Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T15:52:05.482Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Deliberative Democracy in an Unequal World: A Text-As-Data Study of South India’s Village Assemblies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2019

RAMYA PARTHASARATHY Open the ORCID record for RAMYA PARTHASARATHY [Opens in a new window] ,
VIJAYENDRA RAO Open the ORCID record for VIJAYENDRA RAO [Opens in a new window]  and
NETHRA PALANISWAMY
RAMYA PARTHASARATHY*
Affiliation:
Stanford University
VIJAYENDRA RAO*
Affiliation:
World Bank
NETHRA PALANISWAMY*
Affiliation:
World Bank
*
*Ramya Parthasarathy, Doctoral Student, Department of Political Science, Stanford University, ramyap1@alumni.stanford.edu.
†Vijayendra Rao, Lead Economist, Development Research Group, World Bank, vrao@worldbank.org.
‡Nethra Palaniswamy, Economist, Poverty Global Practice, World Bank, npalaniswamy@worldbank.org.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper opens the “black box” of real-world deliberation by using text-as-data methods on a corpus of transcripts from the constitutionally mandated gram sabhas, or village assemblies, of rural India. Drawing on normative theories of deliberation, we identify empirical standards for “good” deliberation based on one’s ability both to speak and to be heard, and use natural language processing methods to generate these measures. We first show that, even in the rural Indian context, these assemblies are not mere “talking shops,” but rather provide opportunities for citizens to challenge their elected officials, demand transparency, and provide information about local development needs. Second, we find that women are at a disadvantage relative to men; they are less likely to speak, set the agenda, and receive a relevant response from state officials. And finally, we show that quotas for women for village presidencies improve the likelihood that female citizens are heard.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 113 , Issue 3 , August 2019 , pp. 623 - 640
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This paper is a product of the World Bank’s Social Observatory. Financial support from the contributions of (1) UK Aid from the UK government, (2) the Australian Government’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and (3) the European Commission (EC) through the South Asia Food and Nutrition Security Initiative (SAFANSI), which is administered by the World Bank, is gratefully acknowledged. The authors are indebted to R. V. Shajeevana, the former Additional Project Director of the Pudhu Vaazhu Project, for her advice and assistance; Kevin Crockford and Samik Sundar Das for their support; and Madhulika Khanna, Nishtha Kochhar, Smriti Sakhamuri, G. Manivannan, and GFK-Mode for their help with the fieldwork. The authors also thank Avidit Acharya, Lisa Blaydes, Nick Eubank, Adriane Fresh, Justin Grimmer, David Laitin, Jeremy Weinstein, and participants of the Indian Political Economy working group in Washington, D.C., for comments and suggestions. The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the UK, EC, or Australian government’s official policies or the policies of the World Bank and its Board of Executive Directors. Replication files are available at the American Political Science Review Dataverse: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/NFZLI3.

