMENT OUTCOMES OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROLIFERATION

The district bifurcations benefit the overall district – and especially newly created districts – in terms of economic output. There could be two underlying reasons for the observed outcomes – it may be arising due to the greater homogeneity in population distribution after the split, or due to the redistributive benefits of bifurcation.

• After the bifurcation, the child and the parent region tend to be more homogeneous. Compared with a similar district that was never split, both child and parent districts do better in terms of economic outcomes. This suggests that the greater homogeneity in population distribution and preferences after the split could be playing a part in the observed positive outcomes.
• However, the child regions do better than the parent regions in the post-bifurcation period. This is reasonable to expect because the villages in the child district gain the advantage of having a new administrative setup built closer to them. This is consistent with the idea that reducing the distance between citizens and administrative centres could lead to better outcomes. [The parent region already has an established administrative system; therefore, the redistributive effects due to the creation of a new district headquarters do not come into play in the parent district. The observed benefit to the child region over the parent region seems to suggest that the positive outcomes are due to redistributive benefits.]

CHALLENGES IN THE CREATION OF NEW DISTRICTS IN INDIA

Creating a number of districts without any rationale can be challenging. This is due to various reasons such as,

• Creating one district is challenging: The government has to find office space for different departments and fill many new positions. All this will require a huge government expenditure. The government will also face challenges with land acquisition.
• Substitute for genuine decentralization: Zilla Parishad and the Panchayat Samiti do not enjoy much power in many states. So, these officials take most of their grievances to the collector. Creating smaller districts without empowering these bodies does not conform to the idea of decentralization in the real sense.
• The increased cost of living in new districts: The growth centres created in new district headquarters will also increase land rates and other service costs. This will increase the cost of living in the new district headquarters in the long run.
• Political motive: Many states reorganize the existing districts and form new ones due to political motives. However, the 2nd Administrative Reforms Commission stated that the political gains from forming a new district are a “minor dividend” and not the major one.

THE ANALYSIS OF THE ISSUE

• In democratic societies, small jurisdictions are believed to enhance political participation, make politics less abstract, politicians more responsive, and facilitate exit-based empowerment of citizens. Decentralization may promote responsiveness and effectiveness of the government as it enhances the capability of the citizens to monitor their government and aligns the incentive structure facing the public official. Decentralization will increase economic efficiency as local governments have an information advantage and can respond better to variance in preferences at the local level and population mobility will lead to competition between local authorities and better provision of public goods [One District, One Product; Aspirational District Programme; Swachh Bharat Mission etc will incentivise the general public in a more comprehensive way].
• Decentralized service delivery, especially when citizens directly elect the local governments, is expected to provide better coverage, quality, and efficiency. Competing local governments may experiment with various ways to provide public goods and lead to innovations [ making use of locally available resources, traditional knowledge and manpower] that can also be applied/replicated elsewhere.
• Local government proliferation also brings citizens closer to their government and may engender a better match between the supply and demand of public goods and services.
• At the same time, there is a counterargument in favour of larger jurisdiction sizes because larger units allow for economies of scale in providing public goods. Local bureaucracies may be poorly staffed and ill-equipped to handle the responsibilities associated with the decentralized provision of public goods [such as in cases of natural disasters and climate change-related issues which impact a larger geographical area and needs more coordinated efforts at a large scale]. Making each unit smaller and increasing the number of units, may increase the total cost of coordination and cooperation.
• There is also the possibility that the newly created administrative units may struggle to generate resources due to poorer administrative capability, thus leading to subpar public good provision. Thus critics also argue that the effectiveness of decentralization measures/administrative proliferation is often hampered by the particular context of its implementation, which may or may not always lead to better outcomes.

THE WAY FORWARD:

1. Ensure proper decentralization: Instead of creating new districts every time, the State governments might reform their decentralization policy as the Panchayats and Zillas face many challenges in their functioning. If the state government provides more powers, this will improve the functioning of Panchayats and Zilla Parishad. For example,

• Creation of SFCs(State Finance Commission) properly and allocating funds properly.
• Widening their tax base and providing access to the Capital market to raise funds.
• State Governments should provide local bodies with the power to properly recruit personnel to fulfil their functions.

2. Guidelines for the formation of new districts: With new districts added every year, the Center may prescribe certain criteria for the formation of a new district. For example, the Center may release a guideline that contains the minimum area of the district, its population, etc.
3. Work on other alternatives: Instead of creating new infrastructure, the States may conduct special camps and frequent field visits from officials. This will not only save the government exchequer but also serve the majority of the administrative and governance targets.
4. Information and communication technologies (ICT) are key instruments for achieving higher competitiveness in the economy and improving the social living standard of the citizens. Wide usage and incorporation of ICT in these two directions are targeted to achieve innovative, sustainable and associative growth, which is envisaged.
5. The present times is an era of technology and underlining the benefits of technology as demonstrated during the time of the pandemic, the union government is working to provide high-speed internet to every village and it is imperative to invest even further in technology and innovation, which will help in better administration and good governance initiatives, reducing the need for further bifurcation of the districts.
6. Parallel steps to enhance the Accountability, Responsibility, and Transparency of the public offices will further enhance the overall functioning of the administration along with the administrative proliferation which indeed helps in bringing the government and administration closer to the people.

THE CONCLUSION: Administrative proliferation as a policy measure has mixed results with specific public service measures such as education, sanitation, water supply, or maternal health. Compared to districts that are not split, split districts (parent and child) are better off in terms of economic outcomes. However, the child regions have an advantage over the parent regions in the post-bifurcation period. Government functions are many and varied and the effect of population size on one of those functions might not be the same as that on others. The demographic and developmental outcomes may fall off the line with the conceived notions of administrative proliferation at lower levels of population per administrative unit.

Mains Practice Question:

1. What are the reasons for creating new districts in the state? are they helping in administrative ease or just a populist measure?
2. Does the concept of administrative proliferation conform to the idea of a leviathan state? In the era of minimum government, maximum governance justifies the idea of creating more administrative centres in the state.
3. Do newly added districts yield desired governance results? critically analyze.