The Pennsylvania State University
The Graduate School
College of Communications
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND PARTICIPATORY
DEMOCRACY: A CASE STUDY OF BANGALORE CITY
A Thesis in
Mass Communications
by
Veena V. Raman
© 2006 Veena V. Raman
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements
for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
August, 2006
The thesis of Veena V. Raman was reviewed and approved* by the following.
Dennis K. Davis
Professor of Communications
Thesis Co-advisor
Co-chair of Committee
Jorge Reina Schement
Distinguished Professor of Telecommunications Studies
Thesis Co-advisor
Co-chair of Committee
Richard D. Taylor
Palmer Chair Professor of Telecommunications Studies
Marybeth Oliver
Professor of Communications
Christopher Benner
Assistant Professor of Geography, Labor Studies, and Industrial Relations
John S. Nichols
Professor of Communications
Associate Dean for Graduate Studies and Research
Head of Department of Film/Video and Media Studies
*Signatures are on file in the Graduate School.
ABSTRACT
In a country where access to information technology is unevenly distributed, what
role can technology play in promoting participatory democracy?
In many developing countries, there is evidence of urban fragmentation, spatial
segregation, and high costs of urban infrastructures and services. Local governments find
it difficult to manage this space and satisfy the demands of their citizens. To increase
their efficiency, local governments are adopting information technologies under
initiatives branded as e-government. Citizens groups are seeking action spaces to solve
local problems triggered by global trends and often see information and communication
technologies (ICT) as part of the solution. This raises interesting questions about the role
of ICTs in urban civic life in developing countries. How are ICTs used in citizengovernment interactions? How does local political context influence technology use
among citizens? What factors facilitate or inhibit use of ICTs in local government? Do
ICTs facilitate greater citizen involvement in local government? Do they strengthen
governance and deepen democracy?
This research examines the impact of ICTs on the civic lives of people in
Bangalore City, the information capital of India. It analyzes the e-government efforts of
the local government in Bangalore, the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BMP), and studies
the efforts of Janaagraha, a citizen’s group, to facilitate participatory democracy among
Bangaloreans.
In this dissertation, I examine what e-government means in the context of
Bangalore. To understand why only specific services are available and how people use
these e-government services, I compare the visions and interpretations of ‘e-government’
from the perspectives of the officials involved and survey citizens of Bangalore city. The
policy on e-government makes it clear that the government expects ICT usage to promote
better service provision and facilitate democratic outreach between government and
citizens. I demonstrate that there is a gap between how officials and citizens view egovernment. Among officials a managerial model dominates over participatory
democratic possibilities where as citizens see it as a failed effort to reach out and promote
citizen involvement due to entrenched government culture, lack of committed personnel,
and lack of trust.
Results suggest that the democratic potential of the Internet has been
marginalized. An executive-driven, "managerial" business model of citizen-government
interaction has assumed dominance at the expense of participatory democratic
possibilities. Efficiency concerns drive reliance on digital government in a top down
process, with citizen demand not being considered an important factor. The focus has
been on the ‘e’ rather than on basic governance that reaches the average citizen.
To understand how information technology might help citizen participation in
governance, I analyze Public Record of Operations and Finance (PROOF). This initiative
is an example of how computerization of information management in local administration
has helped Bangaloreans engage with their local government. The strategies through
which citizens of Bangalore have been able to participate more in local government and
the role ICTs have played in those strategies is examined through the related Ward Works
initiative. Ward Works is an initiative that allows citizens to participate in prioritizing,
monitoring and evaluating works undertaken by the local government in their wards.
iii
The successful PROOF and Ward Works initiatives are a case of IT interacting
with the structure and process of local government in tandem with civic action. Their
success can be attributed to collaboration between citizens, and between citizens, BMP
officials and corporators. Their distinguishing characteristic is the civic engagement
component. Greater availability of information is not a sufficient condition to promote
citizen participation. Conscious efforts are necessary to highlight what information is
available and how it can be useful to citizens who want to participate in governance.
What are some of the findings of this research? While the state government has
discouraged decentralization and sharing of power in practice, citizens groups have been
able to take advantage of a simple computerization process within local government to
gain more space for participation in governance. PROOF and Ward Works were
successful because considerable energy was spent in mobilizing existing neighborhood
organizations and resident welfare associations to generate resources locally. These
initiatives indicate that community leaders who identify and engage efficient government
administrators are catalysts to reform. Local government officials are intricately
embedded in local social relations and will respond to community pressure if it is backed
by political leaders at a higher level. Civic engagement is most successful in
communities that have both strong bonding capital and key individuals who provide
bridges to other groups. Strong bonding capital alone is detrimental to groups when they
attempt to solve larger issues relevant to everyone in the community. While education
and information seem to motivate citizen engagement, wealth does not seem to encourage
collective action. It appears to encourage individuals to seek solutions on their own rather
than rely on the community.
The particular contribution of this research is an empirical examination of the role
of ICTs in citizens’ civic and political engagement in the context of a city that serves as a
technology hub in a developing country. It is clear that the role of information
technology in the political engagement process can vary across governments. In
Bangalore, the IT capital of India and information hub of Karnataka, digital divide is still
severe enough to make traditional forms of IT use in the governance process, such as
email, online consultation and feedback generation, impractical. IT is a factor that
facilitates transparency and allows administrators to be accountable if they choose to
share information with the citizens. IT is still not the key factor that encourages citizen
participation in governance. However, IT can alter information flows that can be used by
citizens to participate in governance.
India is currently undergoing changes in government philosophies and is
becoming more responsive to governance with citizens participation. Innovative
information technology use could facilitate citizen participation. This research highlights
that changes need to occur in all areas: within government, among citizens and in the
attitudes of all stakeholders towards the role of information technology and its innovative
uses.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES …………………………………………………………………viii
LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………….. ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………....x
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………….1
1.1 Rational for the study………………………………………………………….2
1.1.1 Why Bangalore City, India?....................................................................2
1.1.2 Why focus on ICTs and participatory government?................................4
1.2 Overview of Chapters ...……………………………………………………...5
Chapter 2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND LITERATURE REVIEW ......... 8
2.1 Information Society: Are we there yet? ......................................................... 8
2.1.1 Evidence, strenghts and weaknesses ....................................................14
2.2 Information Technology and the City.............................................................16
2.3 Role of Information Technology in Government and Governance ................18
2.3.1 Government in the Digital Age : E-government ..................................21
2.4 Information Technology, Democracy, and Citizen Participation ...................24
2.4.1 ICTs and Democracy............................................................................26
2.5 Relevance of these theoretical frameworks to current research .....................28
2.6 Research Questions………………………………………………………….29
Chapter 3 RESEARCH DESIGN ...............................................................................31
3.1 Methodology...................................................................................................32
3.2 The Survey: Strategy, Design and Process ..................................................... 33
3.3 Strategy for conducting the study…………………………………………....35
3.4 Why Ethnography? .........................................................................................36
3.4.1 Research Setting ................................................................................... 38
3.4.2 Why Janaagraha ? Gaining entry to the research site........................... 40
3.4.3 My position within Janaagraha.............................................................42
3.3.4 Data collection and Analysis ................................................................44
3.5 Limitations...................................................................................................... 46
Chapter 4 SETTING THE CONTEXT: BANGALORE CITY, KARNATAKA ...... 49
4.1 Bendakaluru (Bangalore): The place of boiled grains....................................49
4.2 Bangalore as India's Silicon Valley? ..............................................................51
4.3 IT and the City: Infreastrucutre and City limits.............................................. 56
4.4 Local Government: Administration, Democracy and Citizen Participation...59
4.4.1 Who are the players involved in local government in Bangalore
City………………………………………………………………........62
v
4.4.2 What are the functions of the BMP?..................................................... 66
4.4.3 What does this mean?………………………………………………....67
4.5 Citizen Engagement: Civic Action and Governance………………………….70
4.5.1 A Public-Private Partnership to take 'Bangalore Forward'…………....78
4.6 Relevence to Current Research…………………………………………….....83
Chapter 5 E-GOVERNMENT: POLICY, INTERPRETATION, PROJECTS &
USAGE ........................................................................................................86
5.1 India: Information Technology and E-government……………………...........86
5.1.1 E-government in India………………………………………………....89
5.1.2 E-government Policy…………………………………………………..91
5.1.3 E-government in Practice: What is the status? .……………………….93
5.2 E-government in Karnataka…………………………………………………...97
5.2.1 What government services are available to citizens that can be
accessed through the use of ICTs ..................................................................106
5.3. E-government in Bangalore ...........................................................................112
5.4 The Survey Participants.................................................................................114
5.4.1 Analysis ................................................................................................116
5.4.2 What people did online.........................................................................117
5.4.3 What government services did citizens access………………………..117
5.4.4 Does the use of ICTs influence/change interactions between citizens
and local government?...........................................................................118
5.4.5 What did citizens do when they visited e-government websites……...120
5.5 What are some reasons why citizens do not use the websites?.......................121
Chapter 6 PROOF : Public Record Of Operations and Finance.................................129
6.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................130
6.2 Anatomy of PROOF .......................................................................................131
6.2.1 Structural change in local government : The 'supplu side' reform ...... 132
6.2.2 Why was FBAS crucial……………………………………………….134
6.3 Citizen Engagement: The demand for information ........................................135
6.3.1 Janaagraha ...........................................................................................137
6.3.2 VOICES................................................................................................139
6.3.3 Centre for Budget and Policy Studies (CBPS)………………………. 140
6.3.4 Public Affairs Centre (PAC)………………………………………….141
6.4 PROOF Campaign Activities ........................................................................142
6.4.1 Communication Technology and PROOF : Informing and
Mobilizing Citizens ..........................................................................145
6.4.2 PROOF Meetings ................................................................................147
6.5 What are the changes brought about by PROOF...........................................155
6.6 Analysis: Why did PROOF Succeed where many others have failed?.......... 157
6.7 Challenges to citizen participation in democratic local governance………...161
vi
Chapter 7 WARD WORKS .......................................................................................166
7.1 Data from 10 wards ........................................................................................166
7.1.1 Ward 90 & 94 Kadugondanahalli & Pillanna Gardens .......................174
7.1.2 Ward 54 Girinagar ..............................................................................177
7.1.3 Ward 55 Padmanabhanagara………………………………………….179
7.1.4 Ward 68 Ejipura……………………………………………………….181
7.1.5 Ward 50 V.V. Puram………………………………………………….184
7.1.6 Ward 85 Sarvagnanagar……………………………………………… 186
7.1.7 Ward 100 Sanjaynagar………………………………………………...188
7.1.8 Other Wards: 78, 74, 72……………………………………………….191
7.2 Summary of Observations…………………………………………………....195
7.2.1 Challenges …………………………………………………………… 196
7.3 So, What did Ward Works achieve?................................................................198
Chapter 8 ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS ..........................................................200
8.1 Answers to the research questions..................................................................200
8.2 Summary of findings from the survey…………………………………….....202
8.3 Analysis: Why do state government initiatives not lead to
citizen participation …………………………………………...……………203
8.4 How do PROOF and Ward Works affect
citizen –government interactions? …………………………………………..213
8.5 Theoretical framework for analyzing PROOF and Ward Works…………....216
8.6 Summary of findings from case study of PROOF and Ward Works………..223
8.7 Issues that deserve attention………………………………………………....224
8.8 Future Research……………………………………………………………...226
8.9 Significance and Broader Implications……………………………………... 228
8.10 Recommendations…………………………………………………………..231
Bibliography ................................................................................................................237
Appendix A Survey Questionnaire .............................................................................. 248
Appendix B List of Survey locations.......................................................................... 256
Appendix C Interview Protocol …………………………………………………….261
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1. E-government systems model...................................................................22
Figure 3-1. Ethnographic text composition guidelines............................................... 38
Figure 3-2. PROOF and Ward Works in 2004 ............................................................39
Figure 4-1 Organization structure of Bangalore City Corporation (FBAS, 2003)......63
Figure 4-2. BATF constituents ....................................................................................79
Figure 5-1. India Profile (World Development Indicators database, August 2005) ...87
Figure 5-2. India: ICT indicators.................................................................................87
Figure 5-3. Government of India directory .................................................................94
Figure 6-1. PROOF Stakeholders……………………………………………………155
Figure 7-1. Ward Works campaign at a glance…………………………………….. 168
Figure 7-2. Flow chart of Ward Works budgeting process………………………….169
Figure 7-3. Bangalore ward map with 10 participating wards of Ward Works……..173
Figure 8-1. Framework for analysis of E-government ……………………………...203
Figure 8-2. Bridge builders by ward ……………………………………………….. 222
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 5-1. Government services accessible to citizens online.....................................106
Table 5-2. Online activity as a percentage of users .....................................................117
Table 5-3. Services accessed by citizens .....................................................................118
Table 5-4. Preferred source of information about local government services……….119
Table 5-5. E-government website activity ...................................................................120
Table 6-1. PROOF Meetings ……………………………………………………….. 147
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study owes much to people within and beyond academia.
I am grateful to the many Bangaloreans who agreed to interviews and surveys,
and particularly to the people working as part of the Janaagraha movement. This work
would not exist without them.
I owe special gratitude to my advisors and co-chairs, Prof. Dennis Davis and Prof.
Jorge Schement. This research has been shaped by their expert advice and guidance; they
helped me find and refine my own perspective. I am deeply grateful for the freedom to
explore and for their critical insights. I thank Dr. Richard Taylor, Dr. Marybeth Oliver
and Dr. Chris Benner for encouraging me to always strive for the best.
Finally, I thank my family for all the love, support, encouragement and
inspiration.
x
Dedicated to my mother
xi
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
“Technologies such as email, Internet and high speed data-links fundamentally change
the way nations, communities and individuals communicate”--- Singhal & Rogers (2001).
What are these changes? Are they fundamental in nature? How do people
experience the changes associated with an ‘information age’ in a developing country that
is actively participating in the global economy?
In many developing countries, there is evidence of urban fragmentation, spatial
segregation, poverty within growing economies, and high costs of urban infrastructures
and services. Local governments find it difficult to manage this space and satisfy the
diverse and often conflicting demands of their citizens.
To increase their efficiency, local governments are adopting information
technologies under initiatives branded as e-government. Citizens groups and nongovernmental organizations are seeking action spaces to solve local problems triggered
by global trends and often see information and communication technologies (ICT) as part
of the solution. This raises interesting questions about the role of ICTs in urban civic life
in developing countries. How are ICTs used in citizen-government interactions? How
does local political context influence technology use among citizens? What factors
facilitate or inhibit use of ICTs in local government? Do ICTs facilitate greater citizen
involvement in local government? Do they strengthen governance and deepen
democracy?
Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) is a broadly used term that
can encompass many technologies that are used to produce, process, exchange, and
1
manage information and knowledge. In this study ICT is defined as computers, software,
peripherals and connections to the Internet.
This research examines the impact of ICTs on the civic lives of people in
Bangalore City, the information capital of India. It analyzes the e-government efforts of
the local government in Bangalore, the Bangalore City Corporation, and studies the
efforts of Janaagraha, a citizen’s group, to facilitate participatory democracy in local
government among Bangaloreans.
1.1 Rationale for the study
While a lot of attention has been focused on the ubiquity of computer and
Internet-enabled services offered by the private sector, the public sector has slowly
adopted these new media and emerged as an important point of citizen-technology
interaction. The ubiquity of information technology in government offices and the
proliferation of government websites contribute a new aspect to the study of government
and governance.
Though ICTs play an important role in public life, their role is influenced by
factors such as investment priorities of government and corporate bodies, market
conditions and sociocultural values. Adoption of any technology depends on how people
perceive it and how they use it in their specific local contexts. This study examines how
citizens of Bangalore City perceive and use information technology in their interactions
with their local government.
1.1.1 Why Bangalore City, India?
India has emerged as the source of many skilled information workers. Indian
computer hardware and software developers constitute a major immigrant workforce in
2
the United States. India is now initiating innovations such as the Simputer (portable, less
expensive alternative to computers). Compared to many other developing countries, India
is uniquely positioned in terms of human and technical resources though social and
economic disparities exist.
Many Indian initiatives aim to expand diffusion of computers and access to the
Internet. However, few if any studies have been conducted to examine how people
perceive and use ICTs. Indeed, nearly all information society studies have been
conducted on developed countries. The extent to which the information revolution affects
the quality of civic life in developing countries is still an open question.
Bangalore has been termed the information capital and the Silicon Valley of
India. In 2002-03, this capital of Karnataka State in south India, had software exports of
US $2.67 billion (Department of IT and Biotechnology, 2006). Bangalore was the first
city in India to set up a satellite earth station for high speed communication services to
facilitate software exports. In 1991, a software technology park was established to nurture
information technology initiatives. The city also has a Cyber Park/Technology Incubation
Centre, an International Tech Park and an electronics city area that promote growth in the
IT sector. The state government announced a Millennium IT Policy to promote
information technologies in 1997. There are many cyberkiosks and cybercafes where
people who do not own computers can gain access to the Internet for a small fee though
sizable portions of the population remain beyond this information economy and society.
As the information capital of India, Bangalore is a ‘technopole’, a technology hub
integrating the region to the global information economy. Castells (2000) work on the
impact of information-based globalization on urban-regional processes suggests that there
3
is tension between participation in global operations and the local socioeconomic context.
Information technologies can either facilitate domination by the information rich or an
inclusive democracy with wide spread participation in local governance. Bangalore’s
population is an uneven mix of those who can participate in the global information
economy and those who cannot and thus provides an interesting case study for studying
the impact of ICTs on local governance.
1.1.2 Why focus on ICTs and participatory government?
The explosion of interest in information and communication technologies (ICTs)
has prompted many visions of its role in creating channels of interactive communication
connecting citizens and their governments (Grossman, 1995). This is particularly relevant
to democracies. While democracy may be defined and practiced in many different ways,
the participatory democracy approach suggests that administrative decisions will be more
acceptable to the citizenry if they are made through a collaborative process that builds
community and shared understanding, and therefore overcomes societal divisiveness and
polarization (Kemmis 1990). The basic premise is that citizens will support the
government if they have voluntarily associated with it and feel it is generally responsive
to their interests.
Though ICTs could be used to increase transparency in government and stimulate
citizen involvement through civic consultation, studies suggest that they have largely
been employed in streamlining labor-intensive bureaucratic transactions rather than for
participatory or consultative efforts (Chadwick & May, 2003). This is an important fact
when considering policy statements that claim participatory democracy and
empowerment of the people as the reason for employing ICTs in government.
4
Karnataka’s Mahiti – The Millennium IT Policy states that the government’s
primary aim is to use “e-Gov as a tool and deliver a government that is more proactive
and responsive to its citizens”(Government of Karnataka, 2001). The government defines
e-government as involving “the application of Information and Communication
Technologies to bring about more speed, transparency and responsiveness to the various
areas of governmental activities resulting in enhanced accountability and consequent
empowerment of people.
As the capital of Karnataka State and the main regional IT hub, Bangalore City is
ideally suited to examine whether the goal of enhanced accountability and empowerment
of people through e-government initiatives has been achieved. Hence this study will
focus on local government in Bangalore City. The study will take into account the impact
of the State Government’s IT policies on Bangalore City and analyze any state wide IT
initiatives that affect local government in the City. It will also examine how citizens’
groups engage with their local government and the role that ICTs play in their efforts.
1.2 Overview of Chapters
Chapter two examines the existing literature in the following areas: formation of
an information society; role of ICTs in refashioning cities, role of ICTs in government
(e-government) and governance; influence of new ICTs on a democracy; and
technological access and its influence on civic participation. I integrate these theoretical
perspectives to create a framework for examining what role ICTs play in citizens
government interactions in Bangalore city.
5
I lay out a basic overview of the empirical approaches I use in analyzing egovernment initiatives, measuring technology use and operationalizing participation in
local government in chapter three.
Chapter four sets the context for Bangalore city by examining how it developed
into a popular ICT hub in India and by describing the infrastructure and policy
framework of local government. I also examine how Bangaloreans have engaged with
their local government in the past.
In chapter five, I examine what e-government means in the context of Bangalore.
In the first of two empirical analyses, I enumerate all the services that citizens could
accesses through the use of ICTs in January 2005. Secondly, to understand why only
specific services are available and how people use these e-government services, I
compare the visions and interpretations of ‘e-government’ from the perspectives of the
officials involved and survey citizens of Bangalore city. I demonstrate that there is a gap
between how officials and citizens view e-government. Among officials a managerial
model dominates over participatory democratic possibilities where as citizens see it as a
failed effort to reach out and promote citizen involvement due to entrenched government
culture, lack of committed personnel, and lack of trust acting as barriers to e-government.
In chapter six, I examine one example of how Bangaloreans engage with their
local government through the case study of the PROOF initiative. This chapter examines
how the use of ICTs has influenced local government practices and accountability to
citizens.
Chapter seven examines the strategies through which citizens of Bangalore have
been able to participate more in local government and the role ICTs have played in those
6
strategies. This is done by specifically focusing on an initiative called ward works. It also
examines in what ways citizens can find empowerment through the use of ICTs in their
interactions with their local government.
Chapter eight analyzes the findings and examines the reasons for the successes of
PROOF and ward works and the failure of other e-government projects to get citizens
involved and participating in local governance. It concludes by discussing the
implications of the findings for e-government initiatives in developing countries.
7
Chapter 2
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND LITERATURE REVIEW
Research that examines the role of information technology in local government in
city that is a technology hub by definition straddles several disciplines: public
administration, political science, information systems, communications and others. This
chapter provides an overview of relevant theoretical perspectives in the following areas:
information societies, the effect of information technologies on cities and government of
cities, electronic government/ governance, and effects of information technologies on
democratic practices. The review will only highlight concepts relevant to this research, an
extensive elaboration on each is beyond the scope of this work.
2.1 Information Society: Are we there yet?
Information society has become a widely used term though it is not precisely
defined. Varied evidence to support its existence has been drawn from statistics about the
diffusion of information technologies, occupational changes (information work), changes
in global and national economies, and information flows. However, widespread
conviction in an information society does not necessarily mean that it exists in any
coherent sense.
While many researchers have theorized about the existence of an information
society, scholars such as Webster (2002) and Castells (2000) declare that ‘we should
abandon the notion of information society’. Hence, this section briefly examines the
major theoretical claims for and against the idea of information society and will propose a
framework for situating Bangalore City.
8
Duff (2000) classifies the various information society theories into three
categories- information technology, information work/sector, and information flows. The
diffusion of information technology perspective examines the spread of new
communications technologies (e-mail, data and text communications, online information
exchange) and the convergence between micro electronics and telecommunications.
Researchers in this tradition claim this as evidence of a new society in the making.
However, it is not clear how much information technology has to penetrate a society to
qualify for information society status.
The information flows perspective draws on the pervasiveness of electronic
highways that result in a new emphasis on the flow of information. Though this
quantification of information flows provides a perspective on the amount of information
in circulation, it does not account for the effects of such flows through the networks.
The information sector thesis examines changes in occupational structure to
provide evidence for the arrival of the information society (Duff, 2000). Deriving from
the works of Bell, Machlup, and Porat this version suggests that rise of the service
industry with substantial increases in information work is a marker of an information
society (Schement & Curtis, 1995). This version stresses the transformative power of
information itself rather than the influence of information technologies. A range of
scholars from Drucker to Castells have suggested that the economy is led and energized
by people whose defining characteristic is the capacity to manipulate information
(Webster, 2002). It has been suggested that being inventive, having the capacity to
develop and exploit networks, and a propensity to re-skill as a matter of routine are key to
the new economy since wealth is generated from ideas, knowledge, skills, talent and
9
creativity. Researchers have provided evidence for this perspective through statistics on
the percentage of workforce who are information workers in an information economy.
Most discussions of information society theories commence with the ideas
articulated by Daniel Bell in The Coming of Post Industrial Society. Bell (1976) placed
information and communication technologies as a central theme in his macro theory and
suggested that a new and fundamentally different social order had arisen in response to
transformations in technology, work and the economy. Porat’s description of the
information economy and workforce transformed post-industrial theory and remade it
into a theory of the information society (Schement & Curtis, 1995).
While Bell is credited with constructing a macro theory of the information
society, the assumptions that form the basis of his theory have been criticized. Bell’s
primary assumption was that dominance of the service work force, attended by new
information technologies, products, and industries signals a break with the past; a
momentous disjuncture that he labeled ‘post-industrial’. Discontinuity is the cornerstone
of his theory and all other deductions derive from it. However, many later studies have
provided evidence that rather than disjunction, there are strong continuities between the
forces of early industrialization and those identified with the information society
(Schement & Lievrouw, 1987).
Based on his discontinuity assumption, Bell judged the changes to be
revolutionary, similar to those witnessed during the industrial revolution. The rate of
technological and social change had increased so much that it had precipitated a genuine
discontinuity. This assumption of revolution has been criticized based on evidence that
the changes were gradual (Stearns, 1984). In addition, Bell’s approach to the role of
10
capitalism in the emergence of the information society has also been criticized (Schement
& Curtis, 1995). In Bell’s thesis, technocratic efficiency emerges as the prime mover
instead of economic necessity and the logic of capitalism.
Countering this, Schement (1990) argues that the information society is one
representation of industrial society since the processes of industrialization continue to be
the processes for organizing production and distribution, whether the output is material or
informational. Besides, studies demonstrate that changes in information work, in media
environments, and in technological innovation took place over a long period of time,
occasionally punctuated by periods of rapid development. Schement suggests that since
there are continuities with industrial society, the information society should be thought of
as a development in the evolution of industrial capitalism, i.e. an information-oriented
industrial society (Schement & Curtis, 1995).
In harmony with Schement’s assertion, Webster (2002) argues that there are
striking continuities in the economic and social arrangements between the current system
and the industrial system, and that informational developments have been heavily
influenced by familiar constrains and priorities. While he acknowledges that
informational trends deserve close analysis, he contends that the argument ‘informational
developments signal the emergence of a new type of social system’ is based on faulty
logic and inadequate evidence.
In his analysis of information society theories Webster presents six distinct
versions. He criticizes them on the grounds that they are rooted in inconsistencies and
lack clarity as regards the criteria used to distinguish an information society; they do not
11
define the term information precisely, and carry the unsupportable supposition that
quantitative increases in information lead to qualitative social changes.
Webster sets aside conceptualizations that measure technological diffusion,
occupational change, economic value, information flows and the expansion of symbolic
communication. He considers a sixth definition of an information society, which refers to
the changes in the way life is conducted because of information, to be rather more
persuasive. This definition rests on the argument that theoretical information/ knowledge
is the fulcrum of contemporary life. It draws on Bell’s axial principle of primacy of
knowledge, the argument that ‘what is new is the codification of theoretical knowledge
and its centrality for innovation’. While this is an interesting definition, it is difficult to
define what constitutes theoretical knowledge. Hence, Webster asserts that all current
definitions are suspect and the idea of an information society cannot be sustained.
Abandoning the notion of information society, Castells (2000) provides an
alternative concept in Network Society. Consistent with the propositions put forth by
Schement and Webster, Castells asserts that the information revolution has its genesis in
the mutual interaction of capitalism and information technology. According to him, the
process of capitalist restructuring undertaken in the 1980s was the most decisive
historical factor in accelerating, channeling and shaping the information technology
paradigm and inducing its associated social forms so that the new system can be
characterized as informational capitalism.
Societies react differently to capitalism’s restructuring and diffusion of
informationalism based on their specific history, culture and institutions. Therefore it is
not possible to refer to an information society, since that would imply homogeneity of
12
social forms everywhere under the new system. Castells suggests that we could instead
refer to an informational society that is characterized by common fundamental features in
their socio-technical systems. The core processes of knowledge generation, economic
productivity, political and military power, and media are deeply transformed by the
informational paradigm. Since capitalism and informationalism are global in nature, all
societies are affected by them and many are already informational.
Castells categorizes the end of the twentieth century as characterized by the
transformation of our material culture through a new technological paradigm organized
around information technologies. Historically, technological revolutions are pervasive;
they are process oriented and penetrate all domains of human activity. Hence Castells
argues that the information technology revolution affects all domains of human activity
and induces a pattern of discontinuity in the material basis of economy, society, and
culture. This is a contentious claim since there is no agreement on the extent of
discontinuity.
By transforming information processing, new information technologies act upon
all domains of human activity and make it possible to establish endless connections
between different domains. Thus there is a networking logic to any system or set of
relationships that use the new information technologies. This logic is so inherent to an
informational society that Castells refers to it as a network society. This society is based
upon knowledge, organized around networks and made up of flows– of capital, info,
technology, interactions, images, sounds and symbols. The material organization of social
practices works through flows that are purposeful, repetitive, programmable sequences of
exchanges between physically disjointed social actors. Flows of exchange are at the core
13
of this new society. The support for the network is constituted through a circuit of
electronic exchanges.
2.1.1 Evidence, strengths and weaknesses
Critiques of the information sector, information flows and information technology
versions of the information society thesis revolve around the dissatisfaction with the use
of quantitative measures to designate profound deep-seated social systemic change.
Quantitative measures that calculate how many people work in information jobs, how
much information is in circulation and how many people use new technologies cannot
identify a radical break with previous systems. Such measures carry the assumption that
quantitative increases transform into qualitative changes in a social system; they do not
present an argument for or explain why more information should result in a new era.
There is also a tendency to homogenize highly disparate activities and club them
together as information work. We lose the qualitative differences that might in fact signal
a transformation. For example, if a small group of information experts hold decisive
power, the qualitative difference in the nature of their work will not be accounted for
through a quantitative analysis. The decisive role of information/ knowledge in the power
structure and direction of social change would signal a qualitative change that would not
be captured.
In addition, discriminating between informational and non-informational
occupations is a difficult and subjective task that requires assessment of qualitative
differences. Besides this, most studies take technology as given; a concept that has a
universal definition. This view is technologically determinist and does not recognize that
14
technology is a part of society, subject to social shaping by factors such as investment
priorities of government and corporate entities, market conditions and cultural values.
While studies have shown evidence of change, there are also areas that have
remained out of the loop. The space of flows does not permeate down to the whole realm
of human experience in the network society. There are numerous other gaps between
those who are a part of the network and those who remain outside it. The space of wealth
and power is projected throughout the world, while local people’s lives and experiences
are rooted in places, in their culture and history. When a social organization is based
upon ahistorical flows, superseding the logic of any specific place, it escapes the control
of historically specific local/national societies.
The global processes of flows have to operate in places that have distinctive
cultural and institutional contexts and the characteristics of each location may influence
the manifestation of an informational society in unique ways.
From a social theory perspective, a theory of information society will have to be
attentive to historical/cultural specificity as much as to structural similarities related to a
largely shared techno-economic paradigm.
It is also useful to conceptualize the existence of regions where the characteristics
of both network and industrial societies are manifest so that the areas bypassed by the
networks continue to operate under the logic of industrial capitalism.
Schement proposes that three tests be applied to conduct a systematic
investigation of an information society – examination of (1) the axial principles i.e. the
norms or principles that structure society and form the basis for expectations (2) the
15
organization of the social forces that are operating in a given society (3) the
result/consequences of such social forces (Schement & Curtis, 1995).
In the case of the United States, he identifies the primacy of the idea of
information as a commodity to manipulate, quantify and trade, the lure of large markets,
the attractiveness of economies of scale, the built-in impetus towards big companies, and
the increase in demand for information with urbanization and fragmentation of life as the
social forces that lead to an information society. It is necessary to identify if the same
social forces operate in other countries. In the case of Bangalore City, the characteristics
of an information society coexist with those of an industrial society. Hence, for the
purposes of this research, an information society is envisioned as ‘a development in the
evolution of industrial capitalism’.
2.2 Information technology and the City
The changes brought about by information technology make it possible for the
core economic processes to be scattered around the globe. Thus the role of the city as a
central organizing space is altered. Sassen (1996) argues that cities now have a new
strategic role, they function as command and control points in the organization of the
world economy, as key locations for finance and specialized service firms.
Castells (2000) suggests that because of the nature of the network society organized around networks and made up of flows - the city is not a form but an
informational process; a process characterized by the ‘structural domination of the space
of flows’. Cities are the nodes of the global economy concentrating the directional,
productive and managerial functions, linking informational networks and concentrating
the world’s power. They are connected externally to global networks and to segments of
16
their own countries, but they are internally disconnected from local populations that are
either functionally unnecessary or considered socially disruptive. Though ICTs have the
potential to enhance citizen access to governments, they have a duality built into them
since they are primarily network technologies that operate at a global level.
Graham and Marvin (2001) suggest that the emerging urban landscapes are made
up of layers of premium network spaces, constructed for socio-economically affluent
users, which are increasingly separated and partitioned from surrounding spaces. Beyond
the reach of these networks, there are worlds facing exclusion and confinement where
participation in the benefits of modern networked urbanism is problematic. Geographical
barriers, network configurations, software codes, networks and built spaces are
increasingly configured to increase the gap between these spaces. The construction of
these glocal infrastructures is intimately bound up with the splintering of urban
economies. Nation states, entrepreneurial urban agencies, infrastructural, capital and
corporate firms are all working to support the construction of these glocal infrastructures.
More and more effort goes into making the poor and the marginalized people and spaces
less visible in relation to the constellation of premium networked spaces. These factors
have major implications for democratic possibilities of the city.
Sassen states that urban landscapes will be characterized by a struggle between
glocal forces that attempt to customize and commodify premium network spaces versus
the imperatives of infrastructural, urban and technological democratization, the need for
more egalitarian and democratized practices, and principles of development. Democratic
resistance and social mobilization will be necessary to balance the secessionary
tendencies of the premium network spaces. Scope exists at the local level for
17
government’s to reassert and strengthen leverage over the production and regulation of
premium networked spaces. Local municipalities can take proactive initiatives to develop
and maintain socialized and ubiquitous infrastructures and street networks for their cities.
Graham and Marvin (2001) argue that new forms of direct intervention by state
and public institutions at all geographical levels will be necessary in order to encourage
democratic practices through working towards equality of access to spaces, infrastructure
networks, public services, opportunities of association and systems for holding the
wealthy and powerful accountable to public taxation. This involves political issues such
as reconstructing the balance between the state, the market and civil society, the need to
nurture more democratic ways of economic organization, resisting the replacement of
discourses of citizenship with those of consumerism, and connecting local and urban
strategies with global practices and debates surrounding international economic
governance. Such challenges permeate all domains of contemporary governance and
politics. Local and regional governments are attempting to shape the development of their
cities and regions in the context of these transformations.
2.3 Role of Information Technology in Government and Governance
With economic restructuring and globalization, governance has become more
important in civic life- a process seen as distinct from but inclusive of formal
government. The term government usually refers to formal institutions of the nation-state.
It is a set of institutional forms that hold administrative monopoly over a territory with
demarcated boundaries and borders, its rules sanctioned by law. It refers to the formal
and institutional processes that are used to maintain common order and to facilitate
collective action within a geographical boundary (Stoker, 1998a).
18
Governance is a broader and more inclusive term than government in that it
encompasses the activities of a range of groups – political, social and governmental – as
well as their interrelationships (Stren & Polese, 2000). The term governance includes the
relationship between government and state agencies on the one hand and communities
and social groups on the other and is not tied specifically to a place. Governance refers to
the role of citizens in the policy process and how groups within a society organize to
make and implement decisions. It tells a story of the processes of differentiation,
networks, trust, diplomacy and coalition building (Rhodes, 1997).
The emergence of local governance as a key issue over the last decade may be
ascribed to four major factors that have emerged in the United States and India : the
elaboration and implementation of a policy of decentralization, the move towards
democratic elections at all levels of government, the increased importance of urban social
movements that has produced a tendency to place greater emphasis on local control and
involvement in decisions, the emergence of local policy communities or networks of
government officials, representatives of groups in civil society, researchers and other
experts, which tend to coalesce in response to problems in local communities (Kooiman,
1993). The emphasis on governance stresses the role of citizens in the policy processfrom issue identification, to implementation, feedback and evaluation of results.
Democratic governance in an informational society takes place through networks. It
involves interorganizational action with an expanded set of linkages outside of
government. These linkages could be with private firms, non-governmental
organizations, community associations, or other civil society actors. Rhodes (1997)
19
argues that governance is about the coordination of self-organizing networks that are
alternatives to markets and hierarchies.
In this instance, governance is seen as a process involving relationships. It is more
neutral than the value laden concept of ‘good governance’ that is advocated by
organizations such as the World Bank. Good governance carries with it a premise of
institutional design that is at once open and accountable to civil society, and effective in
terms of financial management and policy implementation. This model implies that many
levels of government, local stakeholders and social groups will be involved. Thus the
concept of governance raise many issues about the impact of different local government
structures, urban finance, local-central relations, the relative access of different groups to
decision making processes, and the generalized attitudes to government performance.
The notion of governance has gained ascendance because globalization of capital,
multilateralization of power institutions and decentralization of authority to regional and
local governments has induced a new geometry of power, inducing a new form of state,
the network state (Castells, 2000). Given this network structure, governance has become
more important. Citizens maximize their chances of representation for their interests by
playing out strategies in the networks of relationships between various institutions. They
stand a better chance of defending their interests if they affirm local/regional autonomy
against the nation-state and supernational institutions. The new structure of power is
dominated by the network logic, in which power relations are always specific to a given
configuration of actors and institutions.