References

REFERENCES

American Political Science Association. 2012. Report of the Task Force on Democracy, Economic Security, and Social Justice in a Volatile World. Washington DC: American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Angus, Daniel, Smith, Andrew E., and Wiles, Janet. 2012. “Human Communication as Coupled Time Series: Quantifying Multi-Participant Recurrence.” IEEE Transactions on Audio Speech and Language Processing 20 (6): 1795–807.10.1109/TASL.2012.2189566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anzia, Sarah F., and Berry, Christopher R.. 2011. “The Jackie (And Jill) Robinson Effect: Why Do Congresswomen Outperform Congressmen?” American Journal of Political Science 55 (3): 478–93.10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00512.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auerbach, Adam Michael. 2017. “Neighborhood Associations and the Urban Poor: India’s Slum Development Committees.” World Development. URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X15311797.10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.03.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bächtiger, André, Spörndli, Markus, Steenbergen, Marco R., and Steiner, Jürg. 2005. “The Deliberative Dimensions of Legislatures.” Acta Politica 40 (2): 225–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baiocchi, Gianpaolo, Heller, Patrick, and K. Silva, Marcelo. 2011. Bootstrapping Democracy: Transforming Local Governance and Civil Society in Brazil. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Ban, Radu, Jha, Saumitra, and Rao, Vijayendra. 2012. “Who Has Voice in a Deliberative Democracy? Evidence from Transcripts of Village Parliaments in South India.” Journal of Development Economics 99 (2): 428–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ban, Radu, and Rao, Vijayendra. 2008a. “Is Deliberation Equitable? Evidence from Transcripts of Village Meetings in South India.” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series (4928).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ban, Radu, and Rao, Vijayendra. 2008b. “Tokenism or agency? The Impact of Women’s Reservations on Village Democracies in South India.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 56 (3): 501–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhattacharjee, Swati, and Chattopadhyay, Raghabendra. 2011. “The Information Deficit: Use of Media in a Deliberative Democracy.” Economic and Political Weekly XLVI(52): 45–52.Google Scholar
Bhavnani, Rikhil R. 2009. “Do Electoral Quotas Work after They Are Withdrawn? Evidence from a Natural Experiment in India.” American Political Science Review 103 (1): 23–35.10.1017/S0003055409090029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chattopadhyay, Raghabendra, and Duflo, Esther. 2004. “Women as Policy Makers: Evidence from a Randomized Policy Experiment in India.” Econometrica 72 (5): 1409–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, Amanda, Josefsson, Cecilia, and Wang, Vibeke. 2017. “Quotas and Women's Substantive Representation: Evidence from a Content Analysis of Ugandan Plenary Debates.” Politics & Gender 13 (2), 276–304.10.1017/S1743923X16000453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curato, Nicole, Dryzek, John S., Ercan, Selen A., Hendriks, Carolyn M., and Niemeyer, Simon. 2017. “Twelve Key Findings in Deliberative Democracy Research.” Daedalus 146 (3): 28–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denny, Matthew J., and Spirling, Arthur. 2018. “Text Preprocessing for Unsupervised Learning: Why it Matters, when it Misleads, and What to Do about It.” Political Analysis 26 (2): 168–89.10.1017/pan.2017.44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dreze, Jean, and Sen, Amartya Kumar. 2002. India: Development and Participation. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 1994. Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dryzek, John S. 2000. Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Elster, Jon. 1998. Deliberative Democracy. Vol. 1. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James D. 1998. Deliberation as Discussion. In Deliberative Democracy, ed. Elster, Jon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 44–68.10.1017/CBO9781139175005.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishkin, James S., and Luskin, Robert C.. 2005. “Experimenting with a Democratic Ideal: Deliberative Polling and Public Opinion.” Acta Politica 40 (3): 284–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, Archon. 2004. “Deliberation’s Darker Side: Six Questions for Iris Marion Young and Jane Mansbridge.” National Civic Review 93 (4): 47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goeree, Jacob K., and Yariv, Leeat. 2011. “An Experimental Study of Collective Deliberation.” Econometrica 79 (3): 893–921.Google Scholar