While the nation-state is weak, it proliferates under the form of local and regional
governments that negotiate with national governments multinational companies and
20
international agencies. The era of globalization of the economy is also the era of the
localization of polity. What local and regional governments lack in power and resources
they make up in flexibility and networking. The identification of cities and city-regions as
significant actors in the global economy has led some researchers to suggest that it is now
local governments, being chosen by and accountable to citizens in their local
communities, that are most responsible for deciding the social character and quality of
life in their jurisdictions. Consequently, local governments and governance are more
important now than in the past,
2.3.1 Government in the digital age: E-government
According to Graham and Marvin (1996), the management and organization of
urban government is an ‘information business’. The shift to market-based and more cost
conscious urban government structures and approaches, has led local governments to
collect, control and managing vast quantities of information flows. The networks of
interlinked computers and other technology offer radically new capabilities for managing
municipal government. Thus, governments are also influenced by the logic of networks
that are introduced through the use of information technology. The public administration
orientation is giving way to business style service organization orientation where
managed networks of service providers indulge in targeted service provision and are
responsive to customers. These represent cultural and political transformations that
radically change local government. One manifestation of this change is electronic
government or e-government.
The debate on the scope and meaning of e-government has a wide range. It has
been defined as the delivery of information and services online via the internet. A
21
comprehensive understanding of e-government includes employing information
technologies to cut costs and improve efficiency of government processes, new fee-forservice applications, to very broad expectations of facilitating of democratic discourse
through a feedback loop between people and government. Heeks (2002) labels these as
eAdministration, eCitizens and eServices and eSociety.
ENVIRONMENT
Organization
Lead Public Agency
Political
Management
systems
Economic
Business
Processes
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
Hardware
Software
INFORMATION
Data
Knowledge
Culture
Telecommunications
Politics
Paper
Structures
People
Process
Resources
Strategies
Other stakeholder
organizations/ groups
Socio-cultural
Legal
Technical
Figure 2-1: E-government systems model (Heeks, 2006)
Optimists expect that e-government will lead to increased transparency and
greater citizen participation in government through interactions with policy makers.
22
According to the e-government handbook published by Infodev, “e-government is not
simply a matter of giving government officials computers or automating old practices.
Neither the use of computers nor the automation of complex procedures can bring about
greater effectiveness in government or promote civic participation... Understood
correctly, e-government utilizes technology to accomplish reform by fostering
transparency, eliminating distance and other divides, and empowering people to
participate in the political processes that affect their lives.”
However, currently, many e-government initiatives focus on ecommerce models
for implementing new IT initiatives such as developing new ways of providing fee-forservice applications over the Internet (Holmes, 2001).
Digital technologies allow governments to develop strategies for improving their
performance management by using information systems (Heeks, 1999). This is expected
to make staff more accountable for their decisions and actions, and be responsive to their
clients, and reduce corruption and inefficiency. Automating personnel records can
improve their overall efficiency. Digital technologies allow decentralization since records
and other information can be accessed from anywhere within a network thus creating
opportunities for more flexible and responsive decision making.
In addition, Heeks (1999) suggests that information technology may be used to
automate existing human-executed processes that involve information processing,
support existing processes in government decision making, communication, and decision
implementation; and help in creating innovative methods for public service delivery.
However, Norris (2003) argues that e-government has succeeded in facilitating
information and service provision, not citizen engagement.
23
The overall agenda of reform in government is a reaction to the numerous
changes occurring in the network society. Expectations about the reform process can be
essentially boiled down to fostering transparency, accountability, effectiveness, and
participation.
2.4 Information Technology, Democracy and Citizen Participation
Information technologies may or may not be used to foster democratic
communication. Historically, if a correlation exists between information technology
advances and civic engagement exists, it seems to be negative (Bimber, 2001, 2003;
Schudson, 1998).
While connections between the state of democracy and technology have always
existed, advances in information technology have instigated wide speculation about its
potential to reinvigorate political community and democratic life. Internet enthusiasts
have pointed to the possibility that the medium could lead to increased political
engagement, erase boundaries between the public and private sphere; provide direct links
to policymakers; to expanding opportunities for political deliberation (Porter, 1997;
Norris 2001). Others have been more skeptical, arguing that the Internet is more likely to
reinforce, not reverse, established patterns of political communication, widening gaps
between elites and non-elites (Norris, 2001; Bimber, 2003).
While information technologies may be used to establish privileged networks that
leave out many and create social exclusion, they also have the potential to create a new
public sphere. For example, the Internet has been considered a new form of public space
since its decentralized nature allows for many voices to be heard. Kellner (1999) argues
that the Internet should be seen as a site of struggle, as contested terrain. The possibilities
24
for making use of it as a tool for resistance, to circulate struggles should be explored.
Cyber activists attempt to carry out globalization from below by developing networks of
solidarity. Such networking links all the social movements thus providing the basis for a
new politics of alliance to overcome the limitations of post modern identity politics; to
contest the mainstream, and offer alternative views and politics.
Information technologies (IT) can be used to correct the failures of the current
political system and their increase democratic quality without altering their structures. In
such cases, digital democracy is continuation of the representative liberal democracy with
greater opportunities for citizen participation in public affairs (Hacker & van Dijk, 2000).
New IT that allow for interactivity are seen as having positive potential to encourage
citizen participation. Internet enthusiasts have pointed to the possibility that the medium
could lead to increased political engagement and to direct democracy, with an
unprecedented potential to reach young, isolated, and minority citizens; to the erasing of
boundaries between the public and private sphere; to providing direct links to
policymakers; to expanding opportunities for political deliberation (Porter, 1997; Norris
2001).
The explosion of interest in information and communication technologies (ICTs)
has prompted many visions of its role in creating channels of interactive communication
connecting citizens and their governments (Grossman, 1995). Generally, governments
have focused on using facilitating ICTs to deliver information and services to citizens and
elicit public feedback as part of e-government. ICTs could be used for increasing
transparency in government, improving citizen satisfaction by delivering efficient
services and stimulating citizen involvement through civic consultation and providing
25
opportunities for electronic ballot casting. However studies suggest that IT has largely
been successfully employed in streamlining labor-intensive bureaucratic transactions
rather than in participatory or consultative efforts to promote democratic practices
(Chadwick & May, 2003).
2.4.1 ICTs and Democracy
It is possible to elucidate democracy in many different ways. According to Held
(1996), democracy includes an elected government, free and fair elections, universal
suffrage, freedom of conscience, information and expression on all public matters
broadly defined, the right to oppose the government and stand for office and associational
autonomy. Schumpter’s (1950) model of democracy attributes equal weight to citizen
participation, pluralistic competition and civil and political liberties.
Based on classic theories of democracy, it is possible to identify three distinct
theoretical variations – pluralist, representative and direct democracy. The role of ICTs
in promoting democracy is slightly different under each theory. Those who emphasize
pluralist democracy argue that ICTs can improve citizen-government transactions,
enhance administrative efficiency in service delivery, improve performance and increase
citizen satisfaction with government while heightening the voice of networked groups
and civic organizations. Proponents of representative democracy stress that ICTs could
improve accountability through the electoral process, allowing citizens to be more
informed so that they can evaluate the government and elected representatives, alternative
policy proposals of parties and candidates. Advocates of direct democracy hope that by
facilitating new forms of interaction between citizens and governments, ICTs can channel
citizens’ voices and priorities into the policymaking process (Norris, 2003).
26
An alternative conceptualization is provided by Barber (2003) in his formulation
of thin democracy, plebiscitary, and strong democracy. Under thin democracy, experts
and elites do the actual work of government and citizens remain watchdogs and monitors.
Here the role of ICTs would be to just facilitate this watchdog function. A strong
democracy incorporates participatory and deliberative elements without necessarily being
a direct democracy. A majority of the prognostications about the role of new ICTs in a
democracy would support this idea.
While it is possible to expound a range of views on citizen participation in a
democracy by drawing on thinkers such as Burke, J.S. Mill and Dewey, it is challenging
to find innovative ways of drawing out the expertise present in the population and feeding
it into the bureaucratic decision making structure (Coleman & Go, 2001). Held (1996)
suggests that the most defensible and attractive form of democracy is one in which
citizens in principle extend their participation in decision making in a number of areas,
but there is no one existing model which provides a satisfactory elucidation of the
conditions, features or rationale of this democratic form.
In keeping with the plethora of models of democracy, the role of ICTs in the
democratic process varies. The model that enables citizens to register their views on
current issues, and electronic town hall meetings that allow interactive dialogues is seen
as the most direct, participatory model. A variation on this model known as the civil
society model suggests transformation of political culture by strengthening the
connections between citizens.
In spite of these expectations, it can be seen that citizen engagement is not
deterministically driven by adoption of information technology. It is contingent upon
27
individual predispositions and on how collective action organizations and other elite
groups use the greater access to information now available to them to influence and
mobilize the public. ICTs are tools that can be used to promote any type of democracy.
Though ICTs allow connections to be made, they are tools; they do not facilitate
deliberative engagement on their own. Facilitation of such engagement is a culturaldemocratic function. ICTs offer another communication channel, but they cannot address
factors such as utilization of resources, ability or inclination for political action. It is the
interaction between technology, citizens, and policy making elites that tends to shape the
face of democracy.
2.5: Relevance of these theoretical frameworks to current research
The information society and network society theories are important in evaluating
the role of information technologies in local government in Bangalore. In addition to
addressing the issue of whether Bangalore can be classified as an information society, it
is necessary to examine how the city’s position as an important node in the global
network of information flows influences or affects local government.
Information technologies affect cities in multiple ways; they are not just another
sector creating jobs. IT industries have specific infrastructure requirements and these
could lead to creation of premium spaces that are separated from the surrounding spaces.
Investments in such infrastructure affect how the scarce resources available to city
governments are allocated and who benefits from such investment. These decisions are
part of local governance and have to be examined in detail to understand the role of
information technology in government.
28
The use of information technology by governments has been termed Egovernment. Heeks (2006) systems model of e-government indicates the various factors
that interact when e-government is introduced. Most studies of e-government focus on
the Information and Technology cluster and ignore the surrounding layers of policies,
strategies, structures, resources and stakeholders that could determine the success or
failure of e-government initiatives. This dissertation focuses on this layer and examines
the policies, strategies, local government structure, resources and stakeholders to
understand the status of e-government in Bangalore City. It analyzes how various
stakeholders in local governance are using information technology and how this affects
the e-government/ e-governance process in Bangalore City.
2.6 Research Questions
Given Bangalore’s status as India’s Silicon Valley, it is an interesting place to
understand the role of information technology in local government. Hence the first
research question examined in this study is:
1. What role do information and communication technologies (ICTs) play in
citizen-government interactions in Bangalore city?
To answer this question, the following areas are examined.
1a) What government services are available to citizens that can be accessed
through the use of ICTs ?
1b) Does the use of ICTs influence/ change interactions between citizens and
local government? If so how?
The explosion of interest in information and communication technologies (ICTs)
29
has prompted many visions of its role in creating channels of interactive
communication connecting citizens and their governments. The Mahiti policy on
e-government in Karnataka State, of which Bangalore City is the capital, states
that e-government is the application of Information and Communication
Technologies to bring about more speed, transparency and responsiveness to the
various areas of governmental activities resulting in enhanced accountability and
consequent empowerment of people. Guided by these factors, the second and
third research question examined in this research are:
2. Does the use of ICT by the Bangalore City Corporation promote citizen
participation in local government in Bangalore City?
3. How does the use of information technology facilitate citizen empowerment?
The methods employed to answer these questions are discussed in the next
chapter.
30
Chapter 3
RESEARCH DESIGN
This research employed multiple methods to address the research questions. A
detailed explanation of each of the methods used, definition of the terms employed and
the limitations that bound the study are covered in this chapter. The data for this study
was collected between June 2003 and January 2005.
At the outset, a few of the terms employed in this research need to be defined.
Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) is a broadly used term that
can encompass many technologies that are used to produce, process, exchange, and
manage information and knowledge. In this study ICTs are defined as computers,
software, peripherals and connections to the Internet.
The ubiquity of ICTs and the primacy of the idea of information as a commodity
have given rise to discussions of an ‘information society’. For the purposes of this
research, an information society is envisioned as ‘a development in the evolution of
industrial capitalism’ (Schement & Curtis, 1997).
Governance in the context of this research refers to the role of citizens in the policy
process with government and state agencies on the one hand, and communities and social
groups on the other. Government is defined as formal institutions of the nation-state at the
local, State and National level. Local government in this study is the Bangalore City
Corporation (Bangalore Mahanagara Palike as referred to in the local language Kannada).
The State government is the legislature, the executive and judicial branches of the State of
Karnataka, public sector companies operated by the Government of Karnataka and
organizations that provide public services in Bangalore City but directly report to the state
31
government: the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB), Bangalore
Metropolitan Transport Corporation(BMTC), Bangalore Development Authority(BDA),
Bangalore Electricity Supply Company (BESCOM), Bangalore Metropolitan Region
Development Authority (BMRDA), Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board
(KIADB) and Karnataka Slum Clearance Board (KSCB).
This research does not start with a preconceived definition of e-government.
Instead, it examines what the concept means to policy makers, government executives, and
citizens in Bangalore City.
3.1 Methodology:
This section details the methods employed for each research question.
To address question 1a) on what government services citizens of Bangalore city
could access through the use of ICTs, a search was conducted online to access all local
government and State government websites. The search did not include National
(Central) government websites since this study is interested in citizen participation in
local government. The websites were evaluated for presence of various features related
to information availability, service delivery, privacy and security, and public access. Over
the past several years, researchers have used different methods for evaluating egovernment services. This research adapts measures developed by West (2005) and
Holzer & Melitski (2003).
Information availability was evaluated employing the following categories:
contact information – telephone and address; links to other sites; online publications,
online databases; and audio clips. Service delivery evaluation was based on the number
and types of online services offered, digital signatures, credit card or direct bank deposit
32
payment. Features were defined as services only when the entire transaction could occur
online. If a citizen had to print a form and then mail it back to the agency to obtain the
service, it was not counted as a service that could be fully executed online.
Privacy and security was assessed by examining if there were visible statements
of the privacy and security policies of the government such as: discussion of encryption
policies, disclosure of personal information, disclosure of information to law enforcement
officials, and prohibition of use of cookies.
Public access was assessed based on features that would help citizens contact
government officials, and use the information on the websites: email, search function,
comments, email updates, or mobile phone updates.
To understand what the concept of e-government means to policy makers and
government executives, government documents and reports were examined. Interviews
were conducted with individuals representing three major agenda builders in the egovernment space in Bangalore: the e-government secretary, an official at the National
Informatics Center (Karnataka), and the deputy director of the Software Technology
Parks of India, Bangalore.
To address question 1b) about how Bangaloreans engage with their local
government and the role of ICTs in their interactions, this study employed two methods.
First, a survey of 993 participants was conducted to assess how citizens contacted and
interacted with their local government. Survey questions are available in Appendix A
3.2 The Survey: Strategy, Design and Process
This survey was administered between June to December 2003, and May to
August 2004. This data was used to examine citizen’s experiences with e-government.
33
The surveys were conducted at public places such as computer kiosks, cyber cafes
and regular cafes employing convenience sampling. (see appendix B for map of areas
covered). Individuals were given information about the study and provided an informed
consent form in English or the local language Kannada. The survey and the consent form
were translated by a professional firm in Bangalore city and pretested there.
Once citizens agreed to participate in the survey, they were provided with a
printed survey in the language of their choice. A total of 1141 people were contacted
about completing the survey. People were approached face to face and the response rate
was 87%. The total number of surveys used in this research is 993. The citizens’ age
range was 18-60. The data was coded by the researcher employing SPSS version 13.0.
The data was verified and answers clarified by contacting individuals during December to
January 2005.
The method of conducting face to face interviews in public places was adopted
since Bangalore city has limited ground telephone connections, limited household use of
computers and there are no directories listing the cyber cafes in the city. Hence random
telephone survey was not feasible or appropriate. The list of locations where individuals
were contacted in the 100 wards of Bangalore is provided in Appendix C.
The survey examined ICT use among citizens, knowledge of e-government
(operationalized as knowledge of one or more e-government initiatives put in place either
by the local government or the State government) and source of such knowledge; use of
e-government services (operationalized as visiting an e-government website); opinions
about e-government websites related to whether information was up to date, relevant,
useful, reliable and easy to use; preferred method of accessing government services;
34
participation in local government (operationalized as a series of questions related to
voting, campaigning, attending public meetings, and contacting public officials)1; and use
of information technology to contact local government officials and political
representatives.
The variables used to measure participation in local government -voting,
campaigning, attending meetings and contacting public officials - were categorical in
nature. Chi square analysis was conducted to examine if there were significant
differences between computer users and nonusers in their participation in local
government. In addition, reasons for non usage of e-government services were also
examined.
To study the case of Proof Of Operations and Finance (PROOF) and a connected
activity called Ward Works (Ward Sabhas) - both facilitated by Janaagraha, a citizens
movement to promote participatory democracy, as initiatives for Bangaloreans to engage
actively with their local government- participant observation was carried out during the
PROOF and Ward Works discussion meetings and in depth interviews were conducted
between May and August 2004. The interviews were flexible and semi-structured in
format. Questions on specific topics were broached while allowing for additional
questions and comments to facilitate personal accounts of interviewees to surface.
3.3 Strategy for conducting the study
The research strategy for the conducting this study evolved during time spent on
the field. There were two distinct stages in data collection. The first stage was the survey
described above. After the survey was conducted between June and December 2003, data
indicated that information technology was not playing a major role in citizen-government
1
These measures were adopted from Verba, Scholzman, & Brady (1995).
35
interactions at the individual level. However, there were changes brought about in local
government by the introduction of information technology at the institutional level. Since
there were no previous social scientific studies of these initiatives, an exploratory case
study was conducted. To understand the changes occurring in local governance in
Bangalore, I decided to use ethonography to explore how information technology was
influencing citizen-government interactions. Participant observation conducted as part of
ethnography during May to August 2004 was the second stage of data collection.
Ethnography was an appropriate strategy to explore how two initiatives– PROOF and
Ward Works – brought about changes through information technology. In the absence of
prior literature it was necessary to examine qualitative data rather than test hypothesis.
Ethnography was adopted as the best way to answer the research questions about whether
information technology promoted citizen participation in local government and how it
facilitated citizen empowerment. The reasons for employing ethnography and the process
of conducting the field work are described in the following sections.
3.4 Why Ethnography ?
Ethnography is the study of actual practices in the field. This enables the
researcher to investigate the social, cultural and political practices constituting the
phenomenon of interest. It allows the researcher to look at the views of various
stakeholders to uncover value conflicts, domination and resistance. Since ethnography is
longitudinal, it can generate insider understanding of a social phenomenon.
According to Atkinson & Hammersley (1998), ethnography is characterized by a
strong emphasis on exploring the nature of particular social phenomenon rather than
testing hypothesis about them. It is used to work with unstructured data to investigate a
36
small number of cases or just one case, in detail. It is ideal when analysis of data involves
explicit interpretation of the meanings and verbal descriptions, with statistical analysis
playing a subordinate role.
These characteristics make ethnography the best method to answer the research
questions set forth at the beginning of this study. Technology use by citizens is a social
phenomenon that has not been extensively investigated in the context of developing
countries. This research is structured as a case study of technology use by citizens of
Bangalore City and analysis of data involves interpretations of the meaning of egovernment, how and why citizens use information technology and what participating in
local government means to these citizens. In addition, PROOF and Ward Works are
initiatives where citizens dynamically engage with their local government. Observation
of these interactions is essentially unstructured data. Thus, ethnography is the best
method to study these cases.
The following section provides a set of principles to facilitate evaluation of this
research. Many researchers such as Lofland & Lofland (1995), Golden-Biddle & Locke
(1997), and Klein & Myers (1999).provide guidance for evaluating ethnographic research
For the current study, the evaluative criteria set forth by Myers (1999) regarding
ethnography in information systems research seem the most appropriate.
•
Has a significant amount of material been colleted?
•
Is there sufficient information about the research method, as in - does the
reader know what the researcher did and how?
•
Does the author offer rich insights?
•
Is this a contribution to the field?
37
In this research, I employ Golden-Biddle and Locke’s (1993) conventions for
composing ethnographic texts. Golden-Biddle and Locke suggest three criteria –
authenticity, plausibility and criticality. Their guidelines are:
Underlying Questions
Research Strategies
• Has the author been
• Particularize everyday life
there in the field?
• Delineate the relationship in the field
• Has the author been
• Depict the disciplined pursuit and
genuine to the field
analysis of data
experience?
• Qualify personal biases
Plausibility
• Does this make sense? • Legitimate the atypical
• Does the study offer
• Differentiate findings
something distinctive?
Criticality
• Does the text motivate • Create room to reflect
readers to re-examine
• Provoke the recognition and
assumptions?
examination of differences
Figure 3-1: Ethnographic text composition guidelines (Golden-Biddle & Locke, 1993)
Authenticity
The research narrative in this study involves thick description of interviews and
conversations that occurred during fieldwork. In the next section, I describe selection of,
and gaining entry to the field site. In addition, I provide an overview of how the actual
fieldwork was staged, and details of the data analysis procedures to provide evidence of
rigorous application of the research method.
3.4.1 Research Setting
Field work was conducted over a total of 10-month period, between June to
December 2003 and May to August 2004, which is consistent with ethnographic studies
in information systems (Schultze 2001).
The study was conducted in Bangalore City. It involved interviews with
government officials working in the e-government arena and working as a volunteer
participant observer at the offices of Janaagraha to study PROOF and Ward Works
initiatives. Both PROOF and Ward Works initiatives involve interactions with the
38
Bangalore City Corporation (BCC). However, they comprise different civil society
groups interacting with the BCC in different capacities. A schematic of the two initiatives
and the citizens groups involved is provided below. Detailed descriptions of the roles of
these groups is provided in Chapter 6.
Figure 3-2: PROOF and Ward Works in 2004
VOICES
Janaagraha
Proof Talk Proof
Energy About Puttanna
Center Proof
PROOF
Ward Works
Proof in my ward
Public Affairs
Center
CRISIL
BMP Budget
Analysis
Akshara
Foundation
Center for
Budget & Policy
Studies
Performance
indicators
Throughout this ethnographic research process, the author was identified as a
volunteer working for Janaagraha. Janaagraha is a people’s movement to improve public
governance through participatory democracy. It is a platform that helps citizens work
with their government on specific issues they care about. Janaagraha came into being in
2001 when a couple, Ramesh and Swati Ramanathan decided that the most effective way
39
of promoting citizen involvement in public governance would be to facilitate creation of
public fora where citizens could come together and engage constructively with their local
government. The movement is supported through a trust fund created by the
Ramanathans. In June 2005, changes were made to the structure of Janaagraha, however
that does not affect any of the observations made during this research and is beyond the
purview of this study.
3.4.2 Why Janaagraha? Gaining entry to the research site
I was identified as a Janaagraha volunteer due to the fact that the Ramanathans
were open to allowing me to conduct a study while working as a volunteer. But why
choose Janaagraha when so many other civic groups operate in Bangalore and quite a few
are involved in PROOF?
During the preliminary research I conducted to understand the various civic
groups working with the local government in Bangalore, I conducted an interview with
Mr. Ramesh Ramanathan in September 2003. In the course of the interview, PROOF
Campaign kept showing up as an experiment in participatory democracy. Out of
curiosity, I mentioned that I was interested in observing PROOF meetings and would like
to read any literature available on PROOF. I was invited to attend the December PROOF
discussion and provided an internal research document put together by the first four civic
groups- Janaagraha, VOICES, Public Affairs Center, Center for Budget and Policy
Studies - who worked on PROOF. These documents contained mission statements and an
analysis of the work done by these four groups. These documents led me to understand
that Janaagraha’s office was an important meeting and organizing place for PROOF.
Based on this understanding, I contacted Mr. Ramanathan about acting as a volunteer
40
while studying PROOF and was told that I would be welcome. I started volunteering and
acting as a participant observer on June 1, 2004 and ended the process on August 31,
2004.
I met with the representatives of the other three original partners in PROOF to
discuss their role in PROOF and obtained documents explaining their role. I spoke to Ms.
Jayanthi Noranha from VOICES, Ms. Sheila Premkumar from the Public Affairs Center
and Dr. Vinod Vyasulu from the Center for Budget and Policy Studies about the role of
their organizations in PROOF. To understand the role of the 2 new PROOF partners –
CRISIL and Akshara Foundation- I obtained documents detailing their role and the work
they had done but did not interview any representatives. I decided to rely on the
information available through the public speeches made by Dr. Ravikanth Joshi of
CRISIL and Mr. Ashok Kamath (managing trustee) of Akshara Foundation during the
PROOF meetings. The in depth participant observation was carried out with citizens who
were working on PROOF through Janaagraha.
Ward Works was an initiative that was entirely undertaken by citizens involved
through Janaagraha. Hence, observing Ward level community meetings was possible as a
Janaagrah volunteer.
In writing up the research, to remain faithful to the process of discovery, I discuss
the material in exactly the same manner that I encountered it. My initial interest was in
PROOF. After I had been at Janaagraha for a month, I understood how important ward
works campaign was to PROOF and I started observing the ward meetings and reading
material on the campaign. Hence, PROOF is discussed first and the Ward Works is
discussed. Second reason for such structuring is the fact that in 2004, PROOF operated at
41
the macro level – for the entire city of Bangalore. Proof in my ward was still under
discussion, not a reality. Ward meetings as part of Ward Works served the purpose of
Proof in my ward – the micro level of the smallest administrative and democratic unit in
Bangalore city. Thus, the discussion begins with the macro level and narrows down to the
micro level to observe how citizen participation happens in the selected 10 wards.
3.4.3 My position within Janaagraha
I was seen as and introduced as a researcher and a volunteer working in the
Janaagraha office. As a volunteer, I answered phone calls, took notes during meetings,
assisted other volunteers, took photographs and helped conduct meetings. As part of this
volunteer role, I was introduced to all the people who were a part of Janaagraha as a
researcher interested in the movement. I had access to the computers of the organization,
and could interview all the volunteers who agreed to talk and gave informed consent.
I started work by reading all the printed material about the movement, the
Ramanathans, PROOF and Ward Works, that was stored in the files at the Janaagraha
office and attending the Monday morning weekly meetings. As a volunteer, I had access
to all the staff members and citizen participants. To select people to talk to about PROOF
and Ward Works, I employed ethnographic sampling. This involves using a few key
informants using a referral approach (Bernard 1995). According to Morse (1998), a good
informant is a person who has knowledge and experience, the ability to reflect, is
articulate, willing and has time to be interviewed. Since the purpose was to better
understand PROOF and Ward Works rather than to capture the widest possible range of
opinions of them, this sampling strategy was more appropriate than random, probability
or saturation sampling. Interviewees were identified based on their willingness to talk,
42
and their specialized knowledge of key knowledge domain related to the research
questions (Fetterman, 1998). In the sections describing the results of these conversations,
I provide details about the individuals and groups I spoke to and the contexts in which the
conversations took place.
The office consisted of two paid full time staff members, two full time volunteers
and a revolving set of part time volunteers. The person who had worked on PROOF for a
long time, Preeta Radhakrishnan, was on leave and my interactions with her occurred
through telephone conversations. My initial resource people for PROOF and Ward Works
were Ms. Sapna Karim and Mr. Deepak, two full time volunteers who had been at
Janaagraha since the beginning of the movement. The in-person interactions with other
long time volunteers familiar with PROOF occurred both in the Janaagraha office and the
PROOF half-yearly meetings. Ward Works was primarily handled by Ms. Swathi
Ramanthan. I interviewed her, visited the different wards where ward meetings (Ward
Sabhas) were held and observed the meetings and interacted with the citizens present
there to learn more about Ward Works and Ward Sabhas. In addition, I read every
document related to PROOF and Ward Works that was archived in Janaagraha. I
collected every piece of information that I could find. My intent was to learn as much as I
could about these initiatives and the people working/participating in them.
I also maintained a log. As I thought about questions to ask or people to meet, I
placed these in the log. My observations while visiting the wards or attending meetings
were set down as field notes in the log. My jottings during interviews and later
observations were also included. Personal profiles of people I met and talked to or
43
interviewed were also incorporated as they were occurring. This log is a documented path
of how I conducted the research.
At the end of my time there, in an effort to give something back to the
movement, I compiled a short report of observations of the successes and failures of
Ward meetings for Janaagraha volunteers.
I analyze this ethnographic data, to answer the remaining research questions
related to the influence of ICTs on local government practices, on government
accountability to citizens, role of ICTs in promoting citizen participation in local
government and facilitating citizen empowerment.
3.4.4 Data collection and Analysis
Qualitative research is intrinsically multi-method. Use of multiple methods is a
strategy that adds rigor, breadth, and depth to any investigation (Denzin & Lincoln,
1998). Thus, observation of citizens during meetings, unstructured and semi-structured
interviews, review of published documents and social contact with volunteers and
participants were all employed to collect data. The empirical evidence for the study is
drawn from 320 hours of participant observation, information gathered from informal
talks with staff and volunteers, 180 pages of field notes, 33 formal interviews, 43 digital
photos, and 57 published documents (news articles, research documents, speeches,
minutes of meetings, and pamphlets related to PROOF, Janaagraha and Ward Works).
Participant observation resolved the problem of reactivity- people changing their
behavior because they are being watched. People knew me as a volunteer who was also
interested in PROOF and Ward Works and one wanted to learn more about these
44
activities. Overtime they started treating me as just another person interested in
Janaagraha.
My formal interviews with the citizens were about 30 minutes in length. After my
first few interviews, I noticed that people were more forthcoming if I did not use a tape
recorder. Hence, during the interviews, I wrote down key phrases. After the interview, I
examined my notes and wrote down field notes about the interview itself, insights and
reflections about the interview.
A majority of the information was collected through participant observation of
meetings among citizens, between citizens and local government officials, and through
casual conversations right after meetings. One of my jobs as a volunteer was to take notes
on meetings and prepare summaries of these for circulation. I used a copy of this as part
of my log. For all the interviews conducted, the protocol suggested by Lofland and
Lofland (1995) was used. Participants were told about the study, asked if they could be
identified and assured that if they chose to remain anonymous, their identity would be
kept confidential. I introduced myself and then assured them that I was interested only in
their opinions and experiences with Janaagraha and that they could interrupt me at any
point. For the formal interviews, I created an interview guide (see Appendix C).Once the
notes were written, I coded them noting which part was description and what was
analysis. Next, specific themes were identified and finally related themes were grouped
together.
45
3.5 Limitations
This study is limited to answering the research questions enumerated. In
interpreting the results, this study touches on research in a number of related areas that
are not within the scope of this study such as:
o Providing a detailed description of the state of e-government in India and
its relationship to development, or comparing and analyzing e-government
in various states of India.
o Addressing in depth various theories about the digital divide and its
impact on e-government. Relevant issues are touched upon.
o Comprehensively examining the role of civil society in promoting
collective action and engagement in local governance.
o Examining the history of participatory democracy and the role of
information and ICTs in participatory democracy. Democracy is
influenced by many things in addition to participation and participation
requires many factors to come together. There is a vast literature
addressing these aspects and this study focuses only on those relevant to
the case study.
In terms of methodology, this study employed convenience sampling in
contacting people face to face for the survey. This method was adopted since random
digit dialing through telephone was not considered to be an appropriate tool when there
are only 916,900 land line connections for a population of 6.52 million people (Review of
the Karnataka Economy, 2004). The areas to survey were selected based on a ward map
46
of Bangalore city. While the data provides an interesting snap shot of citizens across
Bangalore, it has the limitations inherent to all convenience samples.
Secondly, in the time frame during which the study was conducted, June to
December 2003 and May to August 2004, there was a change in administration in
Karnataka State. The government led by Chief Minister S.M. Krishna of the Congress
Party was defeated in the 2004 May Assembly elections. This administration was
responsible for most of the IT and e-government initiatives that are examined here. A
new coalition government was formed under Chief Minister Dharam Singh of Congress
Party with the Janata Dal (S). When data collection for the study ended, the new
government was in the process of replacing many officials within the State Government
and Bangalore City’s local government BMP was also affected. Instability within the
administration led to many repercussions for Bangalore City. This dissertation examines
some of the issues involved in how this change in government and political philosophy
affect PROOF, Ward Works and formal e-government initiatives. However, instability
set in and since 2005 there have been further changes. In February 2006, this coalition
government collapsed and a new one with new parties was formed. These changes are
addressed here only to the extent they affect the research questions, the e-government
policies and Bangalore City.
Third; the ethnographic interviews are bound by the conditions in the field. Some
of these limitations were created by design to provide focus. I chose to concentrate on the
citizens interacting with the government through Janaagraha. This implied that the other
civic groups did not receive as much attention to detail. This was a tradeoff between
47
depth versus breadth and the decision to focus on Janaagraha imposes boundaries on this
research.
Ward meetings were observed only where they were conducted by citizens
groups. Of the 100 wards in Bangalore City, only ten wards were actively conducting
Ward meetings and observations were made only in these wards. This raises questions
about the nature of citizen government interactions in the other 90 wards and the extent to
which information technology is influencing their behaviors. Further research is needed
in this area.
48
Chapter 4
SETTING THE CONTEXT: BANGALORE CITY, KARNATAKA
Bangalore gained an international reputation during the 1990s as ‘India’s Silicon
Valley’, just as India moved towards market liberalization. This chapter reviews
Bangalore’s evolution to ‘India’s Silicon Valley’ and ‘Information capital’. It examines
how local government administration, democracy, and civic engagement have developed
over time, and how information technology has affected these areas. It sets the context for
an analysis of Bangalore’s e-government initiatives.
4.1 Bendakaluru (Bangalore): The place of boiled grains
Bangalore developed around 460 years ago as a small mud fort built by Kempe
Gowda I, a feudal lord who served under the Vijayanagar kings. The area emerged as a
military and commercial center around 1537, as part of a trade route into the Vijayanagar
empire. Bangalore’s political history and local administration has been tracked by many
scholars (Nair, 2005; Heitzman 2004; Jayapal, 1997; Rao, 1985). The following section is
a short overview of history relevant to this dissertation.
From 1673 to 1704, Bangalore was part of an administrative system that was
based on revenue villages (hoblis), sub-districts (taluks), and districts (zillas) (Kamath,
1982). The revenue area comprising Bangalore was granted by different kings to favored
generals and the area developed commercially. Decisive change occurred in 1799 when
the British defeated Tipu Sultan and captured Bangalore as part of the Mysore State. The
British recognized a member of the Wodeyar family as king, who in turn agreed to the
British stationing their regiments in Bangalore, thus creating a cantonment. In 1831, civil
unrest led the British to intervene and take over the administration of Mysore State
49
Heitzman, 2004). Under British commissioners, state government offices were relocated
to Bangalore; administration was streamlined, departments specializing in revenue
administration functioned under British heads and the city became an important node in
the British information network.
The next stage of Bangalore’s development was influenced by the decision of the
British to give control of Mysore State back to the Wodeyar family in return for a formal
transfer of the Bangalore cantonment area to the British. From 1880 to 1940, the
Wodeyar kings appointed prime ministers (diwans) to conduct the administrative
business of the State. Their interest in modernization led to an accumulation of
administrative and technological prowess. A state bureaucracy employing British models
of accounting and record keeping became intensely involved in developmental projects.
An extensive postal system was in place by 1889. Bangalore became the first Indian city
to be electrified in 1900 (Heitzman, 2004).
One of the diwans appointed by the Wodeyars, M. Visvesvaraya, influenced
Bangalore’s destiny deeply with his vision of state-sponsored industrial growth through a
technically educated workforce, and his motto ‘ Industrialize or perish’. Though
Bangalore was initially the location of some large private textile mills it soon experienced
a steady growth in industries substituting Indian products for foreign imports. The
emerging industrial sector received support from the State through legislation regulating
working conditions and suppression of labor actions (Heitzman, 2004, p. 38).
Bangalore’s industrial profile expanded with World War II. When the British
were scouting around for a location to develop an aeronautics industry in India,
Visvesvaraya arranged for transfer of land and facilitated the creation of the Hindustan
50
Aircraft company in Bangalore. This became the first of many large scale public sector
enterprises and soon a wide range of technical and service industries were operating in
Bangalore.
After independence, the Government of India supported the growth of large
public sector units in Bangalore. The reasons for locating such industries in Bangalore
were tied to the city’s history and location – it was seen as a safe location for military and
technology facilities out of range of Pakistan’s weapons, a city already benefiting from
Visvesvaraya’s state-sponsored industrialization and cheap electricity, a good climate that
attracted workers, and the availability of an educated workforce due to the presence of
the Indian Institute of Science and other engineering colleges. These reasons came into
focus again when Bangalore began its evolution into ‘India’s Silicon Valley’.
Heitzman (2004) argues that factors that lead to constitution of an information
society such as placing technological and managerial innovation at the heart of change
corresponded closely with the ‘technocratic and administrative ethos long cultivated
within Bangalore as a science city’(p. 179). He provides a detailed analysis of how
Bangalore evolved into a network city and of the processes leading to the planning of an
information society in Bangalore. This overview touches only on the main points that are
relevant to understanding the context for e-government in the city.
4.2 Bangalore as India’s Silicon Valley?
Bangalore has always been the site of struggle over competing interests and
ideologies. Nair (2006) argues that though many nationalistic fictions have found
symbolic expression in the city over time, after 2000 the struggle has intensified. This is
manifested in the challenges to older cultural formations from global capital interests and
51
its spatial strategies as expressed by the elite enclaves created for information technology
industries.
Bangalore started gaining its reputation as ‘India’s Silicon Valley’ during the
1990s due to a concentration of firms in electronics and software production, and
research and development (IDG, 2001).
Parthasarathy (2004) argues that though Bangalore was home to a large pool of
technologically skilled labor in the public sector since the 1950s, they catered mostly to
the small domestic market and the public sector institutions remained islands of expertise.
It was the policy changes made in 1984 by the administration of Prime Minister Rajiv
Gandhi that changed the course of the computer and software industry.
The Computer Policy of November 1984 helped local manufacturing and
increased availability of computers; it recognized software as an industry, open to
investment allowances and other incentives. It lowered duties on software imports, and
prioritized software exports (Parthasarathy, 2004). Subsequently, the Computer Software
Export, Development and Training Policy of December 1986 promoted India's software
production. Veering away from the model of self reliance, firms were provided access to
global technologies to encourage small software companies in the country to increase
exports and local development. In 1988, the National Association of Software and
Service Companies (NASSCOM) was formed to promote industry interests and in 1990
Software Technology Parks were created around the country.
Thus the decade of the 1980s saw emergence of private enterprises specializing
in computer systems and software production started by managers with technology
expertise in India’s public sector enterprises. These firms catered to the microcomputer
52
market in India and provided body shopping for foreign companies (Heeks, 1996). Once
the INTELSAT Business Service became operational in 1987, most of these firms began
to go online. Bangalore, with its many public sector companies benefited from these
changes. The US-based Texas Instruments established an agreement with India’s Videsh
Sanchar Nigam Limited (VSNL) that made possible the first ‘offshore’ software
production centre in Bangalore (Singhal and Rogers 2001; Heitzman 1999). Its success
led other US technology companies such as Motorola, Oracle, Sun Microsystems Hewlett
Packard and others to set up operations in Bangalore.
Bangalore already had an industrial estate called Electronics City developed by
the Karnataka State Electronics Development Corporation (KEONICS) in the 1970s,
which suffered from infrastructure problems. When the Department of Electronics was
scouting the country for potential sites to locate software technology parks, it selected
Electronics City as one of its initial six locations.
Establishment of the first Software Technology Park in Bangalore provided the
infrastructure to reinforce the advantages the region already possessed, and Bangalore
became central to the expansion plans of a large number of companies, including offshore
development centers of multinational companies (Parthasarathy, 2004). Software became
Bangalore’s contribution to India’s export trade. Claims about Bangalore evolving into
India’s Silicon Valley surfaced with publicity campaigns by KEONICS and continue to
show up in newspaper stories (Rai, S., 2006, March 20; Sherwood, S., 2006, Feb 26;
Beary, H., 2002, April 23) and casual conversations (Heitzman, 2004, p.165). There
have been many articles providing evidence that Bangalore is similar to Silicon Valley
(Balasubramanyam, 1999). The state government announced that an IT Corridor would
53
be created on the eastern and southern sides of Bangalore encompassing the Software
Technology Park in Electronics City all the way up to the International Technology Park
near Whitefield, about 13,700 hectares, to bolster the city’s Silicon Valley claim.
In 1999, the Government of Karnataka under Chief Minister S.M. Krishna created
a separate department of information technology and biotechnology that merged
KEONICS with other government agencies and acted as a single window for matters
related to IT industry (Economic times, 1999, Nov 2). To inaugurate the new department,
a BangaloreIT.com show was created and showcased the IT industry. Among the events
at the fair were seminars on e-government, discussions on venture capital, and product
demonstrations by IT companies. BangaloreIT.com became an annual event to display
Bangalore as ‘the IT capital of the country’.
From a historical perspective, such involvement of the State in shaping
representations of the city was not new. In fact it was continuation of the developmental
state’s exercise of its hegemonic power on how the city was represented. Heitzman
(2004, p. 42-62) documents the state’s involvement in generating previous visions of
Bangalore as ‘garden city’; ‘pensioner’s paradise’ and ‘science city’. He argues that
Bangalore’s image as Silicon Valley never rested on the manufacture of silicon-based
computer chips as in the case of California (p. 197). The economy still depended on a
large number of public sector and private industrial units. The image of Silicon Valley
was a creation that was a response to the economic liberalization and the necessity of
reshaping the city’s image to new demands and opportunities. The State, its functionaries
and corporate players took part in creating an image that they could use to promote the
city as a site for investment and project it as an engine of economic growth. To promote
54
greater acceptance of this image and influence public perception, the State announced
new policies.
In March 2000, Mr. Krishna announced the ‘Millennium IT Policy’ called Mahiti.
It announced that the state would use IT to reach the common man, to increase the use of
Kannada language and to empower women. It stated that creation of a government center
for e-governance and computerization of public departments would address the
misconception that information technology only benefited the elite (Deccan Herald, 2000,
March 19).
In spite of wide ranging claims, scholars have questioned this comparison of
Bangalore to the original Silicon Valley, USA.
Saxenian (2000) argues that such comparisons are misleading since Silicon
Valley’s success is based upon a wider process of collective learning, typically within a
localized community. Such a technical community can only be built through
collaborations of the sort that are rarely practiced in India. In Bangalore academic
institutions and public-sector industries in technology-intensive sectors operate in relative
isolation, helping only to supply skilled labor. Being Silicon Valley implies constantly
innovating products and processes, sharing and circulation of ideas to help firms develop
new technologies and products that are compatible with the evolving technical and
commercial needs of the market while simultaneously shaping the market. Parthasarathy
(2004) suggests that while Bangalore has moved from being a low-wage backwater to an
important centre that develops products for the global software industry, unlike Silicon
Valley it is not a region that defines new products and technologies. It is constrained by
its export orientation since this leads to very little interaction among domestic forms and
55
limits innovation. In addition, there is limited domestic software consumption. Others
such as Dasarathy (2004) have suggested that Bangalore continues to be stuck in service
provision mode and hence not entitled to the Silicon Valley claim. Roy, Badrinath &
Raghavendra (2004) brand Bangalore as ‘Silicon slum’. In spite of such analyses, to date
speculation abounds about Bangalore’s status as India’s Silicon Valley (Rai, 2006).
Irrespective of whether it resembles Silicon Valley or not, it is clear that information
technology and IT industries play an important role in shaping Bangalore city – its image,
its geographical expansion, its government and the lives of its citizens.
4.3 IT and the city: Infrastructure and City limits
Bangalore’s growth into the fifth largest metropolitan region in India at the end of
year 2000 was fueled by growth in the information technology sector. The consequent
expansion in supporting service sectors leads Heitzman (2004) to suggest that Bangalore
indicated signs of evolving into an information society.
The city is spread over 2190 square kilometers with a population of 6.52 million
people (Bangalore Profile, 2006). As the state capital, it has the highest population among
the 237 towns and urban areas in the state of Karnataka. Karnataka is a predominantly
rural state with 66% of its population living in rural areas. Among the 34% urban
population, Bangalore City accounts for one third of the urbanites.
As per the 2001 Census, the Bangalore Urban Agglomeration (a Census unit for
urban Bangalore introduced in 1971) had 915 women for every 1000 men. The literacy
rate for Bangalore City was 85.7 %, higher than the 64% rate for the state of Karnataka as
a whole. The city has more than 80,000 software professionals and 1500 information
technology companies. It is the site of many initiatives to use information technology for
56
development such as Simputer (small hand held computers). In 2004, the city had
916,065 telephone connections and just over 60,000 internet connections (Bangalore
Profile, 2006).
In 2004, when field work was undertaken, the cost of buying a computer in
Bangalore was about Rs. 40,000 ( US $1 = Rs. 42 in 2004). Accessories such as printers,
and ensuring Internet connection for a year can cost anywhere between Rs. 5000 to
10,000. The per capita income in Bangalore for 2002-03 was Rs. 18,000 (Directorate of
Economics and Statistics, 2003). An individual working in a service industry such as
banking or insurance can aspire to a salary of Rs 12,000 per month on average;
investment in a computer can be an expensive proposition. Thus, except in upper-income
enclaves or families with an employee who could secure loans, home access to a
computer and the Internet was not a common phenomenon.
However, because of the city’s reputation as India’s Silicon Valley, its geography
has been influenced to a large extent by information technology related initiatives. The
city has a software technology park at Electronics City, spread over 330 acres exclusively
meant for electronics industries. In 1991, the Software Technology Parks of India started
operating in Bangalore to promote software exports by functioning as a single window
agency and providing international high speed data communication services to the IT
community. Companies that locate within Electronics City are insulated from the outside
world through power generators, special telephone lines, and premium network
connections. Electronics City is not under the jurisdiction of the Bangalore City
Corporation. To the north of the city, the International Technology Park offers 69 acres of
office, commercial and retail space integrated with recreational and residential facilities.
57
The government is also working on creating an IT corridor in the southeast quadrant of
the Bangalore city that will be 20 km long and 7 km wide (Bangaloreit.com, 2004,
Feb23). It envisages creating two new business parks, residential facilities, and
infrastructure to cater to the educational, recreational, trade and commerce needs of IT
professionals. The plan includes creation of an independent authority which will have
protection from legal proceedings and barring any decision or proceedings of the
authority being questioned in a court of law. These exclusive zones have been created
with resources collected from tax-payers though the local government does not have any
jurisdiction over these zones. Madon (1997) documents the uneven development of
Bangalore where IT professionals and technocrats are externally linked to the global
networks they are disconnected from the local populations who are functionally
unnecessary to the software enterprise. Participation in a global informational network
requires certain prerequisites such as education, knowledge of English, and skills of
relevance to the information economy. Individuals who are not contributors to this
information economy such as the urban poor, workers in the informal sectors and slum
dwellers are excluded from the benefits of development (Madon & Sahay, 2002). Graham
and Marvin describe Bangalore as a megacity with all its attendant problems. The city
has to contend with illiteracy, poverty, and lack of infrastructure though it has a high tech
image that prompted Senator John Kerry to point it out as a model for connectivity
(Somanadh, 2004).
Lack of adequate infrastructure in the city- bad roads, daily traffic jams, the
absence of an effective public transport system, low quality power supply- have become a
major complaint among information technology companies and residents. Put off by
58
deteriorating infrastructure in the city, IT companies have threatened to move out to other
cities (Rediff, 2005, January 19). One chairman of an IT company, Azim Premji of Wipro
announced through the media that deteriorating infrastructure, poor sanitation, frequent
power failure and increasing pollution were making it impossible to run smooth
operations out of Bangalore (Rediff, 2004, July 27). The Chairman of one the major IT
companies, Narayana Murthy of Infosys, had proposed that corporate entities would play
a part in improving infrastructure if the government specified a role for them (Rediff,
2004, July 27). His suggestions were based on an experiment tried out in 2000 know as
the Bangalore Agenda Task Force, that was seen as a successful ‘Public Private
Partnership’ initiative. Bangalore Agenda Task Force originated from an idea that
corporate entities had a role in urban governance and could benefit the city through
sharing of ideas and best practices and bringing in an efficient and transparent
management approach. The details of this initiative are discussed in the section titled
‘Information Technology, corporate executives and urban governance’.
The next section will examine local government in Bangalore city and the role of
citizens and corporations in urban governance.
4.4 Local Government: Administration, Democracy and Citizen participation
As discussed in the section on history, Bangalore City figured prominently as a
cantonment for British troops and this affected its government and the emergence of
democratic traditions in local government.
The British idea of a model state in nineteenth-century India had a very limited
role for democracy or public participation in decision making (Heitzman, 2004, p32). The
Viceroy and provincial governors, with the British personnel of the Indian Civil Service
59
administered India. They allowed native rulers to exercise autocratic control as long as
there was peace. Thus the Wodeyars of Mysore State were free to administer it as they
saw fit. A semblance of democracy emerged in 1881 when Mysore State created the
Representative Assembly as a body to redress grievances (Heitzman, 2004, p40). After
1891, the Assembly members were elected by a small constituency based on property
qualifications. A Representative Assembly was created in 1920 with 280 elected and
appointed members, though it had no formal power. In 1923, reforms gave the Assembly
the right to pass resolutions and suggest amendments though it had no real power over
the government.
The first widely recorded mass demonstrations by citizens against the Mysore
government occurred in 1947 when the British announced they would leave India. Manor
(1978) states that the government of the Wodeyar king tried to prevent the emergence of
a genuine democracy within the state and there were mass demonstrations which led to
the king abdicating and Mysore State becoming a part of India.
Under the British, Bangalore was designated a municipality in 1862 when nine
citizens formed a municipal board. However, it did not have a single unified governing
body and the British Resident held wide discretionary powers. The withdrawal of the
British in 1947 cleared the way for bringing all the areas around Bangalore under one
authority through the Bangalore City Corporation Act of 1949. The structure of this new
city government provided for direct election of representatives by wards (localities in the
city). Each representative would serve on the city council for five years. The chair of the
city council would be a Mayor, a council member elected by the representatives for a
term of one year. The first election to the city council took place in 1950 (Rau, 1968)
60
The executive authority rested in the city commissioner who was appointed by the
state government from among the cadres of professional bureaucrats. The commissioner
directed an administration staffed by professional bureaucrats. The state government had
the right to suspend the city council and govern the city through an administrator who
answered only to the state government (Heitzman, 2004, p. 42). Thus, though there was
an evocation of democratic local government, the state government retained executive
power.
Overtime, the state government also created a variety of ‘parastatal’ authorities
(agencies that operate in Bangalore city but report to the state government) that allowed it
to control urban development and service provision. The state government’s role in
Bangalore grew when the city became the state capital after the national linguistic
reorganization of states in 1956 created Karnataka state. All major decisions on daily
administration of the Bangalore City Corporation (BCC), known as the Bangalore
Mahanagara Palike (BMP) in Kannada, passed through the office of the commissioner, a
person appointed by the state government. For city council members elected by
Bangalore’s citizens, securing funds and services involved extensive contacts with the
state bureaucracy.
This trend of state control intensified with periods when the city council was
suspended and the state assumed control- for five years after 1966, four years after 1979
(not reinstated until August 1983), in 1989 and in 1995. The rationale for these
suspensions often related to fiscal problems, with the State being required to step in to
bail out the local city government (Kamath, 1990). During these periods state appointed
administrators were in control. New areas were added to the jurisdiction of the BMP and
61
development plans for the city were decided with no input from any elected body. With
the BMP council removed from direct control over spatial planning of the city, the
majority of citizens paid little attention to BMP affairs (Heitzman, 2004, p. 61).
This situation continued into the 1990s even though the Nagarapalika Act of 1993
mandated major changes in urban government. This act required that electoral wards be
created for election of representatives within each municipality and mandated the
creation of Ward Committees. The Act also mandated that a city council could not be
dissolved for more than six months without being reconstituted through an election. All
of these provisions were aimed at promoting local democratic participation in municipal
government. Yet, decentralization and devolution of power to ward committees was
thwarted in Karnataka during the implementation of the Nagarpalika Act (Heitzman,
1999).
It has been argued that the reason for such concentration power is that
Karnataka’s traditions favor Lord Mayo’s (British Viceroy of India from 1869-1872)
doctrine of administrative efficiency in local government at the expense of popular
participation that might take a long time to evolve and result in inefficiencies (Prasanna,
Aundhe & Saldanha, 2000). This would explain why the state opted for a weak Mayor
system and appointed its chosen bureaucrat to the post of Commissioner. Such a system
would allow the State to maintain strong control over local government administration.
4.4.1 Who are the players involved in local government in Bangalore City?
The only local government entity in Bangalore that has elected representatives is
the BMP. It has 100 elected representatives called corporators, one from each ward of the
city in the Council.
62
Figure 4-1: Organization structure of Bangalore City Corporation
COUNCIL
STANDING COMMITTEES
COMMISSIONER
Deputy
Commissioner
(Revenue)
3
Deputy
Commissioner
(Administration)
CHIEF ACCOUNTS
OFFICER
JOINT COMMISSIONER
(FINANCE)
Functional specialist in
charge of financial reforms
2
1
Deputy
Commissioner
(Health)
Deputy
Commissioner
(Edu, Welfare,
Horticulture)
Deputy
Commissioner
(Markets)
Zonal Assistant
Controller of Finance
Subject to
(ACF)
monetary limits
without prior
approval of each
zonal deputy
commissioner
Accounts
superintendent
2
Heads of Unit
Departmental Staff
Accounts Officer
(General)
Accounts Officer
(Revenue)
Central Zone
& Headoffice
operations
Accounts
superintendent
Accounts
superintendent
3
Audit Officer for
disbursement of
pension dues
Source: Fund Based Accounting System Accounting Manual for Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, by NCRCL March
2003
63
Elections are held every four years and candidates contesting in these elections
represent state level political parties. There are also five nominated councilors. The
mayor for 2006 is Mumtaz Begum. There are eight standing committees in the following
areas: Taxation and Finance, Accounts, Public Health, Town Planning and Development,
Public Works, Education and Social Justice, Appeals, and Horticulture and Markets.
The current commissioner is K. Jairaj. Bangalore is divided into three zones—
North, South and East. Three Zonal Deputy Commissioners support the BMP
Commissioner. A Zonal Deputy Commissioner is also usually from the Indian
Administrative Service. Two Revenue Officers assist each Deputy Commissioner. The
Assistant Revenue Officers are in charge of each range and they report to Deputy
Revenue officers.
When the field work for this research was being conducted, the Mayor was P.R.
Ramesh and the Commissioner was M.R. Srinivasa Murthy. In July 2004, he was
replaced by K. Jothiramalingam.
Historically there has been discord between Mayors and Commissioners,
representing the power struggle between elected representatives and career bureaucrats
who represent the State government. It plays out as battles over control of budget for
Bangalore and what projects need to be prioritized. It also often results in instability in
local government.
Commissioner Srinivasa Murthy held office for just over 18 months. His
predecessors held office for shorter time periods. When the S.M. Krishna government
came to power in October 1999, it elevated the importance of the Commissioner by
posting a senior Indian Administrative Service officer. It replaced then Commissioner
64
K.P. Pandey with K. Jairaj who lasted in office for 11 months (He was reappointed as
BMP commissioner effective May 5, 2006). His successor was Shantanu Consul who
stayed in office for 3 months. Pressure from elected representatives forced the State
government to replace him with Ashok M. Dalwai who lasted in his post for 1 year.
Srinivasa Murthy was Dalwai’s successor (New Indian Express, 2004).
Differences of opinion between Srinivasa Murthy and the Mayors, during his 18
months in office played out as public feuds. He had differences with K. Chandrashekar,
the mayor for 2003. Corporators demanded the removal of Srinivasa Murthy from office
when he sent a proposal to wind up the standing committee on town planning and cut the
powers of the working committee. His decision to reduce the number of piece work
contracts and sanction only those included in the program of works (PoW) angered
corporators. Mayor Ramesh (term 2004 fiscal year) publicly accused the Commissioner
of insulting elected representatives by modifying Budget-related resolutions which were
passed in the council before sending them to the government for approval (Deccan
Herald, 2004) . Shortly after this Commissioner Murthy was succeeded by K.
Jothiramalingam.
These events suggest that the Commissioner as a representative of the State
government often exercises more power than the elected representatives and the only
option left to the elected representatives to exercise their power is lobbying the State
government through their political parties to appoint a new person as Commissioner.
Such public displays of feuds and frequent change lead to inefficiency and gridlocks in
local government. It also makes it difficult for citizens since their elected local
65
representatives often claim that they are powerless and citizens have no mechanism to
hold the commissioner accountable.
Even though the citizens get to elect their local representatives, the power that
such representatives wield is limited. The indirect election of the Mayor and the short one
year tenure makes the position one of a figure head with no executive authority. Though
the BMP is a legislative body that makes the policies, it is the Commissioner who
executes those policies. The power of the Commissioner is due to the British roots of the
system from the time when the administrator was the representative of the colonial power
(Fahim, 2006). Thus to some extent, decentralization, proximity of elected
representatives and civic administration to citizens and enhancement of people’s
participation in local governance remain principles that are not favored in practice.
4.4.2 What are the functions of the BMP?
According to the Nagarapalika Act, there are 18 different areas that each State
government can decide on delegating to a local governing body such as the BMP. The 18
areas are – urban planning; regulation of land use and construction of buildings; planning
for economic and social development; roads and bridges; water supply; public health,
sanitation and solid waste management; fire services; urban forestry and protection of
environment; safeguarding interests of weaker sections of society; slum improvement
and upgradation; urban poverty alleviation; provision of urban amenities and facilities
such as parks, gardens and playgrounds; public amenities including street lighting,
parking lots, bus stops and public conveniences; promotion of cultural, educational and
aesthetic aspects; vital statistics including registration of births and deaths; burial grounds
66
and cremation facilities; cattle pounds and prevention of cruelty to animals; regulation of
slaughter houses and tanneries (Constitution of India, 12th schedule).
BMP is the fourth largest Municipal Corporation in India, and could perform most
of these functions alone. However, the State government over the years opted to create
Special Purpose Vehicles (or parastatal organizations) to undertake many of these
functions. Thus, along with the BMP, there are a few other parastatal organizations that
operate/ provide services in Bangalore City.
BMP has to collaborate with them in performing its functions: in land
development/ urban planning - Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), Bangalore
Metropolitan Regional Development Authority (BMRDA), Karnataka Industrial Areas
Development Board (KIADB), Housing and Urban Development Corporation (HUDCO),
Karnataka Slum Clearance Board (KSCB), Karnataka Urban Infrastructure Development
Finance Corporation (KUIDFC); in transportation - Bangalore Metropolitan Transport
Corporation (BMTC), in water - Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board
(BWSSB), electricity - Bangalore Electricity Supply Company (Bescom); safety –
Bangalore Police.
4.4.3 What does this mean?
Trying to map the functions performed by these various agencies is a difficult
task. For example, according to the Bangalore Master Plan (2005) document,
Bangalore’s service delivery structures are as follows:
• Public works are carried out under 12 engineering divisions
• Garbage collection divides the city into 278 health wards
• Property taxes are collected through 30 Assistant Range Offices
67
• Electricity services are structured along 39 sub-divisions reporting to 10 divisions
• Water supply is managed through 5 divisions, 17 sub-divisions and 74 service stations
• Bus service is monitored through 24 depots
• Law and order is maintained by 88 police stations; traffic through 29 of these stations
• Slum Development is coordinated through 4 sub-divisions
However, the service delivery regulation boundaries are not those of the wards –
the smallest political unit. According to the Bangalore Master Plan (2005), there is no
overlap between the administrative jurisdictions of these service agencies, or
correspondence between an agency’s jurisdiction and a ward’s boundary. This is
problematic because while the ward, a political unit, has an inherent accountability
associated with it, these other service boundaries are not legitimate political units and
hence there is no accountability for them through the corporator of the ward.
The boundaries of the service delivery agencies are powerful because they impact
budgeting, planning, implementation, expenditures, and overall quality of life in the city.
Thus, the major problem for the citizens of Bangalore has been that though they elect
representatives, their everyday life is affected by agencies and officials the citizens have
not elected. Service provision is inefficient and chaotic and there are no accountability
mechanisms that will help citizens participate in and influence the local government in
terms of planning and service provision.
One mechanism that could facilitate citizen participation is the Ward Committee
mandated by the Nagarapalika Act. To meet this Act’s directive on decentralizing power
at the local level, the BMP set up 30 ward committees in the city in June 2003 (The
Hindu, 2004, June 25). According to the Karnataka Municipal Corporations (Ward
68
Committees) Rules 1997, every ward committee has to meet every month. Each
committee covers 3 or 4 wards and is supposed to check on all ward works, monitor their
implementation and suggest modifications, supervise collection of property tax and
proper utilization of budget grants, and approve works up to Rs. 100,000 (CIVIC, 2004).
However, one year after they were set up, the BMP had not budgeted funds for the
committees (The Hindu, 2004, June 25). A study released in May 2006, stated that “the
weak and undemocratic structure, lack of access to information, lack of empowerment
with funds, functions, functionaries and facilities made decentralization of ward
committees largely unfruitful in Bangalore Mahanagara Palike” (The Hindu, 2006,May
17) . According to Ms. Shameem Banu, Principal Secretary, Department of Urban
Development, for ward committees to be functional “Political will is very much required.
The Bangalore Mahanagara Palike itself may not want to give its powers to the ward
committees. It is a threat. There will be resistance” (The Hindu, 2006, May 17).
Thus it is clear that in Bangalore city, citizen participation mechanisms were
either non existent or not functional towards the end of the 1990s and continue to be so in
the case of the ward committees.
The context for local government action in Bangalore towards the end of the
1990s was made clear in the report by the Committee on Urban Management of
Bangalore in 1997. This report highlighted a series of administrative problems for
Bangalore including concentration of control over municipal governance in state
institutions, competitive relationship between elected officials and bureaucrats, low
professionalism in administrative services, and multiplicity of agencies in the city.
69
The most visible manifestations of these problems were lack of adequate
transportation infrastructure, unequal distribution of utilities and inability of citizens to
access information or to obtain redress for complaints leading to low public confidence in
public institutions. In addition, there was lack of transparency and accountability.
Prasanna, Aundhe & Saldanha (2000) suggest that there was also an emphasis on using
the State’s power to achieve development goals rather than any form of modern
democratic participation. The lack of participatory governance negated any constitutional
framework promoting democratic participation and egalitarianism. These problems
prompted many citizens groups to mobilize and try to influence government policy and
actions which will be examined in the next section.
4.5 Citizen Engagement: Civic Action and Governance
Civic engagement is the participation of private actors in the pubic sphere,
conducted through direct and indirect interactions of civil society organizations and
citizens-at-large with government, multilateral institutions and business establishments to
influence decision making or pursue common goals. Engagement of citizens and citizens’
organizations in public policy debate, or in delivering public services and contributing to
the management of public goods, is a critical factor in making development relevant to
the needs and aspirations of the people. This section examines how citizens have engaged
with local government in Bangalore.
Bangalore is the fifth largest city in India and as befitting a big city is home to
many non government organizations and citizens groups. Though there has been no
systematic effort to create a complete list of such organizations, one indicator of a vibrant
non government sector is the Directory of Voluntary Organizations in Karnataka
70
(Bangalore Cares, 2000). In their listing of more than 500 non government organizations
in Karnataka, 301 were based in Bangalore. This list did not include residents
associations and unregistered civic groups. This section examines the efforts of a few
citizens groups and nongovernmental organizations to influence local government
policies and promote governance.
These groups are referred to with the term citizens groups instead of civil society
since the concept is controversial in post colonial societies such as India (Chatterjee,
1997). Chatterjee argues that it is fundamentally misleading to claim that the same
concept of civil society can describe the everyday, localized practices of governance in
Western democracies and what happens in non-Western situations today. Hence the
descriptive term citizens group is used.
The citizens groups that are examined here are the Citizens’ Voluntary Initiative
for the City (CIVIC), Swabhimana, and Public Affairs Center (PAC). They were selected
because of their active involvement in local governance in recent years and their work
provides insight into the process of citizens’ groups interacting with government.
The Nagarapalika Act that came into force in June 1993 brought into focus the
need for decentralization of power in urban governance. Around this time period, the
involvement of civic groups in governance became noticeable in Bangalore. Prior to the
1990s, there were many groups operating in individual neighborhoods such as the
Sarvajanika Jagrati Vedike (Public Vigilance Forum) in 1984. However, these initiatives
were isolated and did not involve a vast majority of citizens in the city.
The Nagarapalika Act amended the Constitution of India and provided a new
legal framework for urban governance and planning. It listed the specific duties to be
71
performed by municipal governments while specifying that allocation of funds to
municipalities would rest with the state Finance Commissions, and a Metropolitan
Planning Committee would be responsible for preparing draft development plans. It
required all states to conform to its standards by June 1994.
The job of making sure that Karnataka State was in compliance with the
Nagarapalika Act fell to the state department of housing and urban development (HUD).
HUD set up a taskforce chaired by Dr. A. Ravindra and called for recommendations from
the public. This presented the first opportunity for civic groups and non government
organizations (NGOs) to participate in the ‘decentralization’ policy process.
A series of interactions took place between bureaucrats and a small group of
NGOs. The NGOs began to act as intermediaries between the state and citizens
organizing meetings to facilitate exchange of ideas. CIVIC was one of these NGOs.
CIVIC was a group of citizens who began meeting in 1991 through a series of
brainstorming sessions to tackle disintegrating public services, and unresponsive
government agencies (Prasanna, Aundhe & Saldanha, 2000). According to its
publications, CIVIC’s objective is to “generate and disseminate empowering information
to the citizens of Bangalore in general, so that they have better control over the processes
of decision making that affect their lives, resulting in a demonstrable improvement in the
quality of their lives. We also activate and mobilize participation of the local people in
the planning, administration and management of the affairs of the Local Authorities”
Vishwanath (2003). In an analysis of its operations, CIVIC’s publications state that since
the original founders of CIVIC were middle-class citizens with associated values, this
bias is still concealed within the composition CIVIC and that it tries to overcome this by
72
undertaking projects and working with people in low income areas and slums. CIVIC
derives funding from the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and
Pacific as an urban forum for discussion of public issues.
In 1992, CIVIC organized seminars on BMP’s budget and in 1993 they conducted
workshops on the Nagarapalika Act. They generated position papers and sent
recommendations to the HUD taskforce. On March 12, 1994 CIVIC organized a public
meeting to discuss the Nagarapalika Act – the first meeting in the history of Karnataka to
debate draft legislation before it was passed (Heitzman, 2004, p. 131). The draft
legislation gave more power to the State representatives in the BMP council and
undermined ward committees. CIVIC worked to point out these problems.
CIVIC conducted an opinion poll among citizens, circulated the results to the
HUD taskforce and engaged in activities to increase public awareness of the Act and the
problems with the government’s proposals. In spite of its efforts, on May 30, 1994 the
state government promulgated the Karnataka Municipalities (amendment) Ordinance
without incorporating a single change recommended by CIVIC’s opinion poll research. In
opposition to citizens’ and BMP councilor’s opinions, State Members of the Legislative
Assembly (MLAs) and Members of Parliament (MPs) were given voting rights in the
BMP council, thus diluting local control and undermining decentralization efforts. Te
Ordinance avoided the question of accountability of municipal officials to ward
committees.
CIVIC tried to influence the state government through meetings with members in
opposition parties and programs in the media. Its members attended the Municipalities
Convention in August 1994 and circulated its critiques of the Ordinance and proposed
73
many strategies to promote more effective democratic participation in the BMP and in
ward committees. Ward committees became an issue of contention since the BMP
councilors felt threatened by them. Thus, while they supported CIVIC in opposing the
presence of MLAs and MPs in BMP councils, they opposed CIVIC and its efforts to
include more citizen participation in ward committees. The Ordinance was approved by
the Governor in October 1994 without any changes made to the May 1994 version. Thus
CIVIC’s role as lobbyist and mediator between the state and citizens did not result in any
change in policy though it led to strengthening of networks and contacts among citizens
groups, the press and members within the government.
CIVIC has continued to work on ward committee issues. In 1997 it worked with
then BMP Commissioner Dr. A. Ravindra (the same individual who had chaired the
HUD task force in 1994) to influence the definition of ward committee functions. It has
closely monitored the implementation of the Nagarapalika Act in Bangalore, and released
a number of studies (CIVIC, 2006) and remains a dynamic citizens group.
Dr. A. Ravindra emerged as an important person in Bangalore’s civic activities.
As commissioner of BMP in 1995, he worked with non government organizations. The
most important initiative he is associated with is Swabhimana, a forum of non
government organizations and concerned citizens to connect citizens groups with
bureaucrats to deal with problems in Bangalore.
A small group with this name operated in the Malleshwaram ward where citizens
worked on solid waste management. The idea of extending Swabhimana to the rest of the
city came up when Dr. Ravindra was interacting with CIVIC and other citizens groups in
March 1995. Based on his suggestions, Swabhimana was launched as a civic forum and
74
three consultative committees were set up at the ward level. The purpose behind the
initiative was to create ward offices, decentralize services, promote access to information,
and transparency in administration (Ravindra, 1995).
At the neighborhood level, Swabhimana’s activities began in Malleshwaram with
a public meeting in October 1995. Residents enumerated problems and solutions in their
meetings with officials and the meetings spread to other wards. Swabhimana organized
seminars on ways to promote citizen’s participation and published a citizens’ guide. Dr.
Ravindra also set up a ward committee in Malleshwaram as a pilot project. All BMP
functionaries and representatives of public service agencies were supposed to cooperate
with the ward committee. The committee began work by proposing ways to improve
accountability from the BMP, developed a preliminary ward budget and set up a Civic
Amenities Centre where citizens could file grievances. The initiative collapsed in January
1996 when Dr. Ravindra was transferred after controversy over his actions within BMP.
The ward committee pilot project was criticized by new councilors elected to BMP in
October 1996 as a mechanism to undermine elected representatives from the wards
(Chamaraj, 1997). Councilors feared their authority over their wards would decline if
they shared decision making power with nominated citizens in the ward committee and
hence did not support citizen participation.
Dr. Ravindra returned as BMP commissioner in May 1997 and interacted with
CIVIC and Swabhimana while deciding on details about constituting ward committees.
However, politicization of the process of nominating ward committee members, lack of
funding and finally the September 1999 code of conduct banning new ward works until
after the State Assembly elections made the ward committees irrelevant (Chamaraj,
75
2000). A new chief minister came into office in November 1999 and replaced the BMP
commissioner. By the time the political battles in replacing former officials was
complete, it was time for BMP elections in 2001.
Swabhimana became a public trust in 2002 and began a partnership with the
Public Affairs Center. Dr. A. Ravindra worked as Chief Secretary to the Government of
Karnataka. He is currently a member of the Board of Directors of the Public Affairs
Center.
The Public Affairs Center (PAC) is another citizens group that became active in
the 1990s. It was founded by Dr. Samuel Paul, a former professor who consulted for the
World Bank and the Ford Foundation. When he returned to India in 1992, he began a
study of service provision in Bangalore. This resulted in the first ‘Report Card’ on the
city’s service agencies (Paul, 1993). With funds derived from the Ford Foundation, Dr.
Paul formed PAC in 1994. Initially PAC mainly undertook to research areas affecting
urban government.
PAC started playing an active role in governance during the 1996 BMP elections.
It decided to inform citizens in specific wards about the background and political policies
of the candidates through ‘Choose the Right Councilor Programme’. PAC collaborated
with CIVIC and another association called the Bangalore Environment Trust. It worked
with residents’ associations from eight wards in the city to create a questionnaire for 100
candidates, interview them and distribute the results to citizens through newspapers and
leaflets in each ward. This resulted in Bangalore’s citizens getting detailed and relevant
information about the candidates before the ward elections for the first time. After this,
76
PAC continued to focus on research in areas such as corruption, the Right to Information
Act and evaluating service provision in other cities.
PAC is perhaps best known for developing ‘Citizen Report Cards’. According to
the PAC, such report cards are based on the premise that ‘feedback on service quality
collected from communities with the help of a sample survey, provides a reliable basis
for communities and local governments to engage in a dialogue and partnership action to
improve the delivery of public services’(PAC, 2005). In keeping with this philosophy,
PAC released its report card results to the press, organized a public meeting bringing
together BMP officials, officials from agencies responsible for water, drains, electricity
and telephones and citizens. This was an opportunity to discuss the report card findings
and how the agencies were going to respond to the problems raised by the citizens. The
first such report card in Bangalore was released in 1994 and the second in 1999.
Comparing the results from the two surveys Paul (2002) argues that essential public
services in Bangalore had shown partial improvement. PAC released its third report card
in 2003 and its report on the findings suggested that there were improvements in citizen
satisfaction across the board for all the public agencies providing services in Bangalore
City and that there was a perceptible decline in corruption levels in routine transactions.
PAC argued that these reports were the first organized efforts to draw attention to public
service delivery as a central issue in good governance from the citizens’ perspective. It
suggested that the report cards “put the spotlight on public services and the resultant
‘glare’, over time, has drawn the attention of service providers, policy makers and donor
agencies to catalyze focused corrective action to improve service quality”(PAC, 2003).
77
While it is true that PAC’s report cards were important in focusing attention on
service provision in Bangalore City other entities such as the Bangalore Agenda Task
Force were also working on the same issues between 1999 and 2004.
4.5.1 Public-private partnership to take ‘Bangalore Forward’
Bangalore’s crumbling infrastructure and poor service delivery were important
issues when the S.M. Krishna government took office in November 1999. The chief
minister S.M. Krishna retained the portfolio on Bangalore city development when he took
office. In exploring ways to improve the city, he received inputs from within the
bureaucracy and prominent IT companies about the need to employ information
technology in managing infrastructure projects, and change administrative practices. It
was suggested that corporate entities had a role in urban governance and could help the
city through sharing of ideas and best practices and bringing in an efficient and
transparent management approach. This led to the creation of the Bangalore Agenda Task
Force through a Government Order issued on November 26, 1999(BATF, 2003).
BATF was given a mandate to achieve the following goals - it had to work with
city stakeholders to achieve the vision of role model city by 2001 by upgrading and
modernizing the infrastructure of the City for a visible impact; modernize systems and
processes for citizens convenience; ensure best practices / management processes and
appropriate use of technology; develop and enhance the internal capacity of the
stakeholder agencies for sustainability; expand the resource base of the city; finance civic
infrastructure, upgrade facilities and service delivery through Private-Public Partnerships;
enable an efficient, effective and pro active administrative framework; institutionalize
upgraded service delivery mechanisms by amending the legal framework; secure greater
78
involvement of citizens, corporate entities, industry for enhancing quality of life and
provide intellectual and professional skills to ensure sustainability.
To translate this broad vision into reality, the government nominated 13
prominent Bangaloreans who were professionals and experts to the task force, in addition
to the BMP commissioner. The individuals nominated to the task force were people who
had a high level of social, economic and cultural capital.
Nandan Mohan Nilenkani– chairman
BATF
Managing Director & COO of Infosys (IT
company), co-founder of National Association of
Software and Service Companies (NASSCOM).