Goodin, Robert E. 2005. “Sequencing Deliberative Moments.” Acta Politica 40 (2): 182–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutmann, Amy, and Thompson, Dennis. 1996. Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gutmann, Amy, and Thompson, Dennis. 2004. Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400826339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1990. Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Heller, Patrick, Harilal, K. N., and Chaudhuri, Shubham. 2007. “Building Local Democracy: Evaluating the Impact of Decentralization in Kerala, India.” World Development 35 (4): 626–48.10.1016/j.worlddev.2006.07.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald, and Norris, Pippa. 2003. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around the World. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karpowitz, Christopher F., and Mendelberg, Tali. 2014. The Silent Sex: Gender, Deliberation, and Institutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Karpowitz, Christopher F., Mendelberg, Tali, and Shaker, Lee. 2012. “Gender Inequality in Deliberative Participation.” American Political Science Review 106 (3): 533–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
List, Christian, Luskin, Robert C., Fishkin, James S., and McLean, Iain. 2013. “Deliberation, Single-Peakedness, and the Possibility of Meaningful Democracy: Evidence from Deliberative Polls.” The Journal of Politics 75 (1): 80–95.10.1017/S0022381612000886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackie, Gerry. 2015. Traveling to the Village of Knowledge. In Deliberation and Development: Rethinking the Role of Voice and Collective Action in Unequal Societies, eds. Rao, Vijayendra and Heller, Patrick. Washington DC: World Bank Publications, 85–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1980. Beyond Adversarial Democracy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1999. “Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent “Yes”.” The Journal of Politics 61 (3): 628–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 2015. A Minimalist Definition of Deliberation. In Deliberation and Development: Rethinking the Role of Voice and Collective Action in Unequal Societies, eds. Rao, Vijayendra and Heller, Patrick. Washington DC: World Bank Publications, 27–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane, Bohman, James, Chambers, Simone, Estlund, David, Føllesdal, Andreas, Fung, Archon, Lafont, Cristina, Manin, Bernard, and Martí, José Luis. 2010. “The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy.” The Journal of Political Philosophy 18 (1): 64–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansuri, Ghazala, and Rao, Vijayendra. 2012. “Localizing Development: Does Participation Work?” World Bank Policy Report, The World Bank, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Myers, C. Daniel, and Mendelberg, Tali. 2013. “Political Deliberation.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, eds. Huddy, Leonie, Sears, David O., and Levy, Jack S.. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 699–734.Google Scholar
Palanithurai, Ganapathy. 2003. New Panchayati Raj in Tamil Nadu: With Act in Original. New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Parthasarathy, Ramya, and Rao, Vijayendra. 2018. “Deliberative Democracy in India.” In The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy, eds. Bachtinger, Andre, Dryzek, John, Mansbridge, Jane, and Warren, Mark. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paxton, Pamela, Kunovich, Sheri, and Hughes, Melanie M.. 2007. “Gender in Politics.” Annual Review of Sociology 33: 263–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polletta, Francesca. 2004. “Culture Is Not Just in Your Head.” In Rethinking Social Movements: Structure, Meaning, and Emotion, eds. Jeff Goodwin and James M. Jasper. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 97–110.Google Scholar
Polletta, Francesca, and Lee, John. 2006. “Is Telling Stories Good for Democracy? Rhetoric in Public Deliberation after 9/11.” American Sociological Review 71 (5): 699–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rao, Vijayendra, and Sanyal, Paromita. 2010. “Dignity through Discourse: Poverty and the Culture of Deliberation in Indian Village Democracies.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 629 (1): 146–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Margaret E., Stewart, Brandon M., and Tingley, Dustin. 2014. “Stm: R Package for Structural Topic Models.” R package 1: 12.Google Scholar
Roberts, Margaret E., Stewart, Brandon M., Tingley, Dustin, and Airoldi, Edoardo M.. 2013. “The Structural Topic Model and Applied Social Science.” Paper presented at the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems Workshop on Topic Models: Computation, Application, and Evaluation.Google Scholar
Swidler, Ann, and Watkins, Susan Cotts. 2015. “Practices of Deliberation in Rural Malawi.” In Deliberation and Development: Rethinking the Role of Voice and Collective Action in Unequal Societies, eds. Heller, Patrick and Rao, Vijayendra. Washington DC: The World Bank, 133–66.Google Scholar
Government of Tamil Nadu. 1994. Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act. Chennai: Government of Tamil Nadu Press.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 1999. “Justice, Inclusion, and Deliberative Democracy.” In Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement, eds. Macedo, Stephen. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Parthasarathy et al. Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/NFZLI3
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Parthasarathy et al. supplementary material

Appendices

Download Parthasarathy et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 367.7 KB