Naresh Malhotra
partner KPMG - Corporate finance professional
Samuel Paul
Director of Public Affairs Center
Raja Ramanna
Chairman of the Governing Council of the
Indian Institute of Science (IISc) & the Council
of Management of the Jawaharlal Nehru Centre
for Advanced Scientific Research
H. Narasimhaiah
Gandhian, scientist, educationist (heads the
National Education Society), rationalist, freedom
fighter, Member of Legistative Council (MLC)
Naresh Venkataraman
Partner and Design Principal in Venkataraman
Associates, an architecture & engineering firm;
Joint Managing Director of Street Atlas
Company, a GIS company
Ashok Dalwai
Commissioner BMP 1999-2000
V. Ravichandar
Head of Feedback Marketing Services, a
research-based consulting firm
M. K. Ramachandra
President, The Greater Mysore Chamber of
Industry; Director of 7 companies; member of
the Board of Governors of the Indian Institute of
Management, Bangalore
Ramesh Ramanathan
Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA)
B. K. Das
Principal Secretary to Government
Urban Development Dept. 1999-2000
I. Zachariah
principal architect, Zachariah Consultants
Kalpana Kar
Director Cancer Patients Aid Association
Figure 4-2: BATF constituents (BATF, 2003)
The task force had no guidelines on what issues were important and needed
immediate attention. To remedy this, the task force decided that the citizens of Bangalore,
79
would set its agenda and it commissioned a series of citizens polls, undertaken by a
professional opinion group. Citizens were asked to prioritize what they thought were
issues that required attention. The citizens’ poll was devised to be carried out every six
months to assess the success of the projects undertaken and formulate new projects based
on citizens’ feedback (BATF, 2003). Among the top ten issues prioritized by the citizens
were garbage, road safety and traffic. This led to the Bangalore Agenda. The Bangalore
Agenda was a partnership between the citizens, corporate entities and administrative
agencies – the BMP (City corporation), BDA (land development), BMTC (public
transportation), BWSSB (water and sewer), BESCOM (electricity), BSNL (telephone),
and Police – also called stakeholders. These agencies had their own set of priorities such
as innovative financing, redefining systems and procedures and revenue growth which
was interwoven into the Bangalore Agenda. The plan was to create a “Private Public
Partnership" (PPP) and harness the benefits resulting from synergy of effort. ‘Bangalore
Forward’ became the rally cry of the BATF and a symbol a white arrow set on a green
background was splashed across the city to provide maximum visibility.
The stakeholders and the BATF, in a first step towards accountability and
transparency unveiled the Bangalore Agenda in a series of presentations during the first
Bangalore Forward Summit. The State government indicated its political support for the
BATF at this summit through the presence of the Chief Minister of the state, various
representatives from the government and issued statements soliciting support from
representatives of the private sector, and this received wide coverage in the media.
The members of the task force engaged in hands on implementation of Pilot
Projects, they defined short term and long term initiatives and identified scaleable
80
programs. They worked with the stakeholder agencies through projects teams and acted
as domain experts to build capacity within these agencies. They provided intellectual
inputs as external consultants and identified options and best practices. For example,
member Naresh Venkatraman contributed skills in GIS and company time to the
development of a pilot property tax collection system. In many cases they found
corporate funding for projects and came up with innovative financing methods such as
Build Operate Transfer schemes and Joint Ventures between the public agencies and
private companies with expertise. They helped to establish service and delivery norms,
standards, methods to monitor the processes, documentation and training officials for
sustainability and replicability.
The members of the BATF decided that to take up the projects outlined, they
would find funding internally even though the Government Order constituting the BATF
mentioned that BMP would fund the task force. According to BATF documents this was
a deliberate conscious decision (BATF, 2003). Mr. Nandan Nilekani with his wife
Rohini, created the Adhaar Trust with their own resurces to fund strategic initiatives and
projects as decided by the BATF members from time to time. By 2004, Adhaar Trust had
contributed about Rs 44 million to BATF projects. In addition, through Mr. Nilekani’s
involvement, the Infosys Foundation had contributed Rs. 635,5000 to fund garbage
collection projects. The founder of Infosys, Mr. N.R. Narayana Murthy and his wife
Sudha Murthy had contributed Rs. 80 million for sanitation projects and erecting public
restrooms. Using their social capital, the BATF members succeeded in getting companies
such as AirTel, Aditi Technologies, Biocon India, Prestige Group, Planetasia Ltd to fund
many infrastructure initiatives. They enlisted the Software Technology Parks of India to
81
adopt 50 parks maintained by the BMP for three years (BATF, 2003). Thus in addition to
contributing personal time, financial resources and expertise, they used their networks to
generate funding for BATF’s projects.
BATF was involved in four areas – Public health and sanitation; road and traffic
infrastructure; urban spaces; and reforms. In each of those areas it undertook multiple
projects. Under public health and sanitation, BATF worked on ensuring timely garbage
collection through Swacha Bangalore and Suchi Mitra, created public restroom facilities
through Nirmala Bangalore, created a Healthnet helpline. As part of road and traffic
infrastructure, it created a central area traffic management plan, undertook to decongest
the city market area and undertook traffic junction improvements. It found corporate
sponsors to undertake road development projects and helped the city agencies to
complete the Ring Road project. As part of improving urban spaces, it erected bus
shelters, undertook parks improvement and lake rejuvenation, and created the first park
and pay facilities. As part of facilitating reforms, it funded and executed the financial
restructuring of BMP with the Fund Based Accounting System, helped the government in
implementing the Self Assessment Scheme for property tax assessment and Sarala Khata
(property records) and a better trade licensing scheme (BATF, 2003)
When a citizen poll was conducted by TN Sofres Mode in February 2003, it was
seen that 94% of the respondents stated that there was improvement in the city’s
infrastructure and civic amenities due to BATF’s efforts. This poll also revealed that
citizens felt that basic civic consciousness was low and that the citizens had to accept
responsibility for some problems such as encouraging corruption through paying bribes.
82
The assembly elections held in May 2004 brought political change. The successes
of the BATF in Bangalore City and the state government’s focus on the information
technology sector became liabilities for the incumbent political party. Opposition party
members argued that the State government under S.M. Krishna had focused more on
Bangalore and IT and neglected other areas such as drought management in the
Karnataka, taking care of the interests of minorities and the urban poor, and rural areas
(The Hindu, 2004, December 4). When the S.M. Krishna lost elections, the BATF’s role
in the city suffered. Since it was constituted by a government order, BATF had insider
status and closely identified with the S.M. Krishna government. These factors that helped
the BATF while the government lasted, affected it when S.M. Krishna government was
voted out. Though the BATF was seen as an important force in Bangalore, it did not lack
critics. Many saw it as a corporate-driven program of governance and infrastructure
development (Menon, 2005).
BATF was constituted by a government order; it did not have any constitutional
status. The lack of political support and the new coalition government’s view of BATF as
corporate interference in areas that were earlier exclusive to the government led to its
dissolution.
4.6 Relevance to current research
This dissertation examines the role of information and communication technology
in local government through a case study of Bangalore. As can be seen from the above
discussion, Bangalore is at the heart of India’s information technology industry. Between
1999 and 2004, e-government became important in Karnataka State, and Bangalore as the
state capital and IT hub was greatly influenced. This chapter highlights and summarizes
83
the historical context that is part of the collective memory of Bangaloreans and their
interactions with local government. Understanding the use of information technology in
government and how citizens use this, is impossible without an idea about the history of
citizen-government interactions. Given the pattern of interactions in the past, we can
now examine what impact e-government has had on citizen-government interactions in
Bangalore city by tracing any changes.
To summarize, during the late 1990s Bangalore began to be identified as ‘the
Silicon Valley of India’ and saw tremendous growth. However, its infrastructure could
not keep up with such growth and there were numerous efforts to improve infrastructure
and service delivery. Citizens groups began to get involved in these efforts - some that
were registered as non government organizations, others that were research entities, and
many more that were neighborhood organizations seeking to improve living conditions in
their own neighborhoods. Another initiative was a ‘public private partnership’ where
corporate entities, some of them prominent IT companies, tried to improve conditions in
the city. Thus the story of governance in Bangalore in the late 1990s and into 2000s is
intricately connected with Bangalore’s IT hub status.
However, an analysis of the city’s decentralization process indicates that a process
of governance – one that includes citizen participation in decision making - is not
institutionalized in Bangalore. The various initiatives undertaken by entities like PAC,
Swabhimana and BATF illustrate how citizens have interacted with local government. It
is interesting that in most cases the discussion has centered on improving ‘service
delivery by the city’s public agencies’. In these discussions, the citizen is mostly a
‘consumer or customer of civic services’, not a partner in governance. A citizen who is a
84
partner in governance has voice in policy making whereas a consumer complains when
dissatisfied with service and expects the service provider to fix the problem.
Dibben & Bartlett (2001) state that ‘empowering the public as a customer
involves extending choices or clarifying the service to which they are entitled, giving
them the means to complain and providing equality and ease of access. In contrast, by
empowering people as citizens, the public are entitled to a share in decision-making’.
In the material discussed so far, it can be seen that in Bangalore the citizen’s role
as partner in governance is less evident than the role of citizen as dissatisfied
consumer/customer of services provided by government agencies. It is in this context that
the use of information technology in government and in governance is examined in the
following chapters. First, the use of information technology in traditional ‘e-government’
initiatives is examined and subsequently, the innovative use of information to facilitate
citizen involvement in governance by taking advantage of local government
computerization is examined through two initiatives - PROOF and Ward Works.
85
Chapter 5
E-GOVERNMENT: POLICY, INTERPRETATION, PROJECTS & USAGE
This chapter begins with an examination of what e-government means in India
and in Karnataka State. India’s status in e-government is examined through the various
indices published by the UN, the World Economic Forum, and the Global e-government
study by the Brown University. E-government in Karnataka is analyzed through policy
statements and interviews with individuals responsible for implementing e-government
projects. Bangalore, as the capital of the state, is affected by these policies, visions, and
actions. Next it provides an overview of what e-government websites were accessible to
citizens. This is broken down into two parts, at the state level and at the level of
Bangalore city. This is necessary since even though the internet is global in nature, local
government and politics are local and it is necessary to understand the intersection
between the two. Subsequent to this, the research question related to whether ICTs
influence interactions between citizens and local government is addressed. The chapter
concludes with an analysis of whether the use of ICTs promotes citizen participation in
local government in Bangalore City.
5.1 India: Information Technology and E-government
India is a relatively large country with tremendous diversity in terms of
technological development, political culture and social practices across its states. It
contains characteristics both of an agricultural society transitioning to an industrial one
and an industrial society evolving into an information society. Some basic statistics
about the country that will help situate the discussion of ICT use in Bangalore are
provided below.
86
India Profile
as of 2004
Total population
1.1 billion
GNI, Atlas method (current US$)
674.6 billion
Value added in agriculture (% of GDP)
21.8
Value added in industry (% of GDP)
26.1
Value added in services (% of GDP)
52.2
Exports of goods and services (% of GDP)
15.3
Imports of goods and services (% of GDP)
17.2
High-technology exports ( % of manufactured exports) 4.8
Fixed lines and mobile telephones
71 (per 1,000 people)
Internet users
17.5(per 1000 people)
Figure 5-1: World Development Indicators database, August 2005
India: ICT indicators
Internet
users as %
of total
population of
1.1 billion as
of 2005
4.5 2
Women as
% of
Internet
users
23 3
literacy rate
% as of 2001
65.38%1
Female
Male
54
75
Female
professionals &
technical
workers as% of
total
20.5 4
Figure 5-2: Sources - see footnote 1
Internet adoption has continued to grow though at a slow pace. Of the total of 1.1
billion population, there were about 50.6 million Internet users and 787,543 internet hosts
in February 20055. Though there were 69 million mobile telephone users, internet access
through mobile phones has not become popular in India.
According to the Internet and mobile association of India (IAMAI), a trade
association representing the e-commerce, mobile commerce and online advertising
industry, Indians who use the Internet go online for a number of activities including email and IM (98 percent); job search (51 percent); banking (32 percent); bill payment (18
percent); stock trading (15 percent); and matrimonial search (15 percent)6. Over 78% of
the internet users are in the age group 18 – 39 years and 75% of the internet users are
87
males. The capital cities (New Delhi and Other State Capitals) account for 79% of
internet connections of the country. Over 61% of the users access internet from school,
colleges, place of work and cyber cafes while 27% access internet from homes.7
By early 2005 there were about 700,000 broadband subscribers – a penetration of
less 0.1%. Adoption of a new broadband policy has encouraged adoption. In February
2006, a monthly broadband subscription cost 199 rupees (US $4.50). An IT & Telecom
Ministry initiative makes computers available for purchase under 10,000 rupees (US
$226). However this has to be viewed in the context of 250 million people who live on
less than a dollar a day and 700 million more who live on less than $2 a day (Hughes,
2005, May 9).
Digital divide remains a major issue. The most affluent groups, concentrated in
major cities, with good knowledge of English, education and cutting edge IT knowledge
constitute the vast majority of users. Keniston (2004) identifies four areas which
manifest the digital divide: Disparities in access to ICTs between rich and poor nations, a
linguistic-cultural gap online between the dominant Anglo-Saxon culture and other
cultures, the gap within a country between the digitally empowered rich and the poor; and
the emerging gap between an affluent elite digerati from the rest of the people since they
live in special enclaves and disregards local conventions, authority and traditional
hierarchies. A majority of India’s population lives in rural areas, is poor, and has limited
access to ICTs. There is also a great need for development of Indian language fonts to
remove language barriers and facilitate localization of content.
88
5.1.1 E-government in India
There are many different studies and reports that rank the e-government status of
countries. This review will examine those of the UN, the World Economic Forum, and
the Global e-government study by the Brown University to look at the status of egovernment in India.
In the 2005 UN Global E-government Survey, India’s e-government readiness
was ranked 5th behind Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Maldives, and Uzbekistan in the South
and Central Asia region. The e-government readiness of a country in this report was
assessed by the effort a government made for the provision of e-services, the extent of
connectivity it provided and the human skills available to access these services. It is a
composite index comprising web measure, infrastructure and human capital assessment.
In the web measure index, that assessed the websites of the governments to determine if
they were employing e-government to the fullest, India had a rank of 33 of the 179
countries that were online in some form.
In terms of utilization, defined as services provided as a percentage of the
maximum services available in a category, India was placed in the 34-66% utilization
category. The country lagged behind in interactive, transactional and network services. In
e-participation index, a composite assessment of e-Information, e-Consultation, and eDecision Making1, India got a score of 12 and was placed in the 33-64% category.
1
E-information assesses the relevance and quality of features on the websites, items such as the
links to policies, programs, laws, mandates and other briefs on key public issues
of interest. among other things, it assesses the relevance of ‘the use of e-mail notification and web
personalization for timely access’; ‘the use of public information on key issues’; ‘the relevance of
the ‘calendar of events/events’; ‘the listing for issue-specific topics open to citizen
participation’; and ‘relevant citizen-to-citizen web forums and newsgroups’. E-consultation
constitutes the use of ICTs for promoting access and inclusion through online consultations. E-
89
While these numbers provide a sense of where countries are placed on a relative
scale, they are not free of controversy. For example, Singapore was noted by the UN
Report as a global leader in providing participatory networked services, that is,
employing e-government to engage the citizen in a dialogue and endowing government
websites with features and services aimed at encouraging partnership with the citizen for
public policy making. However, ‘participation to do what or to what end’ is not specified
in the report. In the UN Report, Singapore ranks # 2 behind the United Kingdom and
ahead of the United States. However, it is important to note that Singapore is ranked at
139 out of 194, as a ‘not free’ country by Freedom House based on the Singapore
government’s record of successfully suing its critics8. Participation could involve
criticism of policies and suggesting changes and it is not clear if this aspect of
participation has been taken into account in the UN Report’s definition of participation.
According to the Global e-government study by the Brown University, India was
placed at 24.8 on an e-government index of 100 with Taiwan rated the best at 57.2 (West,
2005). In the World Economic Forum’s global Information Technology Report (2005),
India’s networked readiness index score was 0.23, giving it the 40th ranking out of 115
countries.
In summary, though India is not ranked very high on the various indices, it
provides some e-government initiatives that offer citizens information and services.
In 2005 India added a Portal on Government Policies, http://policies.gov.in/,
where agencies and departments can publish their policies. Along with downloadable
policy documents, contact information for the individual responsible for each policy is
decision-making is the use of ICTs towards a partnership between the government and the citizen
for participatory and deliberative decision making on public policy.
90
listed, so that people can make comments, or give other input related to the policy by
calling or e-mailing the responsible individual, or by using the provided online comment
form. The site promises that queries and suggestions regarding any policy shall be
directly forwarded to the concerned Department. Another noteworthy website is provided
by the Department of Administrative Reforms & Public Grievances. The Online Public
Grievance Lodging and Monitoring site, http://www.darpg-grievance.nic.in/, enables
users to lodge a complaint about an issue that was not resolved through the regular
administrative procedure of the agency and to track the status of grievances lodged. The
website also allows the government to track the number of grievances lodged against
various agencies and departments to highlight problem areas that require improvement or
reform. Through these two online mechanisms, India is increasing its citizens’ access and
soliciting their views to help shape how government fulfills its mandates in a more
efficient manner.
5.1.2 E-government policy
The Government of India approved a National E-Governance action Plan
(NEGP) for implementation during 2003-2007, subject to funds approval by the Planning
Commission and Ministry of Finance. In explaining the vision of e-government in India,
Mr. Chandrashekar, the joint secretary, Department of Information Technology, has
stated that “all government services must be accessible to the common man , in his
locality, throughout his life through a One-stop-shop (integrated service delivery)
ensuring efficiency, transparency & reliability at affordable costs to meet the basic needs
of the common man”. In defining e-governance, he states that “e-Governance is not about
‘e’ but about governance; e-Governance is not about computers but about citizens; e-
91
Governance is not about translating processes, but about transforming processes”
(Chandrashekar, 2005, March 15).
The NEGP vision lays emphasis on the following: Focus on Public Service
Delivery & Outcomes through process re-engineering and change management, radically
change the way government delivers services; Centralized Initiative and Decentralized
Implementation; and each department is expected to select and empower Mission
Implementation Teams. The Plan provides for a cabinet committee on e-governance that
will deal with all the program-level policy decisions.
According to the plan, all services will be supported by 3 infrastructure pillars to
facilitate web-enabled Anytime, Anywhere access. These 3 pillars are State Wide Area
Networks (SWANs)/NICNET , National Data Bank/ State Data Centres ( SDCs) ;
Common Service Centres (CSCs) that will operate as the primary mode of delivery (a
target of reaching 100,000 villages by 2007). This plan identifies the following areas as
‘mission mode project areas’ at the state level : Land Records, Property Registration,
Transport, Agriculture , Municipalities, Gram Panchayats, Commercial Taxes,
Treasuries, Police, Employment Exchange, Education and Civil Supplies. The Plan
declares that the state level projects will be the responsibility of the state governments,
overseen by a State-level Apex Committee headed by Cabinet Secretary, Central
government will assist to cover initial cost of State projects, each state project will be
under the overall guidance of a respective Central Ministry and financial support will be
provided by the National Planning Commission. The Department of information
technology will address interoperability and standardization issues. The National
92
Informatics Centre will provide the network backbone, nationwide communication
network and e-government support to the state governments.
The World Bank has agreed in principle to provide financial assistance to the tune
of $500 million over the next four years for the National e-Governance Action Plan.
Apart form providing funds, the World Bank is expected to support India's e-governance
initiative at the management and capacity building level (Kaur, 2005, April 16).
5.1.3 E-government in practice: What is the status?
E-government has been described as a continuum that begins when public
agencies publish static information on the Internet and advance to providing more
dynamic transactional services and interaction (Heeks, 1999). Adoption of digital
technology by governments covers the entire spectrum from ignoring technology to using
it mainly to automate information storage, to idolizing the potential of technology and
flooding the public sector with IT-driven reform processes. Initiatives in India can be
placed all along this continuum.2
The amount of government information available to citizens through websites has
increased from 2000, when there were no websites as seen in the figure below.
2
A listing of all the major e-government projects in India can be found at
http://www.egovindia.org/egovportals.html
93
Government of India websites as of May 15, 2006
CATEGORY
INDIAN GOVERNMENT
Executive
Legislature
Judiciary
States [Including Districts]
Districts
INSTITUTIONS/ORGANISATIONS
Banking, Financial & Insurance
Co-operatives
Cultural
Educational
Health & Medical
Public Sectors & Joint Ventures
Scientific & Research
Sports
Tourism & Hospitality
INTERNATIONAL PRESENCE
Indian Missions Abroad
Intergovernmental Organisations in India
COMMITTEES/DOCUMENTS
Committees, Commissions etc.
Documents, Reports, Surveys etc.
MISCELLANEOUS
Events
Total Number of UNIQUE Entries
TOTAL
1265
18
57
2738
470
91
24
62
613
107
31
193
25
53
92
75
63
36
10
3424
Figure 5-3: Government of India Directory, http://www.goidirectory.nic.in/statistics.asp
However, e-government that is interactive is more elusive. Interactivity that
allows for two way communications, can begin with basic functions like email contact
information to reach government officials, to feedback forms that allow users to submit
comments on policy proposals. Most websites provide contact information. However,
few allow for feedback and comments. An example of this is the website of the Central
Vigilance Commission (CVC, India). In an effort to combat corruption in public
institutions and promote transparency, the CVC publishes information about convictions,
investigations and penalties and facilitates citizens’ lodging complaints through its
website.
94
Governments have also gone further along in this process and created websites
that allow users to conduct transactions with the government online. Instances of such
initiatives are few, though the Vijayawada online information center in the state of
Andhra Pradesh is a pilot project incorporating these features. Connectivity in rural areas
to enable rural residents to gain access to e-government services has become very
important. A few projects like Gyandoot in the state of Madhya Pradesh and the interstate initiative Drishtee are financed through government schemes and operated by
individuals from local communities. These projects are more comprehensive, and access
to e-government is just one of the services provided.
Technology has also been used to streamline bureaucratic and labor-intensive
procedures. This has been particularly important in areas of revenue generation, to
combat corruption and increase trust in government policies. A good example of this is
the e-toll system in Gujarat state where prior to the automated system, dangerously
overloaded trucks were allowed through toll gates in return for bribes.
All the above initiatives focus more on e-administration and e-services.
Encouraging citizen participation within a democratic decision making process is a more
difficult task for governments in India particularly because of a traditionally strong
central government. While local government at the village level became more active after
the Panchayati Raj Act was passed, delegation of power has not been successfully
accomplished. This pattern of thwarting decentralization has also been tracked by
Heitzman (1999) in the implementation of the Nagarpalika Act that gave power to
municipalities.
95
There are few examples of state-civil society networks working together to
facilitate participation of citizens in a democratic manner. Linking governance to
democracy brings in issues of legitimacy, responsiveness, pluralism, and managing
public affairs in a transparent, participatory and accountable manner (Brinkerhoff, 1999).
India has many formal accountability mechanisms. It is a parliamentary
democracy where the electoral process acts as an accountability mechanism in addition to
an independent judiciary that can hold the legislative and executive arms of the state
accountable. It has a variety of independent authorities and commissions that perform an
accountability function. India passed a Right to Information Act in 2005, to promote
openness, transparency and accountability in administration. The Central Information
Commission is charged with interpreting this Act. Another government initiative to
increase public accountability is a program introduced in 1997 to institutionalize
"citizens' charters" for the services being rendered by the different ministries/
departments/ enterprises of Government of India. A charter is an explicit statement of
what a public agency is ready to offer as its services, the rights and entitlements of the
people with reference to these services and the remedies available to them should
problems and disputes arise in these transactions. It is seen as a mechanism to increase
the accountability and transparency of the public agencies interfacing with citizens. It
was expected that agencies would become more efficient and responsive to the people as
a result and that the latter would become better informed and motivated to demand better
public services (Paul, 2002).
However the presence of such mechanisms does not guarantee accountability on
the ground. Some of the factors responsible for this are collusion between those who are
96
responsible for performance and those who are charged with their oversight, fragility of
civil society institutions, and the prevalence of corruption (Paul, 2002). Even if they are
achieved, accountability and transparency need not necessarily lead to or facilitate
participation by citizens.
In official discussions about governance, accountability and transparency find
mention but not citizen participation. For example, when Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh took office in 2004, he called for reforms in the process of governance (Deccan
Herald, 2004, July 19). In a letter to the chief ministers of the states, he suggested that the
process of reform would “involve energizing institutions of governance by ensuring
accountability in the provision of public services, transparency in handling public funds
and aligning incentives with desired outcomes”. Encouraging citizen participation
requires an engaged citizenry who trust the government and view its efforts as legitimate.
One way of accomplishing this is to engage all the stakeholders in defining what their
shared vision of governance is, what the role information technology should play in
government and the goals that e-government should accomplish. However, this has not
been documented in the Indian context.
This dissertation will examine an alternative way of employing information
technology within government to facilitate citizen participation in local government in
addition to accountability and transparency in Bangalore City, in South India.
5.2 E-government in Karnataka
Karnataka state has been seen as a pioneer in IT. Its e-readiness for 2004 was
assessed as the highest in India based on its infrastructure, human resources, policy
regimes and investment climate by the Department of Information Technology (Kaur,
97
2005, April 16). It has been cited as a leader in e-government along with the state of
Andhra Pradesh.
According to the official website of the Department of IT and Biotechnology of
the Government of Karnataka, its policy focuses on “using e-governance as a tool and
delivering a government that is more pro-active and responsive to its
citizens.”(Bangaloreit, 2006). According to the objectives stated in the official document
‘e-Governance strategy for Karnataka’, the government believes that information
technology should be used to usher in an era of Electronic Governance aimed at
demystifying the role of Government, simplifying procedures, bringing transparency,
making need-based, good quality and timely information available to all citizens and
providing all services in an efficient and cost-effective way. The government defines egovernment as involving “the application of Information and Communication
Technologies to bring about more speed, transparency and responsiveness to the various
areas of governmental activities resulting in enhanced accountability and empowerment
of people. E-Governance will cover transactions and information exchange between
Government and citizen, Government and business and within Government itself.”
The policy declaration states that the government is convinced that “eGovernance can help bridge the gap between the rich and the poor, between the
developed and the less developed, between the urban and the rural population by
providing equality of opportunity and empowering the poor”. The primary aim of Mahiti
– The Millennium IT Policy is to use “e-Gov as a tool and deliver a government that is
more proactive and responsive to its citizens”9. To this end, government websites should
aid an average citizen by providing contact information that would enable a citizen to
98
find out whom to call or write to, information on services for obtaining a service or
grievance redress, icon based Kannada interface that would facilitate e-Gov access by the
common man, facility for payment of all utility charges online and interactive features
that would facilitate democratic outreach.
The rhetoric of the policy encompasses employing information technology in
service provision by the government and in facilitating democratic outreach between
government and citizens. There is a clearly stated expectation that e-government will lead
to ‘greater transparency, accountability, equality of opportunity and empowerment of the
people’.
In 2001, which was declared as the ‘Year of e-governance’ by the Government of
India, Karnataka’s state government announced a number of e-government initiatives
(New Indian Express, 2001, December 24). To implement these initiatives, the
Government of Karnataka (GoK) relied on infrastructure support provided by the
National Informatics Center (Karnataka) (NIC) and the Software Technology Parks of
India (STPI), Bangalore. In 2003, as part of administrative reforms, GoK created a
position called ‘e-government secretary’. The position of the e-government secretary is a
state level office, and the appointee is selected from the Indian Administrative Service.
Thus, the e-government secretary, the local NIC officers and STPI officials are
responsible for making e-government a reality by interpreting policies and implementing
the projects. To understand e-government in Karnataka and Bangalore, it is important to
comprehend how the officials who implement projects interpret the policies and prioritize
projects.
99
Therefore, interviews were conducted with the e-government secretary, the
deputy director of the Software Technology Parks of India, Bangalore, and an official at
the National Informatics Center (Karnataka). All the interviews were conducted in
December 2003. The National Informatics Center was contacted multiple times about
scheduling an interview with the District Information Officer (Bangalore Urban).
However, I was directed to the website for the role of the NIC and no interview was
officially granted. During my repeated phone calls, one official within the office
mentioned that he and another official would talk to me on the condition that I would not
identify them by name since employees were not encouraged to give interviews and
identifying them would result in causing trouble.
After much consideration, I decided to include these observations since they
provide an insider’s perspective about the NIC’s role. While this is in no way
representative, it is informative in throwing light on the power struggles involved
defining and implementing e-government in Karnataka.
Karnataka is one of the few states with a secretary exclusively responsible for egovernment. The first e-government secretary for Karnataka, Mr. Rajeev Chawla, was
additional secretary in the Department of Revenue for the Government of Karnataka for
five years before he was appointed the e-government secretary. He continued to hold the
position as of May 15, 2006.
During the interview, Mr. Chawla articulated that his primary goal was deploying
IT to make government services available to people in rural areas. His championship of
the Bhoomi project demonstrates this. Bhoomi is a project for the computerized delivery
of 20 million rural land records in Karnataka to 6.7 million farmers through 177
100
government owned kiosks10. Currently, individuals trained in operating the systems at the
kiosk access records and print it out on demand from farmers; farmers do not directly
access records. The goal is to reduce corruption. This is important considering that
Transparency International (India) listed Karnataka as one of the most corrupt states in
the country. The secretary also added that shortage of funds forced the departments to
rely on word of mouth and news stories in the media to communicate the initiatives to the
citizens. There were no funds set aside for publicizing services through advertisements or
public service announcements.
As envisioned by the e-government secretary, the primary beneficiaries of egovernment initiatives are rural residents. This view is consistent with media reports that
Karnataka was driving e-government initiatives in part to ‘rebut criticism that software
boom is only for the rich’ (Sify, 2004, January 24). In December 2004, the Government
of Karnataka signed a contract with Microsoft to develop a government portal accessible
in rural areas through 2000 kiosks to be set up through out the state. As of May 15, 2006
this portal was not yet operational and no official kiosks had been set up.
During the interview Mr. Chawla stated that urban Bangalore was not a priority
area for e-government projects. This comment sheds light on the delays in implementing
a one-stop portal called Bangalore One for urban Bangalore. This portal was to have
started operating in April 2003. During this interview in December 2003, Mr. Chawla
suggested that the delay was due to divergent views among officials about what services
should be provided and how this should be accomplished. (These delays continued to
hinder Bangalore One implementation well into April 2005.)
101
When asked to explain the relatively low priority of e-government for Bangalore
urban area, Mr. Chawla explained that people in urban Bangalore could “fend for
themselves” unlike rural areas of the state and it was the job of individual departments to
provide online services. To some extent this reflects the political imperative to ‘rebut
criticism that software boom is only for the rich’ (Sify, 2004, January 24). While this
argument might be good politically, in practice it is not the most obvious strategy to
achieve quick e-government presence. Rural Karnataka has serious infrastructure issues
that need to be dealt with while urban Bangalore already has the necessary infrastructure
and would require less investment to extend e-government services.
Another important aspect of the interview was his description of Bangalore One.
He described it as “a one-stop-shop where citizens can pay their bills and pay taxes”.
There was no mention of any interactive features such as consultations, discussion or
feedback forum. When asked if any citizens’ inputs were collected to be used in the
discussions on what services were to be provided, he answered that “the National
Institute of Smart Governance was entrusted with the responsibility of conceptualizing
the project and provide consultancy while the state government would handle site
preparation, manpower, training and co-ordination with other departments”.
From the interview, it emerged that in his view, fee-for-service initiatives
constituted e-government. The official policy rhetoric about facilitating equal opportunity,
empowerment of the people, and democratic outreach did not surface in his description of
e-government.
Another government entity crucial to e-government projects is the National
Informatics Center. This Center is part of the Department of Information Technology,
102
Ministry of Communications and IT, Government of India. It established a State unit
(NIC-KSU) in Bangalore in 1987. The Government of Karnataka signed a memorandum
of understanding with NIC-KSU to computerize activities of State/Central government
departments, public sector enterprises and other autonomous organizations in Karnataka.
NIC-KSU has designed, developed and implemented major e-government
projects for the Government of Karnataka. It has centers in all 27 districts of Karnataka
and provides ‘information management and decision support systems’ to government
departments. It is responsible for providing most of the infrastructure requirements such
as servers, routers, bridges/ hubs, multimedia and conference systems, satellite
connections, the radio frequency network in Bangalore city, ISDN nodes and connecting
all the metropolitan areas and major cities of the country.
Though NIC-KSU seems to provide only infrastructure facilities based on the
description found on its website, interviews with officials reveal that NIC also influences
which projects are implemented and how they are implemented. Since the officials were
promised that interviews would remain confidential, they are not identified by name or
position within the organization.
According to one highly placed official at NIC-KSU, NIC handles 70% of IT
projects for the government. He states “they may call for tender, but it is easier for both
parties if it is NIC since we are familiar with governmental routines. Private companies
may have the newest software but they don’t understand government needs or how it
works. They cannot provide technical support or training the way we do. We are always
here to deal with problems.
103
“We have inside knowledge … we have project coordinators for every
government project we handle… they understand the unique problem with government
project … you can’t bring in a solution from Singapore and say wire up your taluka
network when they don’t even have proper electricity or good phone line and all the
information is in 50 year old ledgers. You have to build special systems for the
government, train officers and staff in using the systems and keep teaching again and
again. Also you have to know how to talk to officials about the project, you decide on the
features and tell them what can be done. We will tell them (officials) you can’t do this,
this won’t work and they will listen to us.”
Another official chimed in “tell those private fellows to do local language
interface or say you have to wait because someone got transferred and you have to start
again and those fellows can’t handle it. E-government service is tough. We are the best in
it because we are part of the central government. We won’t go away tomorrow. Private
parties can’t compete with that.”
The comments made by the officials provide insight into the decision making
processes involved in implementing e-government and who exercises power in such
decisions. Even though there is an e-government policy that emphasizes interactive
features to increase democratic outreach, implementing those policies rests with
government officials. If those officials stress bill payment features and choose to ignore
interactive features, the reality of e-government is ‘citizen as customer or consumer’ and
e-governance that enhances citizen participation in governance remains a statement on
paper without being implemented.
104
The third major participant in e-government projects is the Software Technology
Park of India (Bangalore) [STPI] that is assisting the government with computerization of
the treasury and the value added tax systems. STPI was set up in 1991 to promote
software exports by functioning as a single window agency for companies; an agency that
would provide financial, legal and regulatory approvals, offer office space, connectivity
and liaison with customs, telecommunications and the electricity departments. Currently,
STPI provides infrastructure such as VSAT connectivity and virtual private networks.
Mr. Parthasarathy, the deputy director of STPI (Bangalore) was interviewed about
STPI’s role and vision for e-government in Karnataka. He talked about ‘the egovernment market’. According to him, “STPI’s role is providing expertise and
consultancy services to government departments to facilitate growth in the e-government
services market.” Its role as a business incubator seems to have led the organization to
perceive synergies between IT business models and e-government services. STPI has
been hosting the Bangalore IT.com events since 1998. These events serve as annual IT
fairs providing governments with opportunities to showcase their commitments to being
investor friendly for technology companies. The appearance of e-government products
and stalls at the IT fair is an indicator of interest in fostering the ‘e-services market’ and
fee-based e-government services.
Taken together, the views of these important participants in e-government
indicate that they perceive the citizen as a customer or consumer of government services
and e-government as ‘fee-for-service’ initiative.
Evidence of this is provided by the definition of e-governance provided by the
government on the official website of the Department of IT and Biotechnology,
105
Government of Karnataka. According to the website “E-governance or electronic
governance may be defined as delivery of government services and information to the
public using electronic means.”
Even though the Mahiti policy document discusses using e-government to address
both the citizens’ need for services and empowering citizens, in practice only the citizens’
need for services is addressed. Among officials a managerial model dominates over the
participatory democratic possibilities of e-government.
5.2.1 Government services available to citizens that could be accessed
through the use of ICTs between June and August 2004
This section will first examine the services available at the state level. This is
relevant since the Internet has global presence and any website that provides information
and services at the State level is also relevant to citizens in Bangalore. Secondly, it will
examine the local government websites that are particularly relevant to citizens residing
in Bangalore.
In the table below, the various e-government initiatives undertaken in Karnataka
are listed. These websites were available between June 2003 and August 2004 and the
data remains current as of May 15, 2006.
Table 5-1: Government services accessible to citizens online
Project
Mukhya Vahini
(department
information system )
Department
Decision
support
system for
Chief
Minister of
State
Services
available
Information on
specific govt.
projects Operational
What
citizens
can do?
Not for use
by citizens
Comments
System in
place, but
not
extensively
used since
fall of S.M.
Krishna
106
Secretariat LAN
Intra
department
Monitoring
files, letters,
personnel,
budget
proposals and
court cases
Not for use
by citizens
Raitamitra;
Agriculture
Website ;
Online
agricultural
price
information
system (was
visited 32216
times since
17/10/2005); as
of May 15,
2006.
Website; check
posts
computerized;
Department
activities,
records
computerized
Can get
information
on farming,
weather;
crop prices;
send
emails;
comment
on website
through
guest book.
Can get
information
, but have
to visit
offices
physically
to
undertake
transaction
s
Can get
information
on policy,
Bangalore;
register
with GoK;
post
feedback,
send
emails;
http://raitamitra.kar.ni
c.in
Krishi Marata Vahini
Commercial Tax
http://kar.nic.in/ctax
www.bangaloreit.com
site visited 164489
times since 28 Nov.
2000 ; as of May 15,
2006.
www.bangalorebio.com
site visited
218125 times since
12 February 2001; as
of May 15, 2006.
Commercial
Tax
Department
Department of
Information
Technology &
Biotechnolog
y
Websites;
developed
Kannada
software
downloadable
freely;
connections to
other relevant
sites
government
6 out of 23
departments
claim to
have
software to
use the
system,
claim cannot
be verified
except at
Revenue
Department
Weather
information
incomplete;
not updated
for 5 months
at a time;
kannada
language
fonts do not
show up in
links.
Department
activities
computerize
d, but no
online
transactions
can be
completed
Bangaloreit.
com address
has changed
but no
correction
has been
made on
website;
some links
do not work
and have not
been fixed
107
Results online,
computerized
counseling
Education
Department
State budget
Finance
Department
Targeted Public
System (TPS)
Food and
Civil Supplies
Department
CORMIS
Forest
Department
Crime Criminal
Information System
Police, Home
Department
www.karnatakahousing
.com
Karnataka
Housing
Board,
Housing
Department
http://www.khbcustom
erinfo.com
for 4-5
months.
Online allotment Refer to
Most used
of seats to
information site among
professional
online
18-25 age
courses, class 10
group
and 12 exam
results online
Department
Refer to
Site not
computerized
information updated
since 2004
Management
Not for use No
information
by citizens information
system in place
on status of
TPS project
provided in
spite of
repeated
phone calls
to office,
July 2005
Pilot projects in Not for use No public
using
by citizens information
management
available
information
about status
system and
of project
Geographical
according to
information
Department
system (GIS) for
secretary,
mapping
July 2005
Police stations
No direct
computerized;
contact
Vehicle
with
verification
computeriz
counter
ed systems,
operational
can request
since 2002
information
in person at
the vehicle
verification
counter
Department
Can get
computerized;
information
Website
on policies;
house
vacancy;
108
Kannadasri
http://kannadasiri.kar.
nic.in/
www.kar.nic.in/pwd/
Bhoomi – Refer
http://www.revdept01.kar.nic.in/
Kannada and
Culture
Department
Karnataka
Government
Insurance
Department
Planning
Department
Public Works
Department
Website
Department
computerized
Computerized
Data entry and
report
generation at
district level
Website; GIS
use
Registration
and Stamps
Department
Department
computerized;
sub registry
offices
computerized;
Revenue
Department
Computerized
land records
application
status;
download
forms; send
email, file
complaints,
provide
suggestions
Can get
information
on policy
Not for use
by citizens
Not for use
by citizens
Get
information
, maps of
roads;
access
manageme
nt
information
system
reports for
2005
Get
information
on stamp
fee rates,
download
formats
Can obtain
land
records and
documents
at Bhoomi
kiosks; No
direct
access to
computeriz
MIS reports
not updated
since March
2005; as of
May 15,
2006.
Most well
recognized
project;
Citizens
cannot
request
documents
online, have
to physically
109
ed data
e-Nondhani and
Kaveri
Revenue
Department
Computerized
property
registration
Khajane
Treasury
Department
http://rto.kar.nic.in/
Transport
Department
V-SAT based
online banking
for Karnataka
Treasury –
computerized
banking
Computerization
of vehicle
registration,
taxation process;
drivers license
process
Computerization of
Corporations and
Municipal
Administration
Urban
Development
Department
Bangalore
Development
Authority
http://www.bdabanga
lore.org/
Urban
Development
Department
http://www.karigr.org/
travel to a
kiosk located
in their
taluk/ district
(administrati
ve unit)
Get
High impact
information in reducing
on property corruption;
valuation,
as of May 15
download
2006 website
forms,
accessible
provide
only in
suggestions English, not
in local
language
Kannada.
Not for
Expected to
direct use
speed up
by citizens treasury
payments to
pensioners
Get
information
on policies;
track
application;
download
forms.
No online
transactions
can be
undertaken,
however
computerizat
ion is
expected to
reduce
corruption.
Computerization
In
of birth and
Bangalore,
death records,
this is
pilot projects in
supposed to
property tax
work
through
Bangalore
One Portal
Computerized
Access
Cannot make
allotment of
information online
sites;
on land
payments as
plots,
of May 15,
download
2006
110
http://www.waterreso
urces.kar.nic.in
Water
Resources
Department
Computerized
database of
water sources
forms; file
complaints;
Access
information
and
policies
e-tendering
announced
but not
operational
as of May
15, 2006
http://www.kar.nic.in
National
Portal providing Access
Most
Informatics
access to
information comprehensi
Center –
multiple sites
and
ve website
Karnataka
for Government policies,
State Unit
of India and
follow
Government of
links to
Karnataka
external
departments
sites
Project information source: Department of Information Technology and Biotechnology,
Government of Karnataka- http://www.bangaloreit.in/html/egovern/department.htm and
http://www.karnataka.com/govt/links.shtml
Information Availability: As of August 31, 2004 all the websites listed above
provided contact information. They had telephone numbers, email addresses and mail
addresses. Bangaloreit.com and NIC provided links to other websites. However, none of
them provided any online publications, searchable online databases, or audio clips.
Service delivery: Bangaloreit.com (5) and NIC (7) were the two websites that
offered the maximum number of services as of August 31, 2004. None of the websites
offered services that could be completely performed online without physically visiting a
government office or government kiosk. They did not offer electronic payment facilities
where payment could be made through credit card or direct bank deposit 11. None of the
websites allowed digital signatures. On all the websites, even when forms were accessible,
the citizen had to print the form and mail it back or hand deliver the completed form to
obtain the service, none of them could be counted as transactions fully executed online.
111
Privacy and security: None of the websites had visible statements about privacy of
data or security policies of the government. This is understandable since there were no
facilities to enable the citizen to share information with the government online. There
were no statements regarding cookies or the disclosure of information to law enforcement
officials.
Public Access: Public access was assessed based on features that would help
citizens contact government officials and use the information provided on the websites.
All the websites listed above provided email addresses of the officials to be contacted.
However, they did not have search functions that would help citizens look for specific
kinds of information. There were no features to help citizens get updates about
information on the websites either through email or mobile phone.
5.3 E-government in Bangalore
As noted earlier, e-government services for Bangalore city was not prioritized for
a long time after the Mahiti policy was announced. When field work was conducted for
this dissertation between June 2003 and August 30, 2004, the only local government
website available to citizens was that of the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BMP). As
noted earlier, the BMP is responsible for civic development within the Greater Bangalore
Metropolitan area, which covers 224.66 sq. km. (divided into 100 wards) with a
population of 6.8 million. BMP handles more than 20 different types of functions that
allow it to interface with Bangalore’s citizens.
The website www.blrbmp.org was created in May 2000 under Commissioner K.
Jairaj. On this website, there were nine sections to provide information : BMP (listing its
short history, names of the Commissioner, Mayor, Deputy Mayor), protocol(listing of
112
road digging activities), Budget (features of the budget), committees (standing
committees of BMP), Public Grievance Cell (with a format to register complaints), the
Garden City (important landmarks of the City), Your Representatives (names of the
councilors), Self-Assessment Scheme (property tax) and the Vision (BMP vision
statement). One year after the launch of the website, complaints surfaced that the website
was not updated, contained incorrect information, and did not contain information that
might be useful to citizens (Belgaumkar, 2001).
Confusion about the official site of the BMP began when the Bangalore Agenda
Task Force (BATF) created another website for the BMP called www.blrbmp.com.
However, this site was not the official website of the BMP and so did not provide access
to any online services. The links were commercial in nature advertising services provided
sponsors. A new website was created for the BMP called www.bmponline.org in June
2004. This website had more links than the old versions. However under the tab ‘citizen
friendly schemes’, it listed 9 schemes though the links were not functional. There were
no links to the list of councilors or standing committees, no services or information
related to services were provided online. BMP’s official website did not provide accurate
information about who the mayor was – it had not been updated when data collection
ended on August 31, 2004. There were no email addresses where citizens could reach the
Mayor or the Commissioner. There was no search function or a feature that would enable
citizens to comment. There was no statement about privacy of information since there
were no features to facilitate exchange of information between citizens and government.
News reports suggest that the situation of lack of up to date information and lack of
citizen friendly services continued into the year 2005 (Yasmeen, 2005).
113
The other local government website that was expected to be accessible was the
Bangalore One portal. However, this portal did not become operational between 2003
and 2004 due to many delays. On August 19, 2004 the GoK announced that Bangalore
One was scheduled to be launched in December 2004 (Deccan Herald, 2004, August 19).
Additional Chief Secretary Vijay Gore announced that 15 locations had been identified
across Bangalore city to house the portals which would provide a ‘one-stop shop for
citizens with state government and semi-government organizations’. There were further
delays and on December 20, 2004 the e-government secretary announced that Bangalore
One kiosks would begin operating from April 2005 (Press Trust of India, 2004,
December 20). He also announced that the GoK had invested Rs. 40 million and private
firms invested Rs 10 million under a ‘build-own-operate-transfer’ model. Private firms
would run the service from five years employing 20 people per kiosk and about 24
government to citizen services would be available.
Thus, when citizens were surveyed for this research between June 2003 and
August 2004, no local government services were available to Bangalore’s citizens online.
They could obtain some basic information about the BMP. Most of the sites that were
accessible as part of e-government, were those maintained by state level institutions.
5.4 The Survey Participants
There were 993 participants, 603 (61% ) men and 390 (39%) women. A majority
of the participants were unmarried 540 (54%); 133 were married with no children (76
men, 57 women) while 307 were married with children. Of these 307, 140 individuals
had one child, while 149 had two children. There were 12 ( 9 men, 3 women) who were
divorced in the sample. Of these 12, three did not have children, six had one child and
114
three had two children. 47% (465) of the participants were in the 18-25 age group,
followed by 29% (290) in the 26-35 age group, 17% (166) in the 36-45 and 7% (72) in
the 45 to 60 age group. The sample did not have any one above age 60. A reason for this
could be that the survey was conducted in public places between 9 am and 6 pm when
older people might be expected to stay home. This is a limitation of the sample.
In terms of education, 60.8% (604) of the sample were graduates and 29.8% of
the sample (296) had some college level education. 7% (70) had post graduate or higher
degree and only 2.3% (23) had completed grade 10 level education. Thus the sample
indicates a high level of education. Again, this could be an artifact of the sampling
method thus constituting a limitation.
In the N = 993 sample, 66% (658 individuals – 376 men and 282 women)
indicated that they did not use computers. 335 individuals (227 men and 108 women),
that is 33%, indicated that they used computers. Of those who use computers, 156 used
computers at work, 97 in cyber cafes, 71 at home and 11 at friend’s home.
This data has to be considered in the light of some basic statistics for Bangalore
city. Bangalore is the fifth most populous city in India with a population of 6.52 million.
Yet, the city has only 9,16,065 telephone connections and just over 60,000 internet
connections.12 The average per capita income in the city for 2002-03 was Rs. 18,000 ( Rs
43 = US$1) (Directorate of Economics and Statistics, 2003). In 2004, the cost of buying a
computer in Bangalore was about Rs. 40,000. Accessories such as printers, and ensuring
Internet connection for a year can cost anywhere between Rs. 5000 to 10,000.
Investment in a computer can be an expensive proposition. Thus, except in upper-income
enclaves or families with an employee who could secure loans, home access to a
115
computer and the Internet was not a common phenomenon. Many people use cyber cafes
to access computers but there are no official statistics about the number of cyber cafes in
Bangalore city or the number of people who use cyber cafes.
The socio economic status (SES) of the participants in this sample was tracked
through home ownership and vehicle ownership since Bangaloreans are wary of
revealing income data. These two factors are good indicators of SES since it is
considered important to own a vehicle – either two wheeler or a car, and to buy a home.
In terms of home ownership, 47% of participants stated they owned their own homes, 5%
leased their residence, 27% lived with family or friends and 21% paid rent. In terms of
vehicle ownership, most of the participants (89%) either own a two wheeler (59%) or a
car (30%). About 8% use employer provided transport (particularly common among
young people working for companies located in Electronics City) and 3% rely on public
transportation. When taken together, this indicates that the sample consists of individuals
who are not poor. In terms of media ownership, 94% of the participants owned a
television set, 83.4% owned cell phones. However, only 18.7% own a computer. This is
consistent with the data that indicates that most participants use computers at work or in a
cyber cafe. To summarize, the sample was predominantly made up of young, well
educated individuals who could belong to the middle class or higher income group. This
is the group of individuals who might be expected to use computers in Bangalore.
5.4.1 Analysis
There is a significant gender difference among computer users.
A 2x2 chi square test revealed that a significantly larger percentage of men
(67.8%) than women (32.2%) use computers, χ 2(1, N= 993) = 10.49, V = .10, p < .001.
116
Age, marital status or having children did not make a significant difference to whether
people used computers or not. Gender difference also exists in location of computer use.
A larger percentage of men (49.8%) than women (39.8%) accessed computers at work,
whereas a larger percentage of women (50.9%) than men (18.5%) accessed computers at
cyber cafes, χ 2(3, N= 335) = 43.27, V = .36, p < .001. Individuals who were graduates
were significantly more likely to have used computers for 3 or more years (72.4%) than
non graduates (26.2%), χ 2(4, N= 335) = 120.64, V = .60, p < .001.
5.4.2 What people did online
Activity
Number of individuals
Email
297
Chat
139
News/financial information
176
Job information
72
Academics/ education
137
Music, ring tone downloads
103
Movies, sports,
119
matrimonial, entertainment
Shopping
77
Bill payment, online bank
27
transaction
Table 5-2: Online Activity as a percentage of users
% of users (N= 335)
88.65%
41.49%
52.53%
21.49%
40.89%
30.74%
35.52%
22.98%
8%
A separate question asked people whether they had used e-government websites
in the previous 6 months. 69 people (57 men and 12 women) indicated that they had
visited e-government websites.
5.4.3 What government services did citizens access?
The information related to this question was obtained by an open ended question
included in the survey stating “please mention the government websites you have visited
in the last six months”. Participants mentioned the service; the website address is
included in the table for reference.
117
Table 5-3: Services accessed by citizens
Government Website
Number who
visited it in the
last six
months*
48
Passport status –
http://kar.nic.in/passport/instr.htm
Class 12 state exam results
28
http://www.puc.kar.nic.in
Karnataka Public Service Commission
22
http://kpsc.kar.nic.in
Textbooks online
17
http://dsert.kar.nic.in/textbooksonline/first.asp
Commercial Tax Department
9
http://nitpu3.kar.nic.in/ctax
BMRDA http://www.bmrda.org
5
Bangalore International Airport Area
2
Planning Authority http://www.biappa.in
Consumer case status
1
http://kscdrc.kar.nic.in/cs.htm
* The same citizens indicated accessing multiple websites.
% of total (total
number who used egovernment websites
= 69)
70%
40%
32%
24%
13%
7%
2.8%
1%
Considering that only 69 individuals in the survey had actually visited e-government
websites, the next question to be addressed is :
5.4.4 Does the use of ICTs influence/ change interactions between citizens
and local government? If so how?
To address this, the survey included a set of questions related to (a) how people
got access to information about their local government, and (b) how people contacted
their local government official or local political representative.
To measure how people accessed information about local government services,
the survey had two questions. One question asked citizens how they preferred to get
information about their local government services. The choices provided for the sources
included the following – Visit government office, telephone, websites and an open
118
category other. If citizens mentioned visiting an e-government website, they were asked
what they did when they visited e-government websites, and whether they found the
information on the website different from what they would have gathered from other
sources.
To examine whether there was any difference in how citizens contacted their local
government official or local political representative, the survey contained the following
questions:
In the last year, have you contacted your local political representative through email?
In the last year, have you sent an email to a local government official (BMP officials,
BWSSB, BESCOM, Health officer, ward Executive or Assistant Engineer)?
Results:
Out of the 993 participants, 69 indicated they had used e-government websites.
82% of those participating in the survey indicated that they preferred to visit government
offices to gain information about local government services. The telephone was the
preferred by 13%, friend and neighbors by 3% and e-government websites by 1%.
Table 5-4: Preferred source of information about local government services
Preferred source of
Used e-government
Never used etotal
information
government site
number
%
number
%
number
%
Visit government office
24
35
789
85
813
82
Telephone
31
45
100
11
131
13
e-government website
11
16
0
0
11
1
Other (friends/neighbors)
0
0
27
3
27
3
Missing
3
4
8
1
11
1
Total
69
100
924
100
993
100
There are no previous studies that would help to assess how ICTs might have changed
previous information seeking patterns. However, results seem to suggest that internet and
119
computers have not become primary sources of information about local government
services.
5.4.5 What did citizens do when they visited e-government websites?
Table 5-5: E-government website activity
Type of activity
Number Exclusively
involved in activity
Look up contact information
56
Download forms
5
Look up government policy
8
Provide information/ fill
0
forms online
Total number of people
61
12
11
0
Only the 69 survey participants who had visited e-government websites answered
this question. Of the 61 who looked up contact information, 1 person also downloaded a
form, and 4 persons looked up contact information, government policy and downloaded a
form. Among those looked up government policy, 2 of them also downloaded a form
from the website.
In answering the question whether they found that the information on the websites
was different from what they would have gathered from other sources (visiting
government office, telephone, others), 87% (60 people) said that they found no difference
in the information available on the government websites. There was no information on
the website that they could not have found through the other sources. This indicates that
though websites offer a tremendous opportunity to provide additional or in depth
information and search features, this was not taken advantage of. So people who visited
the websites did not feel they got any additional information. There was no additional
incentive to use the online option rather than the traditional channels. People will access
government services online only if doing so is quicker, easier or cheaper than going
through conventional channels.
120
There was only 1 person in the entire survey sample of 993 who had sent an email
to the local government official. The person indicated in parenthesis that no reply was
received to the email sent. None of the 993 individuals had contacted their local political
representative (BMP councilor) through email.
Thus the data indicates that ICTs have not substantially impacted how people
gather information about local government or how they contact their local government
officials or political representatives. This immediately raises the question, why has it not
had an impact? To understand this, it is important to know why, among the 69 people
who had visited the e-government websites, only 11 (16%) stated that those websites
would be their preferred source of information about local government services. To
explain this preference it is necessary to examine what websites they had visited in the
past year. 7 of these individuals had visited the Karnataka Public Service Commission
website. This site provides details to applicants about acceptance or rejections to the
service and is the best source for such information. The other 4 had visited the
commercial tax department website that provides details on new tax policies.
It is interesting that of the remaining 58 individuals who had visited e-government
websites, 31 preferred to get information through telephone and 24 preferred to visit a
local government office. What factors could explain why this is the case?
5.5 What are some reasons why citizens do not use the websites?
This question was examined first for the group of citizens who have visited egovernment websites since a majority of them (58 out of 69) stated that their preferred
source of information about local government services was not e-government websites.
As part of the survey, citizens were asked to rate websites on whether they found the
121
material up to date, relevant, useful, reliable, easy to understand on a scale of 1 (least) to
5 (most). The results of their ratings are summarized below.
Most citizens who visited e-government websites did not find the content up to
date. The mean score was M =1.3, SD = 0.60, the mode was 1. None of the 69 citizens
rated the websites above 3 on the scale; 53 found them to be least up to date. In terms of
relevance of the content, the mean score was M =2.1, SD = 0.75, the mode was 2. Again,
none of them rated the relevance to be above 3 on the scale. The usefulness of the
material found on the websites was also rated quite low, mean score being M =2.22, SD =
0.80, mode 3. The higher modal score could be related to the fact that most people used
the websites to get contact information. In terms of ease with which the material on the
websites could be accessed, citizens rated it at M = 2.88, SD = 0.58, mode = 3. This was
the question where 5 citizens rated the websites at level 4 on the scale of 1 (least) to 5
(most). Reliability was the feature that was rated lowest, with a mean score of M =1.17,
SD = 0.48, mode = 1.
It is clear that most citizens who did use e-government websites at some point
during the previous 6 months, found the content to be unreliable due to the very fact that
content was not updated.
What might be some reasons why citizens who use computers did not visit egovernment sites? One method of answering this question would be looking at survey
questions about knowledge of e-government projects and websites and the source for
such information. Another is examining answers to the open question about any problems
faced when trying to access government websites.
122
Of the 993 participants, 892 (89.73%) indicated that they did not know about egovernment services available for local government in Bangalore city.
What sources do people rely on to get information about e-government projects?
78% (773) relied on television or radio, 13% (129) on newspapers or magazines, 9 %
(91) on word of mouth.
Electronic media, particularly TV and radio, are not conducive for in depth
coverage of e-government unless there are paid public service advertisements or
announcements. Since the e-government secretary mentioned in his interview that no
funds were available for such publicity and that the departments relied on news media
stories and word of mouth for publicity, low knowledge of e-government services is not
surprising.
From the above analysis, it is clear that until August 31, 2004, the use of
information and communication technologies had not significantly affected how citizens
accessed information about local government or contacted their local government
officials or political representatives.
5.6 Information technology and participation in local government
The next question to be examined is did the use of information and
communication technology by the Bangalore City Corporation promote citizen
participation in local government in Bangalore City?
The variables used to measure participation in local government were voting in
BMP elections, campaigning, attending meetings or rallies, and contacting public
officials (BMP, Corporators, BWSSB, Bescom, BSNL).
123
A chi square analysis was conducted to examine whether there were any
significant differences between computer users and nonusers in participating in local
government.
Among the survey participants, a majority of them 712 (71.7%) did not vote in the
November 2001 BMP election. Low voter turn out in local elections is common in
Bangalore A 2x2 chi square revealed no significant difference between computer users
(71.3%) and nonusers (71.9%) in terms of voting χ 2(1, N= 993) = 0.03, p > .05. Only 6
individuals in the sample of 993 indicated they took part in campaigning and they were
all non computer users. However, due to the small number, there was no statistically
significant difference between the two groups.
Although a larger percentage of non computer users (38.4%) attended meetings/
rallies than computer users (19.6%) there was no significant difference among the two
groups in attending meetings or rallies though 58 individuals (18 computer users and 40
non users) indicated they had attended meetings or participated in rallies, χ 2(1, N= 993)
= 0.20, p > .05. Considering the large percentage differences, it is possible that the lack
of statistical significance is the result of small numbers within the cells in the chi square
test.
Finally, though a slightly higher percentage of computer users contacted local
officials (22.4%) than non computer users (21.4%), there was no statistically significant
difference between the two groups, χ 2(1, N= 993) = 0. 12, p > .05. It is possible that
rather than computer use, personality might explain greater contact with local officials.
Individuals who are dynamic might be open to using computers (which are seen as new
media) and might take the initiative to contact local officials.
124
From the above analysis it is clear that, for this sample of survey participants,
information technology did not influence whether they participated in local government
or not. And since the websites of the local government agencies were not geared towards
promoting citizen consultation, discussion or even two way transactions where citizens
could search for information and provide inputs, information technology has not led to
citizen participation in the traditional ways.
5.6 Discussion
The results suggest distinct gender differences in computer use and location of
computer use. While the survey sample was comprised of more men (61%) than women
(39%), this alone cannot explain the gender difference. The higher number of men in the
sample could be due to the fact that the survey was conducted in public places like
restaurants and cybercafés. These locations were selected so as to get a good sample of
citizens who would be computer users. Thus, this gender imbalance could be an artifact
of the survey strategy. It could also be due to the fact that there is a gender gap in
computer use in Bangalore City just like the rest of India. It is interesting that more
women use cyber cafes to access computers and internet. These women are young and
single and use computers outside their home and work place. The reasons for this
preference need to be explored in future research.
The participants were also young. 47% of the participants were between 18 and
25 years and 29% were in the 26-35 years age group. It is interesting that age did not
make a significant difference to whether people used computers. This result is possibly
the result of the sample containing fewer older individuals in the sample (only about 24%
125
were above age 36). This limitation has to be addressed in future research through
different sampling locations and strategies.
Participants were also highly educated with 60.8% of the sample being graduates
and 29.8% with some college level education; 7% had post graduate degrees. And data
shows that graduates are more likely to have used computers for 3 or more years and
presumably be more skilled users. Participants also had a high degree of cell phone
ownership (83.4%). It is interesting that given this bias in the sample towards young,
educated and well to do individuals with an affinity for cell phones, a group that might be
expected to use e-government services, so few of them actually used e-government
websites. The poor rating given to website content indicates that if the content issues
were addressed by the government, there is a sizable group of potential users who could
become interested in using e-government websites.
The lack of statistically significant differences between computer users and non
computer users in voting in local elections, attending meetings, and contacting local
officials could be due to small cell sizes in the chi square analysis. This was an
exploratory study conducted through convenience sampling and results indicate that
future research should be designed using different sampling strategies.
Since this quantitative analysis did not indicate a wide spread influence for
information technology (computers and internet in this study), an exploratory case study
was conducted to examine where information technology has made a difference to citizen
participation. Two initiatives, PROOF and Ward Works that take advantage of
computerization within local government (BMP) are examined to analyze the ways in
126
which information technology introduction can influence citizen participation in
countries where the digital divide is pervasive.
Endnotes
1 For more literacy statistics from the 2001 census refer to
http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2001-02/chapt2002/chap106.pdf
2 Data on Internet users as % of total from Internet World Stats. Retrieved 11 April 2006
from http://www.internetworldstats.com/asia/in.htm
3 Nancy Hafkin and Nancy Taggart. (2005). Gender, Information Technology and
developing Countries: an Analytical Study. Learn Link. Retrieved 10 October 2005 from
http://learnlink.aed.org/Publications/Gender_Book/Home.htm.;
4 Data on female professional workers and literacy from UNDP Human Development
Report Retrieved 11 April 2006 from http://hdr.undp.org/statistics/data/.
5 Retrieved 11 April 2006 from
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/in.html
6 India Internet usage surges, Feb 17, 2006, Retrieved 11 April 2006 from
http://www.internetworldstats.com/asia/in.htm,. For additional statistics see
http://www.iamai.in/IAMAI_new.html
7 Data from Internet Services Industry: An overview. Retrieved 11 April 2006 from
http://www.ispai.in/intetinindia.htm
8 For details refer to
http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=16&year=2005&country=6829
127
9 The original version of Karnataka: The Millennium IT Policy, IT for the Common Man
is available at http://www.kar.nic.in
10 For in-depth explanation refer to Bhoomi home page at http://www.revdept01.kar.nic.in/Bhoomi/Home.htm
11 There are no statistics about the number of credit card users in India and particularly
in Bangalore. According to Rediff (http://www.rediff.com/money/2004/jan/22spec.htm),
while Bangalore has relatively higher credit card usage when compared to other cities, it
is miniscule. The overall credit cards in force in India was between 8.75 and 9 million in
December 2003. The population of India in 2003 was over 1 billion. A more viable
option is the direct bank account transactions which are already in place in many cities.
12 Statistics available at Bangalore profile. Accessible at
http://www.bangaloreit.com/html/aboutbng/bangprofile.htm
128
Chapter 6
PROOF: PUBLIC RECORD OF OPERATIONS AND FINANCE
This chapter is the first of two that examine how the use of information
technology can facilitate citizen empowerment. This chapter provides an in depth
analysis of the PROOF campaign in Bangalore city. PROOF is the first initiative that
allows citizens to get structured information from their local government which they
examine and ask questions and suggest alternatives.
The first section provides an introduction and background to PROOF. It examines
the role of Fund Based Accounting System (FBAS) of the Bangalore City Corporation in
making PROOF possible. The next section describes the major civic groups involved in
PROOF, the philosophy of each and why they are involved in this initiative, the role of
each as defined in the PROOF statement, and the actions taken by them as part of
PROOF. Subsequently, the process of getting citizens involved in the public meetings of
PROOF is examined and finally the reasons for the relative success of PROOF are
analyzed.
Data for this chapter was gathered through various documents published by the
citizens groups involved in PROOF, interviews with individuals representing the citizens
groups and citizens who participated in the PROOF meetings, in addition to participant
observation of the PROOF public meetings in December 2003 and July 2004. The story
of PROOF is documented from the point of view of Janaagraha and the citizens who
work through Janaagraha.
Since the conclusion of this research in August 2004, many changes have
occurred. PROOF, which started as a citizens’ initiative, became an independent,
129
registered trust at the end of 2005, in partnership with VOICES and Akshara Foundation,
with Janaagraha as the founding trustee. Janaagraha itself has moved from being a
‘citizens movement’ to a not-for profit institution that is now called the Janaagraha
Center for Citizenship and Democracy. However, the data provided in this section traces
the initial development of PROOF and the impact it had on citizen interactions with local
government. The subsequent changes do not affect the analysis of what made PROOF
possible and how it affected citizens’ empowerment. The evolution that PROOF has
undergone since the end of this research will be documented at the end of the chapter.
6.1 Introduction
Citizen participation can enhance the efficiency of governments. However, the
level of public confidence in government institutions is fairly low in India. Along with
corruption1 and inefficient utilization of funds, governments have been criticized for
lopsided allocation of funds, which citizens felt powerless to address (India Together,
2005). The 73rd and 74th amendments to the Indian constitution emphasized
decentralization that would bring government closer to the people and allow them to
influence local government. With these amendments, local governments had the power to
raise their resources locally and make expenditure decisions. However, without
transparency, financial reporting, and structured disclosure from government institutions,
citizens were not in a position to participate in governance. PROOF was a mechanism to
address this problem.
Beginning in July 2002, the Bangalore City Corporation has made public its
financial statements to provide performance information to the city’s various stakeholders.
Each quarter, a public meeting is held where city government officials meet citizens to
130
discuss the city’s standardized financial statements, a set of performance indicators, as
well as a report that contains the city government’s management discussion and
explanatory statements. Citizens question specific expenditure items, and request
clarifications on decisions. They ask questions about how decisions about allocations are
being made and seek to participate in such resource allocation decisions. PROOF
operates on the rationale that disclosure of accurate and timely information is a necessary
condition for good governance.
6.2 Anatomy of PROOF
To make PROOF happen, a few systemic changes had to occur. As discussed in
chapter 4, when Bangalore became a major destination for software development in the
early 1990s, many multinational companies set up offices in the city, attracting job
seekers from all over India. This resulted in increasing pressures on the city’s
infrastructure and greater service demands from the growing population. The city did not
have the financial strength to undertake any infrastructure projects on its own and had to
tap capital markets for funding. This brought the city government face to face with the
realities of its financial management. There was inefficient resource mobilization and
utilization, lack of information and evaluation, and lack of transparency and
accountability. The city’s financial statements had not been audited for more than a
decade (FBAS, 2003).
As the capital of Karnataka State, Bangalore was seen by the state government as
the show case for the state and critical to its projected image as the ‘software destination
of India’. The chief minister of the state S.M. Krishna set up a committee – the Bangalore
Agenda Task Force (BATF) – to address these problems2. The BATF came up with a
131
Bangalore Agenda document through consulting civic administrators, a citizen poll and a
survey by an independent organization. As part of the changes to city government, the
accounting system was revamped.
6.2.1 Structural change in local government: The ‘supply-side’ reform
With funds raised by the BATF from a private foundation, The Adhaar Trust, Rs.
15 million was spent in moving the city’s single entry accounting to a fund based
accounting system (FBAS). Financing for FBAS connects it intricately with BATF
members. The Adhaar Trust was created by a private donation from Nandan and Rohini
Nilekani (BATF, 2001). Mr. Nandan Nilekani, CEO of Infosys, acted as the chairman of
BATF. Mr. Ramesh Ramanathan of Janaagraha was a member of BATF and was the
driving force behind the project team that revamped the accounting system.
The City Council passed a resolution giving consent for revamping the accounting
system and BATF hired a dedicated team of accounts executives and professionals at
NCR Consultants to conceptualize and implement FBAS. Twenty two people employed
by the BATF, headed by Mr. T S Prasad, spent 34 months, about 325,000 man-hours,
from January 2000 reengineering the accounting system (FBAS, 2003). A management
information system was put in place and accounting became a core activity.
FBAS was valuable since it allowed for objective oriented accounting, tailormade for the Bangalore City Corporation (Bangalore Mahanagara Palike - BMP). Prior to
FBAS, BMP had used a single entry accounting system. This meant that all transactions
were recorded on cash flow basis. BMP did not have summary financial statements that
accounted for both operational aspects and the financial position of the BMP. The
problem with this situation was that BMP could not provide accurate financial data about
132
its revenues and expenses or a comprehensive annual plan. In an interview on June 24,
2004, Mr. Ramanathan mentioned that when work first began on revamping the system,
he found that there was information lag of 45-50 days so that the commissioner could get
an estimate about the revenue position for December only in February of the following
year.
Interview excerpt from Ramesh Ramanathan: “I remember asking the Chief
Engineer, “How many works are currently there? He said “Well, there are 100 wards and
approximately 10-15 works in each ward. So I would say may be 1500 works”. I asked
him if you don’t know, how can you determine which works are running beyond
schedule…having cost overruns, which ones to inspect? …This meant we had to map the
works process completely.”
In addition to the time lag, there was no audit conducted of the city corporation’s
finances and there were no performance indicators to assess its efficiency. Due to these
factors, there were no accountability mechanisms and transparency could not be achieved
since accurate information was not available. And citizens could not get any information
about the city’s finances or projects that would be undertaken. Without information, they
could not participate in the process or provide any inputs.
Interview excerpt from Ramesh Ramanathan: “So from December 1999 to June
2001, I was into reforming the accounting system of BMP as part of BATF’s Bangalore
Agenda. There was a small core team, a chartered accountant, two retired state
government officials from Accounts Department and 20 people BATF hired. We created
a new role for a finance expert in BMP, other than the Chief Accounts Officer. P.K.
Srihari was then in Revenue, he was brought in to lead this on BMP’s side. We spent four
months just doing process mapping all the activities at BMP, every item of receipt and
expenditure. This was important; we did not know what the current BMP business
process was. They had 14,000-odd people carrying all their activities. So this was
fundamentally business process reengineering.”
“Mapping was important to build the right technology platform. Generally
governments have what an IAS officer once told me was “AC by PC” … create an excuse
to get a computer so you can get an air conditioned office.
“We got Crossdomain, a private firm, to build us a customized software
application at no cost. Once we got the backbone of the information flow we could get
133
the technology working. We prepared a format to collect all the information but given all
the corruption in the system, we needed the Chief Minister’s backing to ensure we
actually got it.”
“We had to do this mapping for each department and build a process so that each
department head could get the right information on time. There were so many challenges.
The city did not know how many bank accounts it had and there was no record of the
properties owned by the city. I prepared a white paper on Bangalore’s finances and with
the Commissioner, met the Chief Minister. Finally a unique MoU was signed between the
state and the city – the state promised to provide financial support to the city on the
condition that the city undertook reforms. The first among those reforms was adopting
Fund-based Accounting System(FBAS)”.
6.2.2 Why was FBAS so crucial?
A municipality's finances can be organized around three categories of funds
directly corresponding to its three areas of activity- governmental & social (obligatory),
fiduciary (activities performed as an agency of others like state government) and
commercial (proprietary/capital maintenance). Adoption of FBAS allows these
categories to be organized as separate funds (BATF, 2001).This was advantageous since
it allowed information based control of a municipality's various activities. It provided an
information trail for auditing and computing costs of goods and services. Accurate and
real time information on finance became available. This helped in efficient application of
scarce financial resources. Item-wise receipts and payments and implementation of works
could be monitored on a daily basis and ward-wise information became available. FBAS
provided better information for external funding agencies to assess the performance and
credit-worthiness of BMP since FBAS conforms to Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles (GAAP) - the global standard for accounting (FBAS, 2003).
Employing FBAS, a fundamental institutional transformation was achieved. The
information flow cycle moved from a 48-day cycle to 2 days, creating a single source
134
database that facilitated quick management decisions (BATF, 2001). The political
support from the chief minister enabled the BATF team to overcome resistance to
mapping the old system and reengineering it, and training personnel. This change in
system led to a complete overhaul of public works management. The BMP could provide
specific details of finances, public works undertaken and status of infrastructure
initiatives through the Internet, through email and through traditional means such as print
outs. Thus the stage was set to enable the city government to respond to requests for
information from members of the public.
6.3 Citizen Engagement: The demand for information
While citizens and the Bangalore City Corporation have a common interest in the
city’s functioning, there was no formal mechanism for them to work together prior to
PROOF. Janaagraha, the citizens’ movement to enhance participatory democracy, was at
the core of the PROOF Campaign.
Janaagraha was started by Ramesh and Swati Ramanathan with the objective of
bringing together all stake holders in the city to ‘team up for a better Bangalore”. They
had returned to Bangalore from London and wanted to actively participate in local
governance. Mr. Ramesh Ramanathan had worked as a management associate for
Citibank and possessed an MBA from Yale University and is a Certified Financial
Analyst. Ms. Swati Ramanathan was a design professional and was interested in urban
planning, working with communities and local development authorities on participatory
planning. However, there were no formal mechanisms that would enable them to
participate as citizens unless they were elected to the BMP council. While they were
scouting for ideas that would increase citizen engagement with local government, Mr.
135
Ramanathan was requested to serve on the BATF and advice the government, based on
his financial expertise. Mr. Ramanathan’s background in corporate finance led him to
advocate that the city government would benefit from adopting a good management
information system and the public disclosure norms followed by corporate entities.
The role of the BATF in revamping the city’s accounting system led Mr.
Ramanathan to propose that there should be a formal mechanism to get the city
government to disclose its financial information – a public record of the city’s operations
and finances. Such disclosure in a public forum would enable citizens to ask questions
and participate in city improvement activity.
To make this vision a reality, Janaagraha enlisted three other non-government
organizations – VOICES, Center for Budget and Policy Studies (CBPS), and the Public
Affairs Centre (PAC). Each group undertook to generate funds for the campaign that was
expected to cost about Rs. 1,200,000 each year.
Janaagraha derived its funds from the Ramanathan Foundation, a private
foundation that had Ramesh and Swathi Ramanthan as its trustees. CBPS utilized surplus
funds from previous projects. VOICES got donations from Ms. Rohini Nilekani. Proof
Energy Centre, operating through VOICES, got additional funding of Rs. 500,000 from
Ms. Nilekani. PAC generated funds from the Ford Foundation and other organizations
funding research on governance and it earmarked some of its research funds for PROOF.
Details about each of these groups and the role they played in PROOF will be examined
in the next section.
136
6.3.1 Janaagraha
Janaagraha was organized as a citizen’s movement in 2001 by Ramesh and Swati
Ramanathan. The couple was identified as campaign coordinators in all the literature
published by Janaagraha. As of August 2004, they estimated that close to 100,000
Bangaloreans have been working through Janaagraha to interact with their local
government.
Janaagraha according to its literature means ‘life force of the people’. Its stated
objective is to improve government performance through citizen participation.
Janaagraha’s approach as stated in its publications is defined by five principles :
mobilizing citizens by working through communities whenever possible; working
through networks of partners wherever they exist; creating a trust-based collaborative
atmosphere with government at every level; act as a facilitator for citizens voices and
collective energies; and identify a specific outcome for citizen engagement before any
issue is taken up. It works on campaigns that bring together citizens, government,
nongovernment organizations and corporate institutions to ‘team up for a better
Bangalore’. The movement decided to focus on issues that met five criteria: mass impact,
long term sustainability, replicability, scalability to allow extending opportunities for
citizen engagement and leveraging of existing platforms (Janaagraha Vision document,
2002).
The movement’s first campaign was Ward Works. Janaagraha mobilized citizens
working within residents’ welfare associations to work with local government officials
and elected representatives to develop plans to meet citizens’ infrastructure needs. This
campaign, which will be discussed in greater detail in chapter 7, resulted in Rs. 4 million
137
of ward works directly requested by citizens included in the 2002 corporation budget for
the first time. PROOF was Janaagraha’s second campaign. The two are intricately
connected. Janaagraha’s work with local community groups as part of Ward Works
enabled it engage community groups in PROOF meetings.
Janaagraha also took on other roles such as extending PROOF to the poorer
sections of citizens, coordinating with the Confederation of Indian Industries for
corporate partnership on PROOF and managing the performance indicators assessment
and training workshops. PROOF has been a core part of Janaagraha’s activities.
This was to be expected since taking advantage of the new accounting system to
obtain transparency in city accounting and increasing citizen participation in city
planning and service delivery was an idea that originated with Mr. Ramesh Ramanathan.
The citizens and communities who participated extensively in PROOF were those who
were already involved in the Ward Works campaign and Janaagraha’s office became the
‘secretariat’ - center for coordinating PROOF activities. Two full time staff members
were hired by Janaagraha: Ms. Preetha Radhakrishnan and T.S. Prasad to handle the
organizational logistical details of organizing meetings and workshops, coordinating with
BMP officials, community members and other partners, documenting activities and
creating necessary materials. Ms. Radhakrishnan did most of PROOF’s performance
indicator work and acted as liaison with Akshara Foundation with assistance from Mr.
Prasad.
As part of its statement of commitment, Janaagraha published a document
detailing its proposed work for PROOF which is excerpted below (Janaagraha, 2003).
138
1. Generate all campaign material and arrange for copies etc. to be provided
2. Distribute all campaign material to all anchor persons @ partners, via email by
default, regular mail if necessary
3. Record weekly meeting minutes and distribute via email
4. Schedule meetings such as BMP, Government of Karnataka, rainbow coalition
partners etc. Inform telephonically in situations of short notice
5. Arrange for and organize the press briefings
6. Arrange for and organize the public debates
7. Organize the orientation sessions and cross-stakeholder conversations, based on
information from Partners
This list indicates that Janaagraha was to be the hub of the most crucial activities and thus
the most logical location for participant observation of PROOF activities.
6.3.2 VOICES
VOICES, a development communications organization, has worked since 1992 to
democratize media in India. According to its website, VOICES stands for “VOICES Of
Individuals and Communities Empowering Society” through “Vehicles of Information
and Communication Enabling Social Change. VOICES advocates developing local
community media with citizens creating their own content, so that information gaps are
filled. VOICES director Asish Sen states that though there is a growing demand for
‘right to information’, this has to be coupled with the right to communication and access
to communication channels so that relevant information is shared. VOICES states that it
strongly believes that ‘strong media can ultimately serve as a catalyst for community
empowerment and as a tool for better governance’(VOICES, 2004).
As part of PROOF, VOICES worked to help design and implement community
communication strategies. Though it started by working with Janaagraha on community
communications for Ward Works, it soon joined PROOF since it saw an opportunity to
work extensively on communications for the whole of Bangalore and establishing
139
mechanisms for community participation and communication. VOICES constituted a
Proof Energy Centre (PEC) which would act as a community communication hub for the
dissemination of relevant information and for capturing grass-root responses. PEC is
described as a core group of citizens' from a cross-section of the community such as
software professionals, lawyers, journalists, college students, senior citizens, members of
various resident associations, people from theatre, entrepreneurs, teachers, and social
workers from slum development projects (VOICES, 2004, b). A coordinator Vilasini
Kumar was hired for the PROOF campaign and initially she was responsible for
PROOF’s communication materials. Soon citizens who were a part of PEC undertook to
create radio programs and publish a newsletter Talk about PROOF. VOICES provided
strategic, managerial and logistic support for citizens who constituted PEC.
6.3.3 Centre for Budget and Policy Studies (CBPS)
The Centre for Budget and Policy Studies is a research institution that was
registered as a not for profit organization in 1998 (CBPS, 2004). Its primary research area
has been sustainable and equitable development, with a concentration on decentralization
as a tool for such development. It has focused on local government budgets and
economies. CBPS began its budget analysis at the district level in Karnataka and later
moved into studying the finances of city municipal councils. According to Dr. Vinod
Vyasulu, a member of CBPS governing Board, before PROOF, CBPS had not done any
work on Bangalore city. The Centre was interested in PROOF since it fit in with its
academic interest in democracy and decentralization and could provide its expertise on
budget analysis to PROOF members. As part of PROOF, CBPS was involved in
analyzing the Corporation’s budget and quarterly financial statements, assessing its
140
performance and general financial management. The primary individual within CBPS
who worked on PROOF was Dr. Vyasulu.
To encourage citizen participation in the core process of analysis, CBPS trained
citizens to understand the city’s budget. It created a manual to introduce citizens to basics
of municipal finance and provided support to the Namma Budget team of the Proof
Energy Center. It helped Janaagraha in conducting research on the contributions of the
poor to the organized and unorganized sectors of economy for the PROOF of the Poor
document. In 2003, CBPS withdrew from being an active partner and decided to support
PROOF from outside without contributing funds to the initiative. Thus, at the time this
research was conducted CBPS was no longer a partner in PROOF.
6.3.4 Public Affairs Centre (PAC)
The Public Affairs Centre (PAC) describes itself as a non-profit organization
dedicated to the cause of improving the quality of governance in India. Established in
1994, it is both a research and an advocacy organization. It undertakes and supports
research on public policy and services, disseminates research findings, facilitates citizen
action and provides advisory services to state and non-state agencies. PAC became well
known for its Report Cards as discussed in chapter 4. PAC members began work with Mr.
Ramesh Ramanathan on evaluating e-government in the state of Andhra Pradesh. Given
this background, PAC’s apparent role in PROOF was to continue its report card on the
state of public services in Bangalore and to use these findings to generate performance
indicators for the city’s various sectors such as health, education, storm drains etc. Within
PAC, two individuals, the Director Suresh Balakrishnan and Program Associate Sheila
Premkumar, were involved directly with PROOF. Though PAC was one of the four
141
partners, its contributions to the PROOF campaign waned towards the end of the first
year. There were delays and neither the Report Card nor the performance indicators work
were completed as part of the first year of PROOF and PAC’s involvement remained
marginal. In July 2004, PAC did not contribute to the PROOF public meeting.
The Akshara Foundation
The Akshara Foundation was started in 2000 to further education for children in
Bangalore. It works in partnership with corporate entities, government schools and local
communities to provide aid to children in schools such as libraries and remedial inputs
for children in math and language. Its chairperson is Ms. Rohini Nilekani with 10 trustees.
Akshara Foundation joined PROOF in 2003 to develop a comprehensive performance
measurement system for elementary education, in the PROOF in Education campaign.
CRISIL
CRISIL is India’s premier credit rating agency. Its involvement in PROOF was
due to Dr. Ravikanth Joshi, a consultant with CRISIL, providing his expertise in
analyzing BMP’s financial statements after CBPS withdrew from PROOF. Dr. Joshi is an
expert in municipal finance and is the author of A Case for Reform; How municipal
budgets can change our cities. This collaborative work was seen for the Quarterly
discussion conducted in July 2004.
6.4 PROOF Campaign Activities
Quarterly review of the City Corporation’s management of its finances is the core
activity of PROOF. Since August 2002, public meetings have been held to discuss the
city’s budget, its actual revenues and expenditures, with a detailed list and valuation of its
142
assets and liabilities. The PROOF document generated for each quarter consists of a
standardized set of financial statements – revenue and expenditure statement compared to
Original Budget figures, an indicative balance sheet with detailed information about
current and long-term assets, as well as short and long-term liabilities; selected
performance indicators and explanatory notes; and discussion by the BMP of its overall
performance and selected activities. BMP’s budget year begins April 1 and ends March
31 of the following year. The Budget is first passed by the BMP and then approved by the
Government of Karnataka. It becomes a legal document once approved. It reflects some
of the promises that elected representatives give to their constituencies.
As discussed in chapter 4, the local government in Bangalore City consists of 100
elected representatives and career administrative officers appointed by the state
government. The city’s 100 wards elect one corporator each to the BMP council. The
corporators elect one member from among them as the Mayor. The day-to-day
administration of the city is handled by the career officers appointed by the state
government. This group of people is headed by the Commissioner. A Special
Commissioner is his deputy. An Additional Commissioner handles the city’s finances and
there are seven deputy commissioners who work for the Commissioner. The PROOF
public meetings are generally attended by the Mayor of Bangalore City (an elected
representative), and the Additional Commissioner handling finances (a career bureaucrat).
When this research was conducted, the Mayor was P.R. Ramesh. The commissioner who
attended the December 03 PROOF meeting was M.R. Srinivasa Murthy. Mr.
Jothiramalingam was the commissioner for July 04 PROOF meeting. Mr. P.K. Srihari
was the Additional Commissioner handling finances during the entire time period.
143
In the public meetings, citizens present their analysis of the budget. They ask
questions about items in the budget and the Additional Commissioner of Finance
responds. This is followed by an open house where citizens question the corporation
officials about specific expenses. Citizens also participate in the formulation of the
Corporation’s budget. To facilitate this process, three retired officials from government
finance departments lend their expertise to citizens’ discussions and planning during
weekly discussions. They prioritize public works from their local areas such as road
repairs and drainage, and examine ways to enhance revenue collection. Citizens have
been involved in proposing methods to double property tax receipts by researching
various issues such as assessment of tax on government residential properties. They also
examine whether all the obligatory functions of the Corporation are being carried out.
Since the analysis of the Corporation’s budget and financial statements provides
just a partial picture of how well the government is meeting citizen demands,
performance indicators are generated as part of PROOF to examine how well the money
is spent. The PROOF campaign adopted the methodology developed by the Government
Accounting Standards Board in the United States to assess performance of departments
within the Corporation. The indicators are classified as input, output, outcome, efficiency
and productivity indicators. Individuals involved in PROOF identify the indicators
through consulting with all stakeholders in local government, collect data, analyze it and
share it with the Corporation. The management discussion conducted using performance
indicators to identify successes and problem areas is shared with citizens in the quarterly
public meetings. The discussion then moves into identifying specific solutions and
144
formulating intervention strategies. By July 2004, performance indicators had been
generated for education.
Performance indicators for education resulted in 46 indicators that covered
infrastructure, teaching staff, subjects covered, accountability, community involvement,
and financial resources of the 43 schools managed by the Corporation. A workshop was
held for teachers and principals of schools to orient them to PROOF’s work since they
were the primary generators of performance information. From the data collected, a
composite index was created and each school was assessed based on its weighted score
for each indicator. Mr. Ashok Kamath, Managing Trustee, Akshara, presented the results
for performance indicators in education during the July 2004 PROOF meeting. It was
found that even though BMP was spending Rs. 10,000 per student per year, its
infrastructure was poor compared to private schools that spent the same amount per
student per year. The worst performing schools were selected for intervention strategies
and various stakeholders in those schools participated in finding solutions to the problems.
Akshara Foundation proposed to sign a memorandum of understanding with the BMP to
implement some of the solutions to the problems identified. This exercise is the first of its
kind in Bangalore. This discussion brought together the Deputy Director of Education Mr.
S.P. Shantaraju, Special Commissioner Subhash Chandra, Mr. Akash Ryall an education
expert and teachers.
6.4.1Communication technology and PROOF: Informing and Mobilizing
Citizens
While the BMP was able to meet citizen demand for information employing a
new information management system, bringing citizens together so that they could
145
engage with the BMP has been achieved by employing various communications
technologies.
Individuals from across Bangalore have undertaken many activities to promote
community communications. As part of the Proof Energy Centre (PEC) within the
VOICES organization, citizens promote overall awareness about PROOF. People
working at this Centre initially became aware of PROOF through their neighborhood
residents associations. About 50 individuals meet Friday evenings to discuss PROOF
activities and issues of local interest. They interact with the VOICES Namma Budget
(our budget) team to understand the details of BMP’s budget preparation process. They
bring questions raised by citizens at the budget analysis workshops and mini-discussions
to the BMP officials. This is a peron-to-person outreach effort made by citizens working
through PEC since the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act does not allow any
representation by common citizens except through the local ward corporator.
These citizens also create and broadcast a 15-minute radio program in the local
language Kannada. A character named Proof Puttanna, who is supposed to represent the
common citizen, is used to inform Bangaloreans about PROOF, discuss issues of local
governance and encourage citizens to get involved. This program is aired every
Wednesday evening on the popular public radio network Akashvani. They also write,
produce and distribute a bi-monthly newsletter called Talk about Proof, which has a
circulation of about 500 according to VOICES. This newsletter is distributed both
manually and electronically, and printed versions are given out at all the public meetings
of PROOF.
146
These media outreach programs complement the traditional communication
activities of addressing neighborhood resident association meetings, organizing
workshops in colleges and distributing flyers.
6.4.2 PROOF Meetings
To provide a quick overview of PROOF public meetings, a table has been created.
Meeting #
Date of meeting
Details
Q1
August 17, 2002
100 attendees
Q2
December 7, 2002
120 attendees
Q3
March 15, 2003
200 attendees
Q4
May 17, 2003
200 attendees
Q1
No public meeting held, decision
mini
to hold ½ yearly meetings made by discussions by
BMP and all stakeholders
PEC
Q2 – 1st
December 13, 2003 (participant
200 attendees
meeting
observation conducted)
for 03-04
Q4 – 2nd
July 3, 2004 (participant
meeting
observation conducted)
300 attendees
for 03-04
Table 6-1: PROOF Meetings
147
The PROOF meetings I witnessed typically began with a presentation by the
Additional Commissioner of Finance describing the budget statements and the activities
of the BMP for the financial year under review. This was then followed by a question
answer session with citizens raising specific questions about the budget statements and
some raising questions relevant to their wards. A sample of the questions is provided
below. In the days following this public meeting, there were meetings between the PEC
members and BMP officials for clarifications or more details about questions/ issues
raised.
Examples of questions posed by citizens during the December 13, 2003 PROOF meeting
1. Funds received from Government as BMP’s share in taxes are nowhere near the
targets. Is the BMP taking steps to rectify this?
2. If the present trend continues, the actual revenues and expenditures at the end of
the year may fall short by about 30%, like last year. Is the BMP planning to meet
targets? Since property tax and trade licenses are payable at the beginning of the
year, isn’t the collection totally unsatisfactory? Why is the collection machinery
dormant?
3. How far is the figure of 5 lakh properties accurate? Is the BMP making any effort
to revise its surveys and identify the non-paying residential and commercial
properties?
4. Property tax realisation shows an adverse trend. Only 37% (Rs 94.53 crore) has
been collected of the budgeted amount (Rs 255 crore). This is against 43%
collected in the same period last year. Can BMP explain?
5. What kind of machinery and equipment are required for which Rs 15 crore has
been allocated? Is there any JV agreements in case it is for SWM? What is the
basis for such allocation? Previously the budgeted amount was Rs 1 crore but Rs
5 crore was spent? Why
6. The budget provision of Rs.13 crores towards election expenses is not warranted
considering that no general elections are due this year. Can the BMP explain?
148
7. Loans should have a sanction limit, what is it for BMP loans? How will the BMP
pay back the money since there is shortfall in revenue? What about the interest
that has to be paid?
8. Why is it that even after two years the BMP has not disposed off their assets
which it has earmarked for sale? What is the burden of this on the citizens?
9. Why has the BMP still not been able to sell the Madivala or Siddiah road
complexes?
10. In some areas streetlight contracts have been awarded to new contractors. Is there
any centralized control and supervision? In case there is no response from the
agency or the contractor who can the citizens approach with their problems?
(Note: 1 crore = 10 million)
While these questions were raised, the answers provided by BMP officials were
often not clear or detailed. The reasons for this were often political and some times an
official openly stated that he had no control over the issue in question and citizens had
better raise it with their BMP councilors. This could also be seen as loop hole for BMP
administrators to evade answers to uncomfortable questions since it has been clear from
the beginning of PROOF that elected councilors were opposed to PROOF and refused to
participate in the meetings (Janaagraha introspection document, 2002)
As can be seen from the sample questions, the most important issue on the table
was the shortfall in BMP’s revenues. Citizens first raised questions about the reasons for
the shortfall and some of them suggested alternative ways of increasing revenues. Earlier
in the year in October 2003, BMP had announced that it was considering a massive
restructure of the property tax system and that citizens’ cooperation was essential for
increasing tax revenues. Some citizens took BMP’s request for cooperation seriously.
As part of improving their neighborhoods, citizens from 10 wards in Bangalore
had been working on creating ward vision documents for their wards. More than 200
149
citizens who were familiar with problems in their wards had gathered information about
priorities, collected by interacting with people in their wards and identified possible
solutions that was collected into a ward level plan of action for the next three years.
Considering the fact that BMP often claimed shortfall in revenues as the reason for not
taking up ward works, they decided to find help BMP find resources. They proposed
Ward RECiP – Revenue Enhancement with Citizen Participation.
As part of Ward Vision, these citizens had prioritized public works in their wards
and calculated the cost of the projects based on BMP’s practices. They undertook to
analyze incremental revenue opportunities in their own wards. With Janaagraha’s help
they got GIS maps from the Bangalore Development Authority. With the help of
professional survey techniques, citizens conducted a detailed property level survey in
their 10 wards. They enlisted the help of students to generate this detailed information,
created a comprehensive data bank of property-level information and used this to
estimate property tax in their wards. From this citizens found that BMP could generate 3
times the level of property tax it was collecting in 2004, without increasing property tax
rates.
Based on this information, citizens approached BMP with Ward RECiP – they
would help BMP raise more property tax if BMP let a portion of the incremental
revenues be utilized for ward works that citizens had identified as priorities. Citizens
argued that this would be beneficial to all stake holders – BMP would get more revenue
to meet its obligations, the corporator would get a larger share of resources into his/her
ward and citizens would get resources allocated to projects they identified as priorities in
their ward vision documents. They also argued that this would be an ideal plan since
150
those vision documents had been created by citizens by collecting inputs from other
citizens in their wards, by interacting with subject experts and representatives of service
providers in the city. In many wards, meetings had been held every night for three weeks
to produce a document that represented everyone in the ward and effort had been put into
including detailed information about the costs of projects and prioritizing needs within
the wards.
Responding to this proposal from citizens, the new Mayor P.R. Ramesh made a
statement that he appreciated the role of Janaagrahis (people working through
Janaagraha) and that he would examine the ward vision documents and wherever possible,
works would be included in the development plans of BMP. He did not address the Ward
RECiP proposal. In a panel discussion on December 17, 2003 addressing revenue short
falls in BMP, the Deputy Commissioner Dr. Parshwanath, Special Commissioner Subash
Chandra, Ms. Salma Sadiq of BWSSB, Principal Secretary Shamim Banu of Urban
Development and Additional Commissioner P.K. Srihari reached a consensus that
citizens’ participation for revenue enhancement was a novel idea, but to make it feasible
many modalities would have to worked out.
The difference between the elected representatives and administrators in
responding to citizens’ proposals on Ward RECiP points to the power issues inherent in
the governance process. The power of the corporators, the elected representatives of the
people, lies in controlling funds for ward works and acting as gatekeepers between
citizens and ‘government resources’. Sharing their power by allowing citizens to
determine which ward works are priorities and how funds should be allocated threatened
corporators. Whereas administrators such as the Commissioner, derive their power from
151
the state government and do not feel threatened by citizens’ participation since
irrespective of any inputs provided either by citizens or by corporators, the administrators
finally decide on how to implement works and projects. The administrators lost nothing
by acknowledging the new idea and no action was taken to make it a reality.
BMP’s revenue shortfall and low property tax revenues continued to be major
issues into fiscal year 2004. In a move to increase revenue collection, the BMP
announced on June 25, 2004 that it would move away from the Self Assessment Scheme
of property tax introduced in 2000 to a Capital Value System (Kushala, 2004). Under this
new scheme citizens could expect their taxes to increase by an average of 30%. This
announcement led citizens working through Janaagraha to argue that the revenue
shortfalls could be fixed through better collection of taxes at the existing rate instead of
increasing taxes. To provide an example to BMP officials that it was a workable plan,
citizens tried to access property tax payers list and found that they could not get it, even
though this was public information. This issue became the center piece of the July 3,
2004 PROOF meeting.
Questions from July 3, 2004 PROOF meeting
1. Why is there only 2.77% achievement in collection of property tax in the wake of
all the new buildings that have come up? Property Tax shows shortfall of Rs 58
crores. With prior period adjustment, the shortfall is much more? Kindly explain
with break-ups.
2. Why is the actual expenditure two and a half times more than budgeted? Are you
overestimating?
3. With regard to expenditure of cesses collected there is a shortfall of Rs 7 crore.
Why? And why is “Other’ expenses under cess far in excess of what has been
budgeted?
152
4. Estimated revenue receipts is Rs 536.87 crores. But actual is Rs 335.67 crores.
Why so much discrepancy? Can’t the BMP use regression to forecast revenue
receipts based on the city’s growth as per the square foot area of plan sanctioned
by the BDA?
5. Why is there inaccuracy in projecting pension liability? Why the mismatch
between Capital receipts and expenditure?
6. Why hasn’t there been any progress in slum development? Why no budget item
for slum development?
7. What measures is the BMP taking to coordinate road cutting and repair activities
with all stakeholders?
8. As per para3 of the KMC (Ward Committee Rules, 1997), Ward Committees (30)
should have been constituted by the BMP by October 31ST, 2000. What is the
present status? Why have these not been constituted yet? Is it not a violation of
the statutory/ mandatory requirements by the Act?
9. Why is BMP lax in collecting specific grants from GoK? Government grants not
collected by BMP in full against Rs 154 crores, collection is only Rs 72.30 crores.
Please explain basis of receiving grants?
10. Why are BMP budget estimates over estimated when actuals are only 60%? Why
capital jobs are not progressing as planned? Please provide clarifications
regarding property tax collection. Increase in tax collection is only due to
enhancement in taxes, no action has been taken against defaulters and avoiders or
those who pay less. Maybe sending demand notices could be privatized to get
much more revenue?
As can be seen from the above sample of questions, citizens were mostly
concerned about revenue shortfalls, avoiding waste of resources and suggesting
alternatives to increases in property tax rates.
The lack of access to the property tax payers list became a major point of
contention. Some citizens complained that in spite of requesting that information under
the Right to Information Act, they had been denied the list. The situation became fraught
with tension when Additional Commissioner P.K. Srihari announced that BMP had
deployed satellite-image based Geographical Information Systems and a database with
153
information about the number of properties in Bangalore with details of tax payers and
non payers was available, though due to technical issues it was not made available to the
public. Citizens argued that if the BMP made the information available, they would help
the BMP increase its revenue collection in their ward.
This issue is a problematic one for the BMP since corporators have been
connected with assisting property tax evasion (Raghunath & Sen, 2003). The split
between the elected councilors and administrators surfaced again at this point. On July 1,
2004, the BMP Commissioner M.R. Srinivasa Murthy was replaced by K.
Jothiramalingam. Both individuals were present during the PROOF July 3 meeting. The
new Commissioner made a statement at the meeting that if citizens were entitled to the
list under the Right to Information Act, then the property tax information would be
released to them on the payment of appropriate fees. The outgoing commissioner M.R.
Srinivasa Murthy who had been associated with the PROOF meetings since its launch in
2002, made a statement that it had been a “rewarding experience” to work with PROOF.
He suggested that it be conducted in all urban local governments since “people’s
participation in such debates would help in citizen friendly governance”.
Following these assurances from the new Commissioner, BMP disclosed the Tax
Demand details on its website on Aug 3, 2004. However, this information contained only
the list of individuals who had received demand notices for property taxes. It did not
include all the properties that were listed with the BMP, the names of those had paid and
those who had defaulted. This fact is significant since the Mayor P.R. Ramesh had
acknowledged on June 10, 2004 that only 500,000 properties out of the a million
properties in Bangalore paid property tax. Since citizens got no response from BMP
154
about getting a list of all properties listed, they decided to launch a city wide campaign
called ‘Taxation with Transparency’. Citizens working as part of Janaagraha’s
Community Resource Committee stated in a press conference that their aim was to
mobilize public opinion through a signature campaign to encourage BMP to not increase
taxes but focus on collection. They argued they were merely following through on the
PROOF discussion statement made by the Commissioner.
Employing the slogan “Bangalore needs more tax payers, not more taxes” they
collected 50,000 signatures from citizens endorsing their campaign which they presented
to the Mayor, the Commissioner and the Chief Minister. The elected councilors in the
BMP Council felt threatened by these actions. On January 29, 2005, the BMP Council
said Janaagraha and PROOF were "interfering in the civic body's functioning" and
accused it of "running a parallel government" (The Hindu, 2005, January 30).
6.5 What are the changes brought about by PROOF?
STATE GOVT
BATF - FBAS
NON
PARTICIPATING
BMP
ADMINISTRATION
P.R.O.O.F.
ELECTED REPS
PARTICIPATING
CITIZENS
Figure 6-1: PROOF stakeholders
155
Bangalore City Corporation was the first local government in India to make its
financial statements public in 2002. PROOF meetings are unique in the extent to which
citizens are able to participate in the budgeting process in addition to insisting on
transparency and accountability from their local government. The public meetings have
provided a formal mechanism for citizens to question the local government officials on
their priorities for the city and request clarifications. PROOF has also led to a
comprehensive framework for assessing local government performance. It has enabled
citizens to be actively involved in working with the local government.
For BMP administrators, PROOF has led to a need for increasing efficiency in
resource utilization. It has provided an opportunity for administrative reform to promote
responsiveness and accountability.
For elected representatives, PROOF could act as the basic building block to
engage with the electorate and seek re-election. However, PROOF also threatens their
monopoly over resource allocation and decision making at the ward level. Thus, they
have resisted PROOF and citizens efforts to participate in decision making by accusing it
of interference and running a parallel government. It is clear from the multiple statements
made by elected representatives in the BMP council that they do not believe in allowing
citizens to participate, they see themselves as the only legitimate decision making entities
in local government.
While the changes brought about by PROOF are substantial, other changes that
were expected such as PROOF in my ward continue to be work-in-progress. Citizens
would like to get access to ward-level data on revenues generated and public works
undertaken. While the information system in place can provide this data, political power
156
and managerial issues have led to glacial progress in making this information available to
citizens.
6.6 Analysis: Why did PROOF succeed where many others failed?
To some extent, the timeframe during which PROOF was initiated was crucial to
its success. The poor financial condition of the BMP made it more open to a new
information system that would allow greater transparency. Janaagraha’s founder, Ramesh
Ramanathan happened to be a member of the BATF task force while he was scouting for
opportunities to facilitate citizen participation in local government. The campaign’s
appeal for transparency and accountability had greater influence coming in the wake of
the Right to Information Act 2000 passed by the Karnataka State Government.
Political and administrative leadership to bring public-private partnership
The Chief Minister of the state S.M. Krishna came into office with a new vision
for Bangalore city. He constituted the BATF task force as an institutional mechanism to
create a public-private partnership by drawing on the expertise present in Bangalore and
provided political support for revamping the city’s financial system. This was a crucial
factor in implementing FBAS. According to Mr. Ramanathan, in 2001 then Chief
Minister S.M. Krishna completely backed the project and at various stages ensured that
‘it did not get torpedoed’. This agenda of the state government permeated to the political
functionaries at the local government levels. This helped the BATF.
The BATF’s role was precarious though powerful. It derived legitimacy, status
and a degree of insulation from political pressure through the Chief Minister’s support.
Its members were professionals and entrepreneurs who were focused on working in a
157
results-oriented manner. It also had a few individuals with experience in heading urban
government agencies. It brought together expertise from the private sector and the public
sector, an institutional innovation in urban government in Bangalore. BATF provided a
mechanism for the new entrepreneurial leaders to enter into public policy space – not as a
lobbying group but as a partner in setting the agenda and ensuring its implementation.
This group ensured that FBAS was implemented. Mr. Nilekani, as the chairman of BATF
funded a private trust so that financial resources could be devoted to FBAS. In addition,
according to Mr. Ramanathan, “Nandan (Nilekani) held monthly reviews with the entire
FBAS team.” However, since BATF was constituted through an executive decision
((Government Order –UDD 400 MNY 99, dated 26 November 1999), it had political
clout without constitutional status and had to careful in the extent to which it could
exercise its power. This is demonstrated by Mr. Ramanthan’s comment “The job is still
not complete; but our work as BATF was done. This did not mean that corruption ended.
The city continued to make many decisions we felt were wrong, sometime driven by
other considerations. We felt the role of BATF was not to expose or interfere in BMP’s
processes. We were there in an unusual capacity and needed to be cautious. Building the
systems was ok; everything else had to happen through the democratic process”.
Political support was also forthcoming from the Commissioner Shantanu Consul,
who issued a circular that no payments to contractors could be made without all the
information being released to the FBAS team.
The minimal political resistance from the BMP Council to implementing the new
information management system can be attributed to a ‘black hole perception’ of
computerization. According Mr. V. Ravichandar, a BATF member, the exercise of re-
158
engineering the whole process, was carried on with minimal disturbance to the old system
and this “lulled” potential resistance. “If they had known what the system could do and
what citizens might ask for, they would not have let FBAS happen. Once the information
system was in place, there was nothing they could do about it.” After the fact,
corporators were persuaded that transparency and increase in credibility would help them
in their reelection campaigns. The benefits of tracking revenue streams and being able to
better manage the institution helped convince administrative officials within the BMP to
support the computerization and training processes.
Thus one of the crucial success factors was the leadership roles played by the
Chief Minister of the State of Karnataka and the BMP Commissioner. This created the
pathway for a civil service-led process of administrative reform without which FBAS
implementation would have failed. The role of the BMP Commissioner has been crucial
to PROOF. This position is a challenging one since on the one hand the commissioner
has to meet citizen expectations, work with the 100 elected representatives from various
political backgrounds and leanings, while on the other hand making sure the behests of
the state government are met. For FBAS and PROOF to succeed, the Commissioner and
his reform team had to convince and carry with them the rest of the BMP organization.
To ensure this, a degree of political insulation was necessary and this was provided by
Chief Minister S.M. Krishna’s government. Secondly, the BMP administration was open
to sharing information with the public once PROOF was put in place. This would not
have occurred unless BMP administrators showed leadership and a willingness to bear
the political risks involved.
159
Once the system was in place, state level political leadership was not as crucial to
sustain the initiative. The change in the state government led to the dissolution of the
BATF, but PROOF continued since it was already institutionalized. It depended more on
citizens taking the initiative to interact with the BMP.
Leveraging Community links and social capital
On the citizens’ side, the four non government entities leveraged their existing
community links by tapping into neighborhood resident welfare associations. Their
experiences in community communication, financial analysis and performance
assessment fit the needs of the initiative. They had good reputations and specific skills.
They successfully got many high-profile personalities involved in the campaign. These
factors made them formidable pressure groups that were hard for the BMP to ignore.
They also stressed innovations which built on existing systems (PROOF is built on
FBAS), working with existing communities and ways of improving participation in
institutions that already exist.
The adoption of the rhetoric of citizen partnership with the BMP to improve the
system made it easier to institute the changes. This threatened the officials less than the
terms watchdog and fact finding missions that would fix the system.
The campaign also unwittingly tapped into the existing power struggle between
elected corporators and career administrators within the BMP. The career administrators
supported the institutional change because they believed that more knowledge of the
BMP’s finances in the public domain would help temper the decisions of the politically
motivated corporators. Information technology makes information sharing easier and
makes corruption more visible. PROOF would help citizens understand the constraints
160
under which the BMP operated and temper their demands. In addition, administrators
could use PROOF as an example of the BMP being in touch with the citizens directly
rather than relying only on elected representatives. Finally, citizens were motivated by an
opportunity to assess the local government’s performance and influence the budget.
PROOF provided a formal mechanism to engage with officials who were otherwise
inaccessible.
6.7 Challenges to citizen participation in democratic local governance
Although the BMP has actively engaged with PROOF in greater depth than
expected by citizens, it has had many grievances about PROOF. The officials were
unhappy that they were not given an opportunity to help set the agenda and were often
defensive in the public meetings.
For example in December 2002, on the day of the PROOF public meeting the
BMP signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Housing and Urban Development for
long-term loan assistance of Rs. 10 billion to be used over 5 years for major infrastructure
projects. This came as a surprise to citizens in the public discussion; no plans for the use
of the loan were included in the documents given out to the public. Dismayed that the
BMP did not provide proper public notice and consult on such an important decision
PROOF issued a press release questioning the BMPs decision and calling for a public
debate about the loan. This angered BMP officials who saw PROOF as organizing
opposition and not respecting the principles of representative democracy. The elected
representatives in the BMP and the state government had approved the loan and PROOF
was undermining the process by encouraging citizens to distrust its decisions.
161
Corporators accused the four PROOF partners of trying to undermine elected
representatives and ‘usurping power’.
The dispute was resolved after apologies from all stakeholders. However this
incident demonstrates the thin line between adopting the rhetoric of citizens participating
in local government as partners and the potential confrontation as adversaries struggling
for power. Though Janaagraha prefers to focus on the ‘constructive engagement’ aspect,
there is no denying that essentially it is a struggle about who has power to define policies,
budget spending and control over the future of the city. Citizens’ participation threatens
potential shift in existing power relations, to change how resource allocations are made.
So it is natural that any forum that promotes citizens’ participation is seen by elected
representatives as ‘political maneuvers’ by organizing individuals like Ramesh
Ramanathan.
The power struggles within the BMP itself have also led to problems for PROOF.
Career officials in BMP felt that PROOF put them in an awkward position when probing
questions were asked in public discussions since honest replies involved showing the
elected representatives in a bad light. For example, when citizens questioned why
revenues from shop rentals and markets were unusually low, officers could not tell the
truth that it was because corporators had insisted on keeping rents low to help their
political cronies. Officials have often suggested that PROOF should ensure that the
elected corporators take part in the public discussions and pose questions to the
corporators directly rather than request answers from career officials. Corporators have
consistently avoided PROOF meetings.
162
PROOF has had trouble in engaging with elected representatives. There could be
multiple reasons for this. A demographic profile of those involved in the campaign shows
that most of them belong to the middle class (Janaagraha database 2004). The non
government organizations that facilitate PROOF are run by professionals who have given
up high paying jobs to work in the voluntary sector. PROOF’s inability to fully engage
with elected corporators to some extent reflects the class biases and the preference of
people to work with individuals most like themselves. Majority of the citizens involved in
PROOF have been retired men and women drawn from residents’ associations across the
city. The participation of young women, youth and middle-aged people has been limited.
This could largely be due to the fact that there are greater constraints on the time
available to these people. However, some mechanism of getting them to participate is
necessary without which it does not reflect broad citizen engagement.
Though PROOF has received a lot of media coverage, it has been estimated that it
has only included 10,000 individuals at most (interview with an active RPOOF
volunteer*). This is a considerable number but quite small in the context of the city’s
population of 6.52 million. It needs to become more diverse and get the urban poor
involved and engage effectively with elected corporators.
The discussions are currently focused on the city level; this has to be scaled down
to the wards (smallest administrative unit in Bangalore city) so that citizens can
continuously engage with their local government.
Establishing a partnership with the local government so that citizens participate in
budgeting and setting the priorities is a new idea in India and the success of PROOF can
be attributed to finding officials within the BMP who were receptive to the idea.
163
However, public service is known for its constant flux of administration officials. The
lack of continuity in public office makes it difficult to have dependable allies. Therefore
PROOF has to institutionalize its relationship with the BMP and permeate to the lowest
administrative level- the ward- so that the activities are carried on regardless of who is in
office. This is an issue that must be addressed in the long run.
This case study of PROOF indicates that while information technology plays an
important role in facilitating citizen participation it is not a sufficient condition to foster
participatory democracy in a developing country where digital divide is pervasive.
Computerization and a new information management system helped the local government
provide citizens with information. However, communicating with citizens and motivating
participation has to be done through all possible communication channels, from
traditional means like addressing resident associations and mass media, to the newly
emerging email and internet services.
While theorists and politicians may believe that ordinary people are too
preoccupied with day-to-day survival to be able to actively participate in public life,
PROOF indicates that there is willingness among significant numbers of citizens to be
involved. People desire to have some real influence and will act if there are practical
ways of engaging with their government. In developing countries this can be important to
solving problems through the governance process. Bringing people who have direct
knowledge of a problem into the solution process can help avoid mistakes. It is more
likely that people will accept institutions and policies if they have a hand in the making of
them.
164
Endnotes
1 India has been ranked by Transparency International as corrupt with a score of
2.7, where 0 = most corrupt and 10= most clean and transparent. This score measures the
degree of corruption among politicians and public officials as perceived by business
people, academicians and risk analysts.
2 BATF has been addressed in greater detail in chapter 4, under public private
partnerships
165
Chapter 7
WARD WORKS
This chapter examines the Ward Works initiative and Ward Sabhas. The first
section describes the Ward Works campaign and the role of computerization in making
Ward Works feasible. The next section describes the Ward Sabhas where citizens in 10
wards participate in prioritizing, monitoring and evaluating ward works. Data for this
section was gathered through participant observation and the discussion focuses on
citizens’ perception of the successes and failures of citizen engagement at the ward level.
The process of facilitating citizen engagement at the ward level is examined and finally
the reasons for some of the successes of Ward Works are analyzed.
According to Janaagraha, the aim of the Ward Works campaign was to engage
citizens in budgeting the Program of Works (2002-03) in a collaborative and nonconfrontational manner with the BMP. Program of Works consists of Road, Footpath and
Drain maintenance and improvements. Bangalore’s 100 wards are categorized as old,
new or intermediate based on date of their formation and development level. They
receive funds annually for various infrastructure maintenance and improvement projects
and corporators have the power to decide how this money will be spent. This is reflected
in the Program of Works.
Just like PROOF, Ward Works took advantage of computerization and the
adoption of FBAS, the new accounting and information management system by the BMP.
This new system helped the Corporation streamline application of resources, plan for the
future, and facilitated prioritization of activities that needed funds. It also facilitated the
generation of a monthly report called Arthika Darpana (financial mirror). This allowed
166
for the generation of a ward-wise budgetary allocation index. The Corporation could in
theory also provide online access to ward level budgets though this had not happened
when field research for this dissertation was completed in August 2004.
While ward level works constituted a relatively small item in the city budget (6%),
it allowed citizens to participate in selection, prioritization and implementation of various
local works. Bangalore has 100 wards. Citizens in 65 wards of the city were interested in
being a part of ward works There were three phases in the Ward Work CampaignPlanning, Contracting and Implementation.. Towards the end of the long process, there
was active citizen engagement only in 32 wards.
The first step in the campaign was to mobilize citizens of the city to come forward
and survey areas that required attention in their respective neighborhoods. Citizens from
various Residents Associations, individuals and residents from slums were trained by
Janaagraha to conduct the surveys. Once citizens had conducted the surveys, Janaagraha
helped them to analyze the cost of the projects based on the BMP schedule of rates.
Citizens used this to prioritize their road comparing it with other citizens and resident
associations in their ward who had also done similar surveys in their own localities.
Janaagraha helped citizens generate additional reports to help them conduct joint
prioritization with their elected representatives since the funds coming into the ward
would not be sufficient to undertake all works. This was part of the planning phase,
which ended with the release of the Program of Works (POW) for 2002-03. It resulted in
a POW of Rs 50 million that had 10 million of Ward Works identified with citizen
participation. For the first time citizens had participated in policy making and had their
voice included in the official POW.
167
Figure 7-1: Ward Works campaign at a glance
Payroll &
Pensions
Admin
Garbage
Ward
Works
Debt
Service
Infrastructure
Projects
MegaCity
Projects
Rs 10 crores* of Ward Works
done with participation.
Citizen
Success in
22 wards
Rs 5 crores of Citizens’ Works
included, with Corporator OK
Active Citizen
Engagement in 32
wards
Rs 120 crores of works prioritized
down to Rs 10 crores by citizens
Citizen Participation in 65 wards
Rs 150 crores of works identified
directly by citizens
2.50 lakh ** Citizen Endorsements
Support from 1 in 20
Bangaloreans
Source: Janaagraha
**100,000 = 1 lakh
* 1 crore = 10 million
The second phase of the campaign was the contracting process which tracked the
progress of the work from the POW stage until the work was issued a work order with
which the designated contractor would execute the work. The POW does not give exact
details of roads/areas where work will be undertaken. BMP’s engineering department
officers prepare detailed estimates, which was analyzed by the citizens. The work was
then sanctioned by the relevant authority after which a work order was issued.
168
Figure 7-2: Flow chart of Ward Works budgeting process
POW document
Prepare
Detailed
Estimate for
each Work
Estimate to be
sanctioned by
relevant
authority
AE
AEE
EE
CE
DC
COMMSNR
Work to be
tendered
Tender to be
analyzed by
citizens
Work Order
issued
Source: Janaagraha
Legend: AE – Assistant Engineer; AEE –Assistant Executive Engineer; EE – Executive
Engineer; CE- Chief Engineer; DC – Deputy Commissioner; COMMSNR –
Commissioner.
Bangalore is divided into 3 zones – East, West and South. Each zone has its own Deputy
Commissioner, for details see chapter 4.
169
The final phase of Ward Works was implementation where citizens monitored the
work with the contractor and the Engineering department. To help citizens engage in a
structured and productive manner with stable information flow from their engineering
department, there was need for a regular process by which they could interact to
exchange information. This led to the creation of ‘Monthly Review Meetings’ (Ward
Sabhas), a space where the citizen and department representatives meet to review status
of works and discuss concerns on implementation and engage in planning.
The success of Ward Works is that the BMP administration agreed to formalize
the Monthly Review Meetings, these are considered official meetings to be documented
and used for reviews and planning by the Department and the citizens. In the spirit of
being transparent and accountable to their citizens the administration mandated that
information on all works going on in the ward be made available on a monthly basis for
public consumption. A circular stating this and to mandate attendance by ward engineers,
health officials and other employees was sent out to all the departments by former special
commissioner, ISN Prasad, thus institutionalizing the process.
In 2003, to help citizens prioritize the issues of concern in their ward, they were
encouraged to develop a 3-year-perspective document for the development of each
participating ward.
One of the major barriers to public participation is the lack of information about
issues related to local government. Janaagraha volunteers organized a series of
workshops where they collected citizen inputs using ward and property maps. They also
provided residents with information on city administration and expert notes on roads,
street lighting, water supply, sanitation, city laws etc. In each ward of the participating
170
wards, a dedicated group of citizens acted as drivers for the successful generation of a
vision document.
Janaagraha provided citizens with tools to assess local infrastructure and draw up
plans to use some of the budget allocation for their needs such as patching potholes and
covering open drains. This process included five workshops in each of the participating
wards. A core group of about 20 community members were trained in team building and
meeting management by a professional team. Citizens were provided with high-quality
maps that Janaagraha obtained from the Bangalore Development Authority under a
memorandum of understanding. Surveys conducted by over 500 students helped in
assessing land use and dimensions of buildings that provided increased granularity to the
information. Community members also received information that helped them estimate
potential revenues from their wards. Once citizens identified the problems in their wards
in the first workshop, a second session was organized to help them in identifying
potential solutions. At this workshop, community members volunteered to be citizen
anchors, chose issues they felt strongly about, and assumed leadership roles on those
issues in their wards.
A handbook for citizens providing information on 21 important civic issues
compiled by Janaagraha helped citizen anchors work with their local government
agencies. In the following workshops, citizens arrived at costing figures for works that
were required and prioritized them to develop a ward vision document. On December 6,
2003 citizens formally presented their completed ward vision documents to city
government officials and the Mayor P.R. Ramesh assured citizens that their suggestions
would be included in developments plans and implemented wherever possible.
171
Once the vision documents were ready, citizens followed up the public works
going on in their wards through the monthly review meetings (ward sabhas). The monthly
review meetings involve accessing the ward works index for each ward for a given month
and discussing the progress of works with the officials responsible for them. This gives
citizens an overview of how money has been spent and provides a critical formal space
for citizens to hold the agencies responsible for ward-level issues and press forward with
the agenda of their vision documents. Currently, communities in different wards hold
monthly review meetings each month, where they meet with their corporators, engineers,
police inspectors, and other officials dealing with electricity, water and sanitation to
discuss ward works and work together in tackling civic problems.
7.1 Data from 10 wards
I attended the meetings in 10 wards that were holding monthly review meetings
between June and August 2004. The data presented here was gathered through participant
observation and in-depth interviews to assess the degree of success in promoting
participation in governance at the ward level. The degree of success was judged using the
following criteria.
1. Evidence of community mobilization - new volunteers for projects such as
mapping, working on specific issues, forming a federation, verification of public
works undertaken.
2. Government interaction – getting officials to undertake works citizens want;
getting co-operation from corporator
3. Planning process – any items from the ward vision or other citizen suggestions
accepted and included in the program of works of the corporation.
4. Implementation – any issues resolved such as roads fixed, sewer lines laid, storm
drains fixed, street lights fixed, garbage cleaned regularly etc.
172
Figure 7-3: Bangalore ward map with 10 participating wards of Ward Works
10 participating wards
50 Vishveshwarapuram
54 Srinivasanagar
55 Padmanabhanagar
68 Ejipura
74 Jeevanbheemanagar
78 Vasnathnagar
86 Sarvagnanagar
94 Kadugondanahalli
96 Hebbal
100 Sanjaynagar
The original 10 wards involved in ward vision are shown above. There were no
monthly review meetings in ward 96, Hebbal and none of the contacted residents were
willing to speak to me. Hence it was dropped and ward 72 Indiranagar, which was in a
similar situation, was included instead of ward 96.
Citizens’ stories from the 10 wards are presented below. The documentation often
relies on direct quotes to let citizens tell their own story. To provide context for their
successes, information about the individuals involved; their personal stories of
173
involvement, their efforts to approach authorities, and their reflections about the reasons
for their successes and failures are documented.
7.1.1 Ward 90 & 94: Kadugondanahalli & Pillanna Gardens
Ward 90 and 94 are adjacent areas and residents from the two wards share many
amenities and organizations including a resident welfare association. While parts of
Kadugondanahalli are revenue pockets recently included under BMP administration, it
also includes a few areas from the BDA developed Pillanna Garden.
Pillanna Garden was formed during 1972-73 but was not developed. The area
lacked asphalted roads and storm water drains. Residents hoped that the situation would
improve when BMP took over the ward in 1992. When the conditions did not change, a
few residents formed the Resident’s social and welfare association, Hennur Road 1st and
2nd cross (ward 90) and Pillanna Garden 3rd stage (ward 94) in 2002.
This association has helped bring residents and ward officials together through
monthly review meetings (MRM). Officials from the Engineering department of the BMP,
BESCOM, BWSSB, the health officer and police officials have taken part in the MRMs.
The following section documents the initiatives and successes in ward 94. This is
one of the few wards with documented successes in all 4 categories: community
mobilization, planning, government interaction and implementation. Information was
gathered through interviews with Mr. Sugumaran, joint secretary of the Residents social
and welfare association mentioned above and Mr. Sivashankaran, president of the
association.
174
Many areas of this ward did not have asphalted roads. After the ward vision
campaign, residents decided to tackle the issue of roads and were successful in getting
some roads metalled and tarred. For example, 12 th cross Pillanna Garden was buried
under 2 feet of mud, most of which was dumped there to prevent water-logging. Initially,
the contractor refused to tar the road since his men would have to dig through 2 feet of
mud to reach an old metalled surface. Residents were able to talk the engineers and their
corporator into helping them and supervised the road making work. The residents also
had a problem with unevenly made culverts. After lodging many complaints, they
documented badly made culverts and showed the pictures to their corporator. This
process of documentation and constant follow-up resulted in new evenly laid culverts.
Some parts of this area also lacked sanitary pipe connections for over 30 years.
The Association took up this issue and Mr. Sugumaran continued calling officials. With
community members constantly raising the issue at MRMs, the sanitary work was soon
undertaken. When officials had problems connecting two streets of different levels,
residents took them for a visit of the area and suggested alternative solutions.
On many roads, there were no road side drains to carry away rain water. Active
residents mobilized community members and supervised the creation of road side drains.
Where side drains were created but water flow was obstructed by electric poles, the
community members got the poles relocated. Many streets in this area lack street lights.
The Association appointed Mr. Sugumaran to follow up on this issue. He routinely
inspects street light poles that exist and has designed a form for registering complaints. In
addition, he has mobilized community members, submitted petitions to the corporator
and has been instrumental in getting lights installed on many streets of the ward. Having
175
at least one street light on the narrow streets has minimized petty crime and theft.
However, maintaining streetlights is a constant battle. On many streets, the wire
connections that were provided have been cut and Mr. Sugumaran has begun mobilizing
community support to get street light connections restored.
Ward 94 lacked a park and three of the four civic amenities sites had already been
used for other purposes. Community members thought CA site 4 was a park. However
they found that CA site 4 had already been sold and the owner planned to build a threestorey structure. Association members decided to approach the owner and negotiate with
him. After many conversations, the owner decided not to build a three storey structure; he
would limit it to one floor. The built up area would constitute only 30% of the total area
of the site. The owner agreed to landscape and maintain 50% of the site and any changes
to building plans or land use would be made only with approval from community
members. There would be only a wire fence around the site to promote a sense of
transparency. If the community wanted to use it for ward activities or fund and construct
a federation office on this site, they were free to do so.
In spite of these successes, it has not been smooth sailing. The ward is composed
of community members from diverse religious and linguistic backgrounds and reaching
out to them and promoting engagement is challenging. Mr. Rasheed Ali, 20 year resident
of Kadugondanahalli, realized that many community members who wished to attend the
weekly meetings of Pillana Garden’s Residents’ Social & Welfare Association could not
participate fully due to language and educational barriers. Understanding that Ward 94 is
composed of community members from diverse religious and linguistic backgrounds, Mr.
Ali wished to reach out to them in a language that they could not only identify with, but
176
also use to articulate and communicate their own ideas. To engage the people in his area
in the Janaagraha public governance movement, he formed the Arokiyamma Layout
Welfare Association on December 14, 2003.
Currently there are 14 members in the association of which 8 are active in weekly
meetings and neighborhood campaigning, Mr. Ali is able to speak to his members in
Urdu and explain the importance of social engagement and action. He says, “the mindset
for the past 50 years is that the people and the government are separate. To change that
attitude we must show results that are directly beneficial to them.” To illustrate this point,
he wrote to the BWSSB about the absence of a sewerage line in the locality by collecting
50 resident signatures with details of property and betterment taxes payment. Due to his
efforts, sewer line construction started. By promoting the attitude that ‘development’ is
community-based, Mr. Ali has been able to attract more people to the cause and help
them take ownership of their neighborhood. The associations from the two wards are
discussing forming a federation called Jago.
7.1.2 Ward 54: Girinagar
Unlike wards 90 and 94, Girinagar had a history of collective civic action prior to
its engagement through Janaagraha. Girinagar was developed by the Bangalore
Development Authority and settlement in 1st phase Girinagar began in 1979. As with
most localities, a 2nd and 3rd phase developed around the first phase, with private
builders dealing directly with buyers. All these areas lacked basic civic amenities such as
drinking water, sewerage and drainage facilities. This led citizens to form a Girinagar
residents welfare association in 1985. Their first task was to address the problem of
drinking water – most residents had to walk one kilometer to fetch drinking water from
177
Seeta Circle. Association members met with the chief minister, collected money for water
connections and got water. When problems arose due to the temporary nature of the
connections, the association pursued a court case and got the make-shift facilities made
permanent. The association made arrangements for road construction and for garbage
collection by employing six workers and a supervisor. In the absence of street lights,
residents faced difficulties in using their streets after dark. To address this, in 2001 the
association negotiated with Commissioner Jairaj of the BMP and KPTCL. They collected
Rs 5 lakh from residents to pay BMP charges and got street lights installed.
When the Corporation (BMP) took over the area in 1995, it demanded that the
residents pay Rs. 100 as betterment charges. The association swung into action and in
2001 successfully negotiated with the BMP to reduce the charges to Rs. 50 since the
basic infrastructure had been put in place through residents’ own efforts prior to its
incorporation into BMP jurisdiction.
Girinagar residents thus had a background in community mobilization and
interaction with government officials when they decided to become one of the core
communities of Janaagraha and undertook the ward vision campaign. The Girinagar
Residents Welfare Association currently has 647 members. In 2003, they decided to
mobilize the strength of the community and formed a federation with 6 resident
associations called Abhaya. With the federation, the strength of the entire community has
been mobilized.
Some areas that were revenue lands were included as part of the new ward in
1995. These areas lacked water lines. The Federation, headed by Mr. Y. Damodara, took
up the matter in the monthly review meetings and ensured that the water lines were laid.
178
According to Mr. Damodara, officials now call him to inform him that specific works are
to be executed and if any community members would like to see the implementation they
should be present at a specific time at the work site. Community members have been
involved in supervising tarring of roads in Srinivasa nagara.
This ward has also been the site of one of the few instances where the problems of
the urban poor were addressed. Residents of Manjunatha Colony, a slum-area in Ward 54,
lacked drinking water, underground drains and had to deal with sewage infested streets.
Many of the residents, particularly women felt that employing the Janaagraha platform to
solve their problems would involve them in controversial matters of politics and religion.
They were also shy and apprehensive about speaking out in public. When they attended
the monthly review meeting of ward 54, their hesitancy and self-consciousness turned to
confidence after they saw officials interacting positively with residents. When the women
spoke about their living conditions, the sanitation official along with the assistant
executive engineer went back with the women to examine the slum. The next day,
residents of Manjunatha Colony were supplied with drinking water every other day for 5
hours. In addition, federation members helped the women draft formal documents to
officially petition for implementing pesticide treatments and extending the time period of
water supply. Mr. Damodara has been the principal motivating force in mobilizing
community members. He is now engaged in persuading other community members to
take more active roles in the ward.
7.1.3 Ward 55: Padmanabhanagara
In Padmanabhanagar (ward 55), the largest ward in Bangalore city, residents met
their Executive Engineer and complained that they did not have water, under ground
179
drainage or street lights, though they were under the Corporation and were paying taxes.
They were told they would have to wait 3-5 years. Frustrated, residents decided to contact
resident associations in their area and form a federation that would give them greater
leverage. In 2003, they formed a federation called Abhyudaya. Since then they have been
able to secure many civic amenities.
The secretary of the federation B.V. Ramakrishna says, “We have about 115
individuals who are members of the federation. We have 50 resident welfare associations
of which about 30 are members. Each association has about 300 to 500 members. We are
big now. Individuals face a lot of difficulty but the federation identity makes it easier for
us. Wherever we call, if we mention we are from Abhyudaya work gets done faster. We
have had success with the water supply people. If we complain that there is a leak, even
at night 10 o-clock, next day morning they attend to it right away.” Mr. V. Ramaraju, an
octogenarian and long time resident says, “Ittamadu has all-mud roads and no drinking
water facilities or underground drainage. Now the roads are being metalled and water and
UGD work is going on …all on account of involved people.” Uma Nanjundiah of
Ittamadu added, “We also do verification of works, we keep going to see what they are
doing. Even officials now know Abhyudaya members are going to supervise, so they
make sure the work is done well.”
“Last year in Bharath Housing Society when road work was going on, we went
there, measured the thickness of the road, met the contractor and everybody in the area
came there and we used Janaagraha format to record what happened. Earlier we did not
know what they were doing. Now we know the plan, where they are doing work, and we
were able to get tender copies and details of works,” said Mr. T.R.Gopalakrishna
180
He continued, “Our greatest achievement was paura spandana 55. Thirty five
senior officers heard us and we now have monthly review meetings. And as you see,
nearly 40-50 % of our members are women, some are employed, many are housewives,
all are highly educated, responsible citizens. Our vice president is a practicing lawyer,
there are some bank officials, teachers, all highly placed responsible citizens. To our
credit we have three parks developed. We hold meetings every Friday. People come
expending their own funds. We have already had 120 meetings without a break. All the
problems presented by our members are noted and we send letters to officials.
Abhyudaya has become a force.”
7.1.4 Ward 68: Ejipura
Ejipura is another area of Bangalore that has seen tremendous amount of new
development and growth in the last decade. Every time a new layout grew and
encountered infrastructure problems, they formed an association so that the ward saw a
lot of citizen activity in lobbying for new infrastructure. Janaagraha, according to Mr.
Anil Kumar a resident active in interacting with local government agencies, provided the
first opportunity for many association members to meet.
Mr. Anil Kumar along with 7-8 associations in his area attended the first Janaagraha
meeting in ward 68. They watched videos on how to cost projects in their areas, how to
measure roads, etc. At this meeting they realized how many other associations there were
in their area and the lack of interaction. They decided to find a way to meet with
everyone and come together under one banner. The idea of creating a Federation was
offered by a retired government secretary by the name of BK Mohan Rao. While
participating in Janaagraha’s ward works campaign, the groups realized that they had
181
competing demands. Unless they cooperated nothing would be achieved. As part of ward
works, they found that though the ward could potentially contribute Rs. 7 million in
revenue through property taxes, BMP was collecting Rs 4,500,000. A survey of the entire
ward was taken to understand the conditions of the roads, drains, garbage etc. Two
members from each association were selected as representatives to meet and prioritize the
works to be undertaken in their neighborhood. 20 meetings were held to bring down the
Rs 70 million worth of required works to Rs 1,850,000 in which each area would receive
a small portion of the money. The core group of 2 members from each association
became the foundation for a federation that held its first meeting on October 20 2002.
The Federation consisting of 10 community associations began Monthly Review
Meetings/ Ward Sabhas, and the cooperator as well as the assistant executive engineer
began interacting with community members.
Among the first issues taken up was the quality of sidewalks, footpaths and lanes.
Due to misaligned stones conditions were dangerous for pedestrians. Citizens
documented the bad condition of these facilities and met with the contractor in charge.
When he claimed that his men had completed the work, citizens invited a community
member Professor Justo to review the work. When his consultation revealed that only
55% of the work had been completed, the federation decided to monitor all the works
undertaken and verify the results. According to Mr. Anil Kumar, secretary of the
Federation, “community members dedicatedly monitor all roadwork projects. They bring
a camera, measuring tape, and screwdrivers to make sure road works are completed as
promised.”
182
Community members were also unhappy that streets were not cleaned by corporation
workers. The workers argued that they could not clean the streets unless they were
asphalted. This led to citizens to contact their local health officer and request that he issue
a letter stating that where ever streets were asphalted, the sweepers would be required to
clean the streets. Citizens used this letter to ensure that sweepers did their job. To fix their
problem with garbage on the streets, residents pooled resources and hired a private
company. The federation circulated information about garbage collection and provided a
helpline telephone number to ensure garbage collection.
As part of the ward vision campaign, 330 citizens marched around their ward and
their visibility prompted their corporator to join them and assure them that he would
cooperate with their efforts to improve their neighborhoods.
The Federation counts its efforts to bring water supply to their areas as its main
achievement. According to Secretary Anil Kumar, “BWSSB had its own plan about what
areas to include in providing new water lines. We wanted to make sure all the areas got
water. So we asked for BWSSB’s plan under the Right to Information Act. They had left
out three areas in the ward. We took up the issue with the executive engineer and asked
them to revise the drawing. BWSSB revised the plan to include the other 3 three areas
like we asked. Every month afterward, the BWSSB officials came to the MRMs to
monitor progress and enquire about problems. Any time there is water leakage, or certain
pipes have not been laid, a simple call to the executive engineer will solve the problem”.
Citizens have also undertaken monitoring of works in their area. When poor quality
of cementing in water pipes led to leaks, citizens approached their chief engineer with
photographic evidence and got the engineers to relay the pipes. Mr. Anil Kumar said
183
“BWSSB is actually scared of the Federation because they realize the community
members are constantly monitoring water supply works. In Charananadi and
Koramangala 6th block, there were bends in the water pipes, coconut shells were blocking
water and rats entered the pipes. We proved the technical deficiencies by photographs
and it was corrected in Charnanadi layout; this could not be achieved without the
Federation’s work”.
“We’ve worked with the police too. Federation suggestions were given to Traffic
Police to provide new signals, painting of old signs, flashlights for Ring Road. Traffic
Police responded with a letter 2 weeks back saying some recommendations have already
been taken up. We are making a lot of progress.”
7.1.5 Ward 50: V.V. Puram
While some of the wards lack basic civic amenities, others are well developed and
have problems with making sure that the infrastructure is maintained well. V.V.Puram
has been part of the city for more than 30 years. The ward was re-formulated in 1995
through division of VV Puram and Kanakanapalya. It has a federation of associations,
Supraja, formed in 2002, with participation from 6 resident welfare associations. Mr. B.N.
Mani, the secretary of the Federation, has been involved in civic issues for over a decade
and is personally known to most ward officials. He states that while he was individually
approaching ward officials in the past, the Federation now serves as a collective umbrella
for community members to approach authorities for solutions to problems. According to
him, there are about 50 individuals who are a part of the Federation, though few are very
active. The corporator elected from this ward was the Mayor of the city for 2003-2004.
184
Yet, citizen prioritized works were not incorporated as part of the program of works for
ward 50 in 2002-2003 or 2003-2004.
Since this is an old ward with adequate infrastructure, residents desire regular
maintenance and upgrade of civic amenities which has not happened. In addition, citizens
were unhappy with the quality of works that were undertaken. Each time the issue of
unsatisfactory work quality was brought up, officials demanded proof. To get assistance
in their verification efforts, the Federation enlisted the help of two retirees, Mr. K.
Chandrashekar, Mr. G.R. Nagraj, from the Public Works Department. The Federation
got relevant information, under the Karnataka Right to Information Act, on bills paid for
works executed and the retirees helped in documenting and costing works undertaken.
With this, the Federation lodged a formal complaint that exorbitant sums of money were
paid for inferior quality of work. According to Mr. Venkatram, president of Supraja
federation, “Once contractors start working, there should be some way of ensuring we get
quality work for money spent. If they complete work worth Rs 60,000 and get paid Rs 2
lakh, that is not acceptable. BMP does not have a bill verification process, so we need to
produce evidence of shoddy work and make sure they act.”
With the initiation of monthly review meetings, which the corporator occasionally
attends, community members have seen some improvement in garbage clearance around
B.P. Wadia road, though there is scope for a lot of improvement. The population density
in this old ward has grown in the last decade. Individual bungalows have been converted
into apartment blocks with 30-50 residence units. This has added additional stress on the
civic infrastructure, particularly the sewer lines. Blockage and leaks from sewer lines has
become a common feature. Federation members are currently involved in requesting that
185
the old sewer lines be replaced. Their main effort is to get more individuals involved and
participating in the process.
7.1.6 Ward 85: Sarvagnanagar
Sarvagnanagar is one of the older wards of Bangalore and includes the old Cox
Town area. The ward was reconstituted recently to include adjacent areas such as
Kadrenapalya, Kalahalli and New Byappanahalli. The ward now has an area of 4.2 square
kilometers. While the old Cox Town area requires maintenance and expansion of existing
infrastructure facilities, the newly added area require basic infrastructure such as water
and sewer pipes.
The Sarvagnanagar Citizens’ Forum (SCF) was formed in 2002 by a few
members under the leadership of Mr. P.V.Ramakrishnappa. Today it has a membership of
about 150 members. In August 2003, the association led a ward yatra mobilizing about
200 citizens. After they created a ward vision and prioritized issues that required attention
in their ward, they followed the works in their ward through monthly review meetings.
About 15% of the works identified as priority works by citizens were included in the
program of works. However none of them have been actually implemented.
Their interactions with local ward officials have been complicated by frequent
transfers and change of personnel. Their coporator for 2004 is an 18 year old woman
whose father wields power on her behalf. This has often led to unproductive interactions.
However the community members have been able to mobilize residents for various ward
activities.
186
Cox Town residents have a problem with their market. Ten months ago (in
October 2003) the old market buildings were evacuated and Bangalore Mahanagara
Palike had promised residents a new structure on the old site. With the loss of the old
market, vendors moved across MM Road into temporary stalls erected on the pavement.
The old market area has turned into a dump yard. The market area is adjacent to schools,
a hospital and a church. Residents were very unhappy with the situation.
Concerned citizens proposed an alternative solution of relocation the market to a
more appropriate site, which currently contains the revenue office. With the help of
Janaagraha volunteers, the Sarvagnanagar Citizens’ Forum offered residents three
possible proposals for a new market. On Sunday July 18, 2004 residents engaged in
participatory planning and selected a design for the new Cox Town market as part of a
community referendum. Of the 1600 votes, the proposal for a new market building with
the tax office and post office on the first floor garnered 1265 votes. This proposal was
formulated with community inputs into the design process.
In the absence of positive response from BMP, community members have now
approached Mr. Sangliana, the Member of Parliament (MP) elected from their
parliamentary constituency for support. On August 7, 2004 they gave their MP a tour of
the area and the market to highlight their problems.
Community members have also had problems due to the lack of involvement of
their corporator. On August 7, 2004, about 70 community members held a protest
meeting at the corporator’s office. They have informed their corporator that they would
cooperate and help her if she decides to allocate money and execute much needed works
in their ward.
187
Since Cox Town is an old area, while water connections are place, most valves
and pipes are old and often residents went without water due to defective valves causing
leaks and pipes getting clogged. They would buy water from lorries even though they had
corporation water pipe connections. SCF members and other residents of the area decided
to meet BWSSB chairman Mr. Vidyashankar and request action. After their meeting on
August 27, 2002, workmen showed up the next day and changed valves and removed
blocks. Residents on Ramakrishnappa road, Gover road and Webster road now have no
problems with their water supply.
7.1.7 Ward 100: Sanjaynagar
Sanjaynagar was the last ward to join the Corporation. It was a totally unplanned
ward, dotted with haphazard street signs and awkward turns. Previously, plots of land
were owned by private agencies, which were turned into housing layouts after Ward 100
joined the Corporation. Ms. Kala Sundar, a new resident of 1st A Cross, and Ms.
Niroopama Nayar, a 10-year resident of the area, discussed the progress of their project
of work as stated in their Ward Vision document.
About 30-40 people attend the monthly review meetings that are held at the RMV
Club. Ms. Sundar explained, “Our method is to identify problems at the MRMs and then
call the corresponding agency official to attend the next meeting. With repeated calls,
they respond quite attentively to our complaints.”
There is a new initiative among the women of Ward 100 to begin working on
projects that they feel are more ‘in their depth’. Ms. Sundar explained, “We don’t really
understand what has to be done, as in the specifications of how a sewage pipe should be
laid, and what not. We are not really equipped to supervise such things. So we would like
188
to identify those areas where the cooperator or engineer cannot take advantage of our lack
of knowledge.”
The women would like to supervise projects such as the daily sweeping of the
roads and daily garbage collection. Keeping the neighborhood clean is their main concern.
The women are also taking an active role in aiding the urban poor of their area in voicing
their grievances and solving their problems. Ms. Sundar explained, “ At a recent meeting
with the urban poor, women self-help groups expressed themselves quite firmly regarding
the civic problems in their area: Ration Cards: the 1 rupee application form for ration
cards were being sold to them for 100 rupees, an exorbitant rate which no one could
afford ; no sewage drains; public toilet has no water connection and no door ; tuitions
should be held for their children a few hours every day. These are things we understand. ”
“You know some of these women do not even have the money to pay the bus fare
to meet an agency official. If they go in the evening they are told to come in the morning,
if they go in the morning they are told to come in the evening. Sometimes they are yelled
at to go away. We would like to help them assert themselves in front of the agency
officials at our MRMs so their concerns can be attended to,” said Ms. Sundar. She
stressed that they do not want to be an intermediary or a mediator, but rather be a
presence to boost their confidence in articulating their needs.
They have had successes in some areas. Community members from ward 100
have been able to establish good rapport with the BESCOM representative Mr. Narayan.
This has helped them in addressing complaints about street lights. Community members
identified the Kanyakaparameshwari temple as a central location and established a
complaints box. If community members have any problems with street lights or
189
electricity poles, they write to the official and drop it off at the temple. Mr. Narayan has
promised to attend to these complaints and get back to the community members with
feedback during their monthly review meetings/ ward sabhas.
“This road you see here, 1 st A cross was just in a terrible state …we tried our
level best for 10 years to tar this road. We called the cooperator so many times, but no
one would answer. You should have seen this road when it rained it was horrible,” said
Ms. Nayar. Recently, the community contacted the executive engineer and the contractor
and urged him to attend their MRM. After 2-3 visits to their road, the officials realized
the miserable condition of the road. After 10 years, the preliminary work for asphalting
has been completed on 1st A Cross. “Even when the supervisor came with his materials
to lay the road, he brought barely enough to cover the road. Community members made a
tremendous effort to find the proper specifications for road asphalting and showed it to
the supervisor, and forced him to bring more materials to lay the base of the road.”
They have also had success in increasing garbage collection in their area through
repeated calls to the BMP. But they are unhappy with the progress made on their ward
vision. Ms. Sundar, “I can’t say we are moving anywhere close to that vision because
this is a new, unplanned ward. There are so many civic projects to be attended to. Much
more citizen participation is needed. But there are no youngsters and they have no time.
You cannot fault the youngsters because they go at 8:30 and come back by 8:30. The
retired people must take on the responsibility.”
“We do have some people now. The amount of time and energy that retired
people in our area are investing in these civic projects is amazing. I don’t know how they
do it … they find out how much money has been sanctioned to each project and how
190
much has actually been used, they find the exact specifications for road laying and
asphalting, and pipe laying and water connections. Without Janaagraha’s assistance in
making such resources known to communities and telling us it is our right to make use of
this information, verifying the quality of work in our area would be impossible.”
Community mobilization has been difficult in some parts of ward 100 while in
other older established neighborhoods, there are residents associations that have indicated
that they prefer to interact directly with city agencies. Ward 100 is working on forming a
federation. While a few existing resident welfare associations (RWA) will be a part of the
federation, it is the individuals who do not currently belong to any association who are
driving the process enthusiastically. In the absence of an RWA, it has been proposed that
each main road choose a representative for the Federation.
The citizens are hopeful that things will change. Ms. Sundar summarizes it as “I
think our biggest success is communities have begun to realize that these civic issues
need to be attended to. Even if they don’t come to our meetings and help us, their positive
energies can be exploited in the future, like time, etc. They will become more active once
they see things are changing.”
7.1.8 Other wards : 78, 74, 72
Other wards have faced numerous problems in mobilizing community members
and keeping their monthly review meetings going. In wealthy Vasantnagar (ward 78),
core community members have had to face resistance from BMP officials and residents.
According to Mr. Krishnamurthy, a long time resident and core community member,
though BMP engineers attended the monthly review meetings initially, they stopped after
191
the ward vision document was created. To get officials to attend, community members
tried holding two meetings in the ward office – the office was locked.
According to Mr. Krishnamurthy, the biggest success of ward 78 has been
completing the ward vision document. Of the 3,000,000work identified as required,
citizens prioritized and recommended Rs 1,000,000 work. When the program of works
was released for 2003, only Rs. 300,000 worth of work was included in it based on
citizen recommendation.
Though residents have tried to supervise the works that were being implemented
as part of the program of works, they have had unpleasant interactions. Engineers in the
ward do not respond to phone calls from citizens requesting emergency minor works such
as broken water pipes. Core members have found it very difficult to mobilize other
residents for ward activities. The apathy of other residents has discouraged the core
members. They find that area residents lack the initiative to “pick up a phone and call the
authorities” about neighborhood problems. Awareness of citizens in ward 78 is low and
there is apathy towards civic action. Few young people, men and women, are involved.
There is a lot of work to be done to make people aware and interested.
In Jeevanbheemanagar (ward 74), another relatively well developed area, there
have been difficulties in maintaining people’s interest. Residents started an association
called RISE - Residents’ Initiative for Safe Environment in 1997. More than a 1000
residents joined together to ensure that the streets would be free of garbage and the
material would be recycled. As long as they had problems with garbage collection in their
areas, they participated in the meetings. Once the government ensured routine garbage
collection, residents stopped attending meetings. After years of passionately pursuing
192
RISE, the government’s assumption of responsibility for the garbage issue destabilized
the unity they had built and unraveled the communities. People who were championing
the movement were unhappy that their objective of recycling garbage would no longer be
reached.
Currently, there are other issues that affect the ward such as clogged storm water
drains. However, there is general apathy and cynicism among residents. The
Jeevanbhimanagar Citizens Forum is having difficulties securing membership and
maintaining people’s interest. After years of being involved in RISE, the members feel as
though they must latch on to another offensive, intolerable issue in order to unite the
community under one platform. They have also very little faith in government officials.
During an interview attended by 13 citizens, one resident, Mr. Shankar Narayan went on
to say, “Every government official would rather waste his breath telling you all the ways
something cannot be done than work with you on a solution. I’m sorry that’s just how it
is.” People were also unwilling to raise controversial issues and offend powerful
residents. They did not want to be involved in issues that caused unwanted confrontation
or to get caught up with “government goons”. When one citizen, Nagaraj Prabhu raised
the issue of increasing revenue collection in the ward, this fear surfaced with comments
such as “Those who are not paying property tax must be rich people, having a good
connection, knowing the ARO… one fine day if they come to know it is our people who
are exposing them, they will break our legs” “I’m sorry but I refuse to get involved. I
have washed my hands off all of this. My family and I have been threatened that if we go
too deep into certain issues involving government, we will regret it. I’m telling you
Nagaraj, do not get involved. We don’t want anything happening to you.” The ward
193
lacks young, energetic members who can articulate themselves forcefully and fearlessly
to government officials and local engineers. The cynicism of the citizens currently
working on the ward issues surfaced again with the comment “Youth who have to earn
the bread and butter will not give their time. Because we are now irrelevant to any other
profession, we are doing this.” When the interview ended, citizens were making plans to
restart their monthly review meetings that had been discontinued.
Motivating citizens and sustaining participation is also a challenge faced in
Indiranagar, ward 72. The ward has a federation, the Indiranagar Coordinating
Committee which includes Wards 72, 74, 82, and 84. There are a total of 18 associations.
Their meetings are held regularly at the Indiranagar Club. According to Mr.
Ramamoorthy, a founding member “because we represent a big area, we have big
strength and we have developed a good rapport with the health department, the police,
BESCOM. But many of the association members are retired people who were previously
employed in the public sector or government. There are no youngsters to be found due to
their preoccupation with the bread earning”.
According to Mr. Ramamoorthy Ward 72 has found it difficult to follow through
on its Priority of Works because the cooperator had no interest in helping the middle
class. “Every time we approach her with our concerns, she sends us away saying she is
now only concerned with helping the slums. After all that is where she hopes to get her
re-election vote. So we are left to help ourselves.” However, The Indiranagar
Coordinating Committee has had a number of successes.
For 6 years, community members were fighting to fix road separators along
Indiranagar’s 100 ft. road. The community invited Mr. Sangliana, a popular retired police
194
inspector resident in the ward to one of their monthly meetings and discussed the problem.
His initiative led to half the work being done. When he could no longer pursue the issue,
the community approached Inspector General MD Singh to survey the conditions. This
led to completion of the work.
Another success story the community is proud of is interacting with BDA
chairman Jerome Jayakar on the Flyover Bridge. According to Mr. Ramamoorthy, “We
sent a letter telling him all the problems with cutting down 2000 trees, running a bridge
over drains and all the traffic and pollution problems we would have to face. Jayakar
called me and said he wanted a meeting and invited all of the association members along
with other signatories to discuss the government project. That was maybe the first time in
the history of Karnataka the government consulted the people and addressed their
concerns before beginning the project. There was a 3½ hour discussion involving the
community members, signatories, and the government officials”.
He explains their success as follows “The reason we are achieving all of these
things is because of the residents of this area and members of our association. Many of
them are retired Inspector Generals or ex-Chief Secretaries of the Karnataka Government.
They have much pull with government officials and add credibility to our arguments.
Without such a residential make-up, we would not have achieved what we have so far.”
7.2 Summary of observations
From observations and interviews with community members it is clear that there
are a few important factors for successful participation in local government.
195
Some of the most successful wards have been those with serious infrastructure
problems. Problems with government services seem to fuel citizen engagement and
interest in participatory democracy. Constructive engagement with government officials
has occurred when residents selected specific issues and employed a focused approach to
actively participate in meeting officials, pursuing them over time and kept following up
on their issues until they were satisfied with the solutions. This often involved long tem
engagement with no visible immediate payback to citizens. Committed people who
could dedicate time to verifying works implemented in their wards were critical for
successes. Often such individuals were retirees, stay at home mothers and older women.
Most of them were people who were actively involved in other social organizations.
The engagement process failed in cases where there was no political support from
the corporator or active opposition from BMP officials to residents holding them
accountable.
There were also a few differences in how the wards conducted their meetings that
made a difference to their success/breakdown. In some wards, such as ward 100 and ward
72 the monthly meetings were held in locations that were not public spaces and some
members of the poorer sections felt intimidated and did not participate. In some wards,
women were conspicuously missing from the activities although, there are issues such as
garbage disposal that affect their daily routines and require their inputs, participation and
active involvement in decision making.
7.2.1 Challenges
Elected representatives felt threatened by citizens working through Janaagraha to
participate in the budgeting process and prioritizing ward works. On October 29, 2003
196
the BMP council passed a resolution to initiate legal action against Janaagraha if it
continued to “misguide” the people by claiming to solve the civic problems of the City
(Deccan Herald, 2003). Former Mayor Chandrashekar argued that Janaagraha was
interfering in BMP’s activities by calling upon the people to identify civic problems in
their respective areas and to come out with budget estimates, besides directing the people
to approach it for getting their civic problems solved.
Mr Chandrashekar demanded that a police complaint be lodged against
Janaagraha for having announced that it would “ prepare the budget estimates for
Bangalore City”. He received support from Leader of the Opposition Jameel Ahmed who
was citied as stating, “If Janaagraha is going to prepare the budget estimates, what is the
necessity for the BMP Council and for so many officials here?” another corporator
Padmanabha Reddy told the BMP Council that Janaagraha was “actually playing the
people against the corporators by organising public functions and announcing that
development works were not being carried out in the wards due to objection from the
elected representatives. While the budgetary allocation is Rs 40-50 lakh per year to a
ward, the expectations of Janaagraha runs into crores of rupees. From where do we get so
much money or how can we convince the people about the limited budget?”
While some of their concerns are legitimate, the statements also indicate that
corporators are not fully aware of the activities of citizens working through Janaagraha
since Ward Vision and Ward RECiP answer the concerns raised by the corporators.
This does indicate that citizens need to find ways in which their corporators feel
that citizen participation benefits them. For example, the common perception that at
election time it is the slum dwellers who vote can be countered if middle class citizens
197
working through Janaagraha take active interest in electing their councilors. In some
wards such as Girinagar and Sanjaynagar, middle class citizens have begun interacting
with the urban poor and find that the urban poor are equally unsatisfied with local
government so that there are common interests to be pursued by working together.
7.3 So what did Ward Works achieve?
Through Ward Works, citizens engaged in participatory budgeting for the first
time in Bangalore. They identified Rs 100 million of ward works as priorities for the
financial year 2002-03 of which Rs 50 million of works was included in the Program of
Works.
The process of prioritization led to citizens engaging in dialogue with other
citizen groups/associations in their wards. Instead of collapsing into chaos, these
meetings proved that with enough information and opportunities to participate in
decision-making citizens could work effectively. They made compromise when they saw
the process as fair and transparent. They also monitored implementation of works to
improve the output for their tax rupees and make their neighborhoods more livable.
Through the monthly review meetings, citizens interact with their elected
representatives and BMP to review works going on in their ward and provide feedback
and suggest changes or new additions. These meetings are conducted with digital reports
generated from a regularly updated database made possible by FBAS. This has led to
citizen partnership in local government.
For its part, BMP administration made it mandatory for ward officials to attend
these monthly review meetings where they are held. The minutes of these meetings are
198
part of official record. This promotion of citizen participation is commendable in an
organization that has often officially criticized “citizen interference”.
199
Chapter 8
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS
This chapter analyzes the data to draw some conclusions about the role of ICTs in
local governance in Bangalore city. The first section reiterates the findings and answers
the research questions. The second section first examines the reasons for the marginal
role that ICTs play in citizens’ interactions with the local government. Secondly, it lays
out a theoretical framework and investigates why PROOF and Ward Works initiatives
have succeeded in promoting citizen participation in governance. An analysis of how
these two initiatives empower citizens then follows and some conclusions are outlined.
Following this, areas that need further research are discussed.
8.1 Answers to the research questions
1. What role do information and communication technologies (ICTs) play in
citizen-government interactions in Bangalore city?
To answer this question, the government services available to citizens that could
be accessed through the use of ICTs were examined (see table 5-1). In addition, to
understand whether the use of ICTs influences/ changes interactions between citizens and
local government, variables related to information seeking about local government and
contacting government officials were analyzed. Results indicated that people
predominantly preferred to visit government offices (82%) and secondly to use the
telephone (13%) to get information rather than use e-government websites (1%). Only
one person in the entire sample of 993 (69 of whom used e-government websites) had
sent an email to a government official.
200
Based on the survey results, it is clear that until August 2004 information and
communication technologies did not play a major role in citizen-government
interactions.
2. Does the use of ICT by the Bangalore City Corporation promote citizen
participation in local government in Bangalore City?
In terms of the formal participation measures included in the survey- voting,
campaigning, attending meetings and rallies, contacting local officials, there is no
significant difference between people who do and peoplw who do not use computers.
Thus, it could be argued that ICT use by the Bangalore City Corporation as part of egovernment has not promoted citizen participation in local government.
However, if we consider the case studies of PROOF and Ward Works, use of
ICTs by the city corporation (computerized fund based accounting system in this case)
made information sharing easier and this facilitated citizen participation. ICTs was a
facilitator not an instigator. Lack of wide availability of Internet and computer terminals
limited the role that technology could play at the individual level in Bangalore city but
ICTs made a crucial difference at the institutional level. Changes in processing
information resulted in new information flows and helped citizens who wanted to
participate in local government. Information technology did not play a role in developing
community networks or social/political coalitions in this study though literature suggests
that IT is expected to play such a role.
3. How does the use of information technology facilitate citizen empowerment?
Use of information technology by the city corporation affected information flows.
Information availability, transparency in budget figures and ability to track public works
201
projects and expenditure, gave power to citizens to demand accountability and to
participate in the decision making process. Thus availability of information that was
previously not accessible, through new information technology empowered citizens.
8.2 Summary of findings from the survey
In a survey of 993 participants, predominantly made up of young, well educated
individuals who could belong to the middle class or higher income group, only 69 had
actually used the e-government websites available. Significantly more men use
computers than women and while a significantly larger percentage of men prefer to use
computers at work, women prefer to visit cyber cafés. Individuals who were graduates
were significantly more likely to have used computers for 3 or more years. Results
suggest that new information technologies have not made a significant diference in
citizen-government interactions. 82% of those participating in the survey indicated that
they preferred to visit government offices to gain information about local government
services. When citizens visited e-government websites, they mostly looked up contact
information. 87% of these individuals said that they found no difference in the
information available on the government websites. There was no information on the
website that they could not have found through the other sources. One person in the entire
survey sample had sent an email to the local government official, and none of the 993
individuals had contacted their local political representative (BMP councilor) through
email.
Most citizens who visited e-government websites did not find the content up to
date. They gave poor ratings for the relevance of content, usefulness of the material and
reliability of content.
202
There were no statistically significant differences between computer users and
nonusers in voting, attending meeting, participating in rallies, campaigning or contacting
local officials. for this sample of survey participants, information technology did not
influence whether they participated in local government or not. And since the websites of
the local government agencies were not geared towards promoting citizen consultation,
discussion or even two way transactions where citizens could search for information and
provide inputs, information technology did not led to citizen participation in the
traditional ways.
8.3 Analysis: Why do State e-government initiatives not lead to citizen
participation?
To answer this question, we need a framework to analyze the e-government
initiatives of Karnataka State government and Bangalore Mahanagara Palike. The
guidelines developed by Center for Democracy and Technology and Infodev in the
eGovernment Handbook for Developing Countries (2002) are employed here.
Figure 8-1: Framework for analysis of E-government
• Stages - publish, interact, transact
• Process Reform
• Leadership
• Strategic Investment
• Collaboration
• Infrastructure Development
• Supportive Policy & Implementation
• Transparency
• Interoperability
• Cost-structure, workforce issues
• Civic Engagement
Govt of
Karnataka
&
BMP initiatives
PROOF
&
Ward Works
203
Karnataka’s e-government initiatives are placed among the pioneering pilot
projects in India. As seen in Chapter 5, many departments within the state government
have websites. However, these e-government websites do not seem to have achieved the
goals stated in the Mahiti policy. The reasons for this are clear when we apply the
guidelines provided by Infodev to analyze Karnataka’s e-government initiatives.
To begin with, none of these websites allow citizens to carry out the entire
transaction online without physically visiting an office or kiosk. Most of the websites just
publish information. Few if any, allow citizens to interact with the government through
online consultations or feedback mechanisms. Thus most initiatives are in stage one of
the e-government process.
One of the major issues in e-government is ensuring that government processes
are reengineered before computerization begins. These processes have to take into
account critical elements of government performance such as effectiveness, efficiency,
accountability, responsiveness to citizens, and access. However, except in the case of the
Bhoomi project, this has not happened in the other departments.
Bhoomi’s success as a state-wide e-government project depended on some
important factors that have not been replicated for other projects. An analysis of Bhoomi
by the World Bank listed civil service officers enlisting a significant level of political
support for Bhoomi as one of the key driving factors. In addition, resistance from field
staff was anticipated and conscious steps were taken to lessen the resistance. There was
controlled experimentation with the model to facilitate learning and innovation and
finally, central government funding and support from the World Bank in the form of
structural adjustment loan and technical assistance in the form of periodic review of
204
major e-government initiatives were critical external catalysts. These factors have not
been operational for other e-government initiatives.
Thus in many departments, there has been limited process reengineering. While
the information is available in digital format, the processes are based on legacy
information flows. Thus, introducing computerization just adds another layer to the
existing process at great expense without fundamentally altering information flows.
The status of computerization is best explained by a quote from an official within
the Department of IT and Biotechnology. Mr. V.A. Patil had an interesting perspective on
the e-government initiatives undertaken in the state. In an hour long interview he stated
that while the central finance ministry had issued a directive that all central and state
government departments should spend 3 percent of their budget on the purchase of
computers, very few administrators at the middle level were trained or motivated to use
IT tools. “ The Mahiti policy aims at computerizing every department, and creating
websites for every district. Where are you going to get people who can maintain all this
once it is setup? You need people to fix problems, update information, keep up with new
technology. Everyone with some skill wants to work in a company and make money.
There is an entrenched file culture even if we are all required to have our email addresses
on our visiting cards. Most departments have randomly bought material to exhaust
allocated budgets. There is very little accountability or motivation to put them into
efficient use after they buy them. It is easy for politicians to lay down policies on paper.
You can go the departments and see for yourself what people are actually doing.”
Another issue is the limited coordination between departments. This is true even
fro the most celebrated e-government project in Karnataka –Bhoomi. The scope of
205
Bhoomi is limited to maintenance of land records, and issue of Rights and Tenancy
Certificates. The Department of Stamps and Registration is responsible for deeds in case
there is a change in ownership because of sale or inheritance. This department was
computerized and started a project called Kaveri (Karnataka Valuation and eRegistration). However, the Bhoomi kiosks are not connected to the Kaveri centers. So
Kaveri centers sent out their information in digital forms on storage media such as floppy
disks and citizens still had to physically travel to the kiosk or center as the case may be.
When electricity outages occurred, citizens had to make multiple trips to the centers.
Thus the system is not seamless in the digital sense. Besides this, there is no single
standard for digitization since the proposed detailed e-government policy did not
materialize. Neither has a state data center materialized as planned (Krishnaswamy,
2002). This makes interconnection and sharing of data difficult. Since there is no definite
timeframe to move all manual transactions to digital, there are inordinate delays in
implementing projects that give rise to cost over runs and change of personnel.
Leadership from officials within the departments has been sporadic. This is
partly due to the file culture cited above, but a few other factors such as frequent
transfers, instability within the state government and lack of incentives for change have
contributed to the situation. This observation is supported by comments made by Mr.
Vivek Kulkarni, who was IT secretary for Karnataka until September 2003. Mr. Kulkarni
resigned from his government position in 2003 to start his own company. He refused
requests for an interview in December 2003 and hence his views were gleaned from past
interviews that were published in newspapers. In 2001, in an interview with the New
Indian Express, Mr. Kulkarni argued that the basic work culture and framework of the
206
government in India did not favor e-governance (New Indian Express, 2001, December
24). He claimed that he was convinced 95 percent of people in the government did not
believe in e-governance. His explanation for problems with e-government was that there
was conflict between domain knowledge and knowledge of IT. According to him, policy
makers were older people who were not technology savvy and those who understood IT
were junior staff - seniors did not want to surrender their power by sharing information.
According to Chetan Krishnaswamy, a news correspondent with The Times of
India, a leading English daily in Bangalore, differences of opinion between the IT
department and the Chief Secretary caused delays in Karnataka's e-government projects.
He says “Take for example the Centre for e-Governance they provided for in
Mahiti,…turned out a non-starter. During the June 2000 Global Investors Meet, the IT
department had signed a MoU with Reliance Industries Limited to establish 7,500
electronic kiosks across the state. Those things were supposed to dole out government
records pertaining to birth, death, land, etc, for a fee. Why didn't the project take off?
Nobody is talking. Before Mr. Chawla was appointed as e-government secretary, egovernment initiatives were under the IT Secretary and Karnataka had a succession of
three different secretaries in as many years before 2003. Each man had his own agenda,
there is no consistency here. What progress do you expect ?”
This issue is not unique to Karnataka. It is common in India and has prompted the
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to state that senior officials should have a fixed tenure
to ensure continuity (Outlook, 2005, June 27).
While transfers are deemed a necessary feature of civil service to keep corruption
at a minimum, it would help to have a policy where after transfer, the officers are
207
available to successors for consultation. It would help if the government made sure that
this is counted towards their annual performance appraisals and promotions.
It is also important that strategic investments are made in infrastructure and
human resource development instead of investing in introducing computerization in every
department. Merely publishing information may not result in greater accountability,
transparency, efficiency or citizen friendliness. As seen from data in Chapter 5, while
most websites publish some information, citizens did not find the information relevant or
useful. One of the most important complaints that citizens had was that the information
was not up to date and hence not reliable. This could be due to the fact that most
departments do not have an officer whose job is to monitor and maintain the website.
Investment in hiring an officer for such a purpose would help the departments to project
an image that is reassuring to citizens and convinces them to make use of the services.
Another important policy issue is the lack of e-security and privacy guidelines.
Without a well defined policy on the security of information, building interactive features
might not help since citizen trust has to be earned. There is also a need for adoption and
use of digital signatures by government departments. Currently, e-government
transactions cannot occur completely online due to security constraints. Citizens seem to
feel that it is pointless to use e-government websites if they have to physically visit an
office at some point anyway. This is exemplified in citizen comments such as this one by
Dr. Srinivasan, professor of physics, Bangalore University, “I go the website and get
information on passport renewal but I can’t submit anything online. So I still have to go
there and stand in a queue. I can ask my bank to pay my utility bills but if I have a
208
question or a problem with the bill, it is the same run around again. What do you do with
infrastructure if nothing else about how they work changes?”
These issues remain in the case of the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike and its egovernment initiatives. BMP’s website has links under citizen services that do not work.
Many documents do not open and the information on the official website is outdated.
Even basic information such as the name of the Mayor and Commissioner is not updated
and therefore it is not surprising that citizens do not trust the website to get any
information about local government services. The website does not offer any online
services. In addition to these problems with the website, there is confusion about the
correct official website since there is another one www.blrbmp.com started by the BATF
that now provides commercial links. This is an unnecessary complication given that
digital divide extends to skill levels and knowledge, in addition to access to computers.
While FBAS introduced process reform in accounting at BMP, the other
processes of city government have not seen such reform. FBAS introduction and the
PROOF meetings showcased leadership from the BMP Commissioner. However, in
terms of introducing citizen services online, there has been a series of missteps. This is
partly explained by the fact that initially BMP did not have an information technology
officer or unit. In 2005, BMP created a computer section and appointed Mr. Ramani a
senior official from the Indian Space Research Organization. However, this has not
remedied the problem with lack of up to date information on the website.
The city’s proclivity for multiple agencies handling the same issues seems to have
spilled over into online services. While BMP was promoting citizen services on its
website, Bangalore One, a portal to allow citizens’ access to all public services online
209
was being handled through the E-government Secretary’s office. Due to lack of
coordination and lack of consensus, the project was delayed by 2 years.
Since field work for this research was completed, many developments have taken
place in relation to Bangalore One. The website became operational in April 2005. A
study conducted in July 2005 of the usage of Bangalore One centers revealed that three
months after they were launched, half the services promised were yet to be introduced
(New Indian Express, 2005, July 28). About 2 per cent of the electricity bills and 4 per
cent of the water bills of Bangalore city were handled by these centers, according to
Bescom and BWSSB statistics. The objective of Bangalore One was to bring under one
roof, the services of the Bangalore City Corporation, Bangalore Electricity Supply
Company (Bescom), BSNL (Telephone), Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board
(BWSSB), City Police, Regional Passport Office, Commercial Taxes Department,
Stamps and Registration and Regional Transport Offices, so as to help citizens get
information and pay their utility bills faster among other services.
One of the issues for Bangalore One was that some of the utility agencies
involved had their own fully automated kiosks spread across the city. An agreement was
reached that these utilities would shut down their own centers if they were within two
kilometers of a B1 centre. However, as of May 31, 2006, all these kiosks continued to
function indicating lack of coordination, and waste of resources through duplication of
facilities.
Bangalore One is the only site that as of May 31, 2006 allowed online
transactions in relation to bill payment. It is the only site that contains security statements
and encryption features. However, such online transactions are currently operational only
210
for water, sewer, power and telephone services that are provided by autonomous
agencies. BMP services such as birth and death certificates and payment of property tax
cannot be done online. To pay fines to the Bangalore Police, apply for license renewal or
pay vehicle and road taxes, or obtain market value of their properties citizens have to
physically visit a Bangalore One center. The city has 14 centers. Filing of grievances
online was also not possible as of May 31, 2006. Thus, most of local government service
transactions could not be completed online. There was no provision for citizens to offer
feedback online either. One link called ‘Visitors book’ that could allow citizen comments
was not functional. Thus, it can be seen that Bangalore falls short when it comes to using
information technology to satisfy the day-to-day needs of ordinary people.
None of these websites has been designed to enable citizen engagement with
government. The best sites contain a citizens’ charter that states the level of service a
customer can expect and the rights a customer has to complain or take action when not
satisfied with the degree of service. As envisioned in these sites, the citizen is a
‘consumer’ idea rather than a ‘partner’. Partnership involves active engagement with the
government in determining policy and structure of services and how these can be
effectively delivered where as being a customer is passively consuming services that
might be available. In the above conceptualization of e-government, basic services are to
be delivered to customers for consumption, they are not areas where citizens might
participate in decision making about those services and suggest solutions to problems
they face. This has led the government to invest in services that are not used by many
citizens. Without citizen inputs, the websites do not really serve the needs of its
envisioned users.
211
To summarize, the democratic potential of the Internet has been marginalized as a
result of the ways in which government use of such technology has been framed by
agenda builders. An executive-driven, "managerial" business model of citizengovernment interaction has assumed dominance at the expense of participatory
democratic possibilities.
Efficiency concerns drive reliance on digital government in a top down process,
with citizen demand not being considered an important factor. The focus has been on the
‘e’ rather than on basic governance that reaches the average citizen.
One of the major reasons for low usage that emerged from the survey was that
citizens felt there was very little information that was relevant or useful to their everyday
lives. They did not feel a necessity to use government websites. They did not think that
the services available were valuable or time saving. Some mentioned that they preferred
receiving information about their bills through SMS (short message sending through cell
phones) rather than accessing anything on a computer. This makes sense when we
consider that in the survey, 83.4% of the participants owned cell phones while only
18.7% owned a computer. Internet adoption has not matured to the level where many
people use the Internet as their primary source of information.
There was no additional incentive to use the online option rather than other
channels. If a service is formally useful to a citizen but takes no account of where they
use it, the constraints on their time and attention, their level of technical ability, or the
related tasks they need to perform, it is unlikely to be used. People will access
government services online only if doing so is quicker, easier or cheaper than going
through conventional channels. While the internet can support meaningful two-way
212
communication, the realization of that potential depends on an interactive component
built into e-government services. Data indicates that young people who have knowledge,
skills and access to coputers would be a sizable potential user group for e-governmet
websites if the government addresses the content issues and provides up to date, reliable,
useful, relevant information.
8.4 How do PROOF and Ward Works affect citizen –government
interactions?
PROOF and Ward Works rely on the use of information technology. They would
not be possible without FBAS. However, they are a case of IT interacting with the
structure and process of local government in tandem with civic action.
FBAS instituted a major process reform in accounting within BMP. It made
accounting a core activity and effectively reengineered information flows. In a replication
of the processes that made Bhoomi project a success, FBAS introduction had significant
level of political support from the Chief Minister. As discussed in chapter 6, BATF was
allowed to implement the project with limited political interference. Resistance from
BMP officers was anticipated and training was provided to administrators so that they
could convince others of the benefits of FBAS. External funding, raised through personal
resources and social networks of BATF members, led to minimal cost to BMP. Changing
the accounting system proved to be a strategic investment since all resource allocation
decisions are affected by it. Being able to track information provides opportunities for
increasing transparency, accountability, and for increasing citizen participation.
The key to the success of FBAS was collaboration between government officials,
individuals from the corporate sector and citizens who were professionals with a desire to
213
contribute their skills. PROOF and Ward Works similarly rely on collaboration between
citizens, and between citizens, BMP officials and corporators.
Policies supportive of PROOF and Ward Works had to be made by
Commissioners. And to their credit, administrators such as M.R. Srinivasa Murthy, P.K.
Srihari in the case of PROOF and INS Prasad in the case of Ward Works took
considerable risk and exhibited leadership in allowing information sharing, transparency
and making officials accountable in public.
Of course the main distinguishing characteristic of PROOF and Ward Works is
the civic engagement component.
The official information technology implementation teams and e-government
initiatives did not take into account the need for educating the public, advertising services
and promoting citizen engagement in the process.
PROOF and Ward Works relied extensively on educating citizens, building their
capacity and advertising what possibilities existed for citizen participation.
Greater availability of information is not a sufficient condition to promote citizen
participation. Conscious efforts are necessary to highlight what information is available
and how it can be useful to citizens.
PROOF and Ward Works succeeded since there was considerable energy spent in
mobilizing existing neighborhood organizations and resident welfare associations to help
generate resources locally. In addition Janaagraha and VOICES spent time in facilitating
capacity building among the citizens and raising awareness of the citizens about the
potential for participation and its benefits for citizens. Participation is high where
education levels and awareness are high.
214
Furthermore, successful initiatives, irrespective of their nature, need champions.
In the case of PROOF and Ward Works, the champions were the campaign coordinators
of Janaagraha, Ramesh and Swati Ramanathan.
If we think about civic engagement and governance as social networks of people,
Ramesh Ramanathan would be a central node in that network. As finance professional
with an interest in governance, he was nominated by Chief Minister S.M. Krishna to the
BATF. While BATF was expected to consider many different problems, Mr. Ramanathan
directed its attention to BMP’s outdated accounting system. He was instrumental in
introducing FBAS as a solution. As described in chapter 6, he was deeply involved in
making sure it was implemented. Once it was in place, he saw an opportunity to use the
information made available by FBAS for increasing citizen participation in local
government. Social network researchers measure network activity for a node by using the
concept of degrees (Wasserman and Faust, 1994, p. 178). This is judged based on the
number of direct connections a node has to determine whether an individual is a
connector or a hub in the network. In the networks examined in this research, Mr.
Ramanathan emerges as a hub for Janaagraha and a connector playing a bridging role
between formal government networks that include the Chief Minister and administrators
such as Secretaries of departments, corporate actors such as Nandan Nilekani, and
citizens working through residents’ welfare associations. Within this network, he had
great influence over idea and information flows and was in an excellent position to
monitor the information flow within the network.
As part of BATF, he could persuade commissioners to institute institutional
changes to share power with citizens. It is important to note that his position within
215
BATF was critical to providing him access to policy decision makers within BMP
administration and elected representatives at the state level. It was crucial to laying the
institutional foundation for PROOF and Ward Works. This institutionalization proved
critical to the survival of these initiatives since they remained relatively impervious to the
political changes at the state level, changes that led to the demise of the BATF.
It is not possible to quantify and provide a mathematical analysis of Mr.
Ramanathan’s role within the network since this research was a qualitative case study.
Such analysis is a topic for future research.
Another important aspect where PROOF and Ward Works differ from formal egovernment initiatives is the level of civic engagement they were able to generate. To
understand this, it is important to define a theoretical framework within which the
analysis can be situated. This is discussed in the following section.
8.5 Theoretical framework for analyzing PROOF and Ward Works
Factors that can lead citizens to become engaged in civic activities have become
an important area of research for political scientists and sociologists. Some scholars such
as Tilly (1973) have argued that communities are most likely to act when they are
mobilized (hold collective control over resources), have similar amounts of power
relative to other power centers and are in the beginning stages of urbanization. Many
studies based on a variety of theoretical traditions have since examined the factors that
contribute to or hinder community action (Hunter and Staggenborg, 1986) such as
community attachment, sense of community, and human capital variables (Sampson,
1988).
216
Recently much attention has been focused on the social conditions under which
citizens participate and the relationships that constitute a community’s social capital. The
main premise behind social capital is that well connected individuals or groups are better
able to mobilize other resources to pursue desired outcomes. Empirical evidence suggests
that a well connected community is able to mobilize resources to act effectively (Putnam,
1993, 2000).
Recent research on social capital also recognizes different types of social relations
(bonding and bridging) and the importance of resources embedded within network
connections. Bonding social capital, the close-knit/ strong ties among similar individuals
is said to be good for ‘getting by’ where as the bridging form of social capital, the weaker
ties among heterogeneous individuals, connects people to new resources and is needed to
‘get ahead’ (Gittell and Vidal, 1998). Putnam (2000) defines bridging social capital as
bonds of connectedness that are formed across diverse social groups whereas bonding
social capital cements homogeneous groups.
Thus one way to analyze PROOF and Ward Works would be to examine how
bonding and bridging capital has operated to help or hinder these initiatives. This would
involve examining interviews for evidences of residents’ opinions of their connections
with other residents, the trusting nature of the community, the extent to which people in
the community work together (all bonding measures); and for evidence of belonging to
multiple associations or participating in many different social groups or using multiple
sources of information (measures of bridging capital). Since no surveys were conducted
with this group of individuals, interview data is the used. This can only provide
217
exploratory data but it could lead to insights that might be followed up with formally
designed studies.
Social capital is a controversial concept with very little consensus as to its
definition. According to Coleman (1990), social capital is a by-product of social
interaction that exists in social relations. It is not possessed by an individual; it is a
resource in aggregate. It is part of a social structure; a resource that exists in families,
neighborhoods and communities that an individual may access. It makes possible “the
achievement of certain ends that would not be attainable in its absence” (Coleman, 1990:
320). It is unique to a setting of time and place, and is rooted in relationships, in social
networks, social interaction, neighborhoods and communities.
Putnam’s (1993) work marries aspects of Coleman’s “social capital theory” to
propositions about voluntary associations to explain effective democratic governance in
Italy. He argues that regions with a lot of associations have more effective governing
arrangements. According to him, individuals who regularly interact with one another in
face-to-face settings learn to work together to solve collective problems. They gain social
trust, which spills over into trust in government. Good public policies, robust economic
development, and efficient public administration all flow from such social trust grounded
in regular cooperative social interactions. He understands effective democracy as an
outgrowth of dense small-group ties and positive attitudes and actions these evoke from
individuals.
Historical institutional scholars such as Theda Skocpol disagree with this stress on
social trust as the essence of democracy. Skocpol views democracy as historically arising
out of long struggles among social groups, and between state authorities and their
218
subjects (Skocpol & Fiorina, 1999). According to Skocpol, democracies institutionalized
the balance between power holders in the economy and government, leaving spaces for
citizens to exert leverage in public affairs when they chose. From this historical
institutional perspective, voluntary associations matter as sources of popular leverage, not
just as facilitators of individual participation and generalized social trust. This perspective
leads to examination of changing patterns of organization and resource balances with
questions like – who relates to whom, who is organized for what purpose and is
particularly focused on forms of participation and power that affects average and lessprivileged citizens. Skocpol argues that civil society thrives to the extent that the state
actively encourages it. Woolcock (1998) and Narayan (1999) integrate the core ideas of
bridging social capital and state functioning, and suggest that different interventions are
needed for different combinations of governance and bridging social capital. They argue
that inclusive development takes place when representatives of the state, the corporate
sector, and civil society establish common forums through which they can identify and
pursue common goals.
To apply this perspective to current research, though it is possible to examine who
were the individuals who actively participated in PROOF and Ward Works in terms of a
few demographic details, detailed data is not available to apply it effectively. However,
it is clear that there was some impetus towards decentralization within the government
when PROOF and Ward Works initiatives began. The Nagarapalika Act catalyzed citizen
group involvement in governance, though the Act itself was not successfully
implemented. In some ways PROOF and Ward Works achieve the goals of the Act
without relying on ward committees to achieve them.
219
PROOF and Ward Works are considered together for the reason that most people
who participate in PROOF meetings are also individuals who participate in Ward Works.
Most of the citizens who participate have received information through Janaagraha. In the
two PROOF meetings that I observed as a participant observer, about 20% of the
participants were not associated with Janaagraha. They were individuals who came to
know about PROOF through VOICES. These individuals are not included in this analysis
since throughout this research process, the perspective has been framed by Janaagraha’s
activities. The reasons for this decision relate to access and willingness of people to share
information, as explained in detail in chapter 3.
One of the important factors that emerge from observation of the 10 wards where
monthly review meetings were taking place is - citizen engagement is greater in areas that
have serious infrastructure issues (wards 90, 94, 68, 55, 54). These are also the wards
where residents’ associations have come together to successfully form federations. One
way to explain this might be that citizens bonded over their infrastructure woes. They
might also share some characteristics. It is interesting that most of the members of these
residents’ welfare associations were described as “middle class” by the interviewees –
association/ federation presidents and secretaries. While this is a very imprecise,
unsatisfactory definition, it provides insight into how they identify themselves. The
perceived homogeneity might be traced to the fact that most of them are home owners,
middle aged or retired, college graduates and own two wheelers or cars. In their
descriptions of successful interactions with ward officials, they frequently talk about
delegating work amongst themselves, and working together to monitor BMP works. The
220
community leaders talk about the trust placed in their ability to convince BMP officials to
undertake the community’s plan.
It is also clear that these associations and federations are aware of their collective
power and hence strive to present a picture of unity. Comments such as “unless we
cooperated nothing would be achieved” (ward 68, Ejipura); “Individuals face a lot of
difficulty but the federation identity makes it easier for us” (ward 55, Padmanabhanagara)
indicate that there is a conscious decision to work together.
However, bonding capital can cut both ways. While strong ties are needed to give
communities a sense of identity and common purpose (Astone et al, 1999), such intra
group ties could hinder inter-group collaborations as seen in Sanjaynagar (ward 100). In
this ward, there were many residents’ welfare associations that preferred to work on their
own instead of coming together under one umbrella federation. This feature has also been
a problem in Jeevanbheemanagar (ward 74). In the case of Hebbal, there were too many
conflicting groups, each demanding that its needs be prioritized, and it eventually led to
some of these groups disassociating themselves.
It is true that the communities that exhibited strong bonding capital were also
characterized by key individuals who provided the bridging ties to other groups to make
working together possible. Bangalore city has a diverse population and perceptible
divides based on religion, language, socio-economic status, class and gender roles exist.
In the most successful wards, key individuals with strong ties to the smaller groups
established bridges with other citizens groups to create federations. For example in ward
90-94, a separate association had to be established in Arokiamma Layout to bridge
religious and language differences.
221
During the interviews, individuals were also asked about their civic activities
prior to Janaagraha, whether they belonged to other associations, and whether they
interacted with individuals outside their neighborhood to get access to information. Based
on the answers to these questions, the following individuals were identified as key
members in their wards who brought the strength of weak ties to their areas. They hold
leadership positions; they have many external contacts, and are well recognized within
their communities.
Figure 8-2: Bridge builders by ward
Bridge builders
Wards
Mr. Sivashankaran, Mr. Sugumaran
94
Mr. Rasheed Ali
90
Mr. Y. Damodara, Ms. Nanda Rao
54
Mr. Mukund
55
Mr. Anil Kumar, Mr. Sebastian Devaraj
68
Mr. B.N. Mani, Mr. Venkatram
50
Mr. Murali
85
Mr. R.C. Dutt
100
Mr. Nagaraj Prabhu
74
Surprisingly, it is the wealthier wards where people have well developed infrastructure
that seem to have problems with citizen engagement. Considering the fact that
individuals who live in these areas have economic, cultural and social capital, one would
expect that they would want to participate more in local governance. One explanation
could be that in wealthy areas such as Vasanthnagar, Visweshwarapuram and
Indiranagar, people are satisfied with their neighborhoods and there are no immediate
problems that propel them to community action. However, it would seem that when there
are problems, people prefer to work for themselves using their individual social networks.
222
The very fact that these individuals have higher levels of economic, cultural and social
capital might dampen enthusiasm for community action. It is interesting that while
education and information seem to have a motivating influence on citizen engagement,
wealth does not seem to encourage collective action.
8.6 Summary of findings from case study of PROOF and Ward Works:
Information technology introduction at the institutional level can have a big
impact even when IT use among individuals is not widespread. The role of information
technology in PROOF & Ward Works was generating new kinds of information and
altering information flows rather than facilitating community networks. Findings indicate
that even in this limited role, information technology could facilitate citizen participation.
Though the participation channels were traditional in nature, information technology
made participation possible through new information flows.
Community leaders who identify and engage efficient government administrators
are catalysts to reform. Local government officials are intricately embedded in local
social relations and will respond to community pressure if it is backed by political leaders
at a higher level.
Civic engagement is greater in areas that have serious infrastructure issues. Civic
engagement is most successful in communities that have both strong bonding capital and
key individuals who provide bridges to other groups. These individuals hold leadership
positions; they have many contacts external to their communities and have name
recognition within their communities. Strong bonding capital alone is detrimental to
groups when they attempt to solve larger issues relevant to everyone in the community.
223
While education and information seem to motivate citizen engagement, wealth
does not seem to encourage collective action. It appears to encourage individuals to seek
solutions on their own rather than rely on the community.
8.7 Issues that deserve attention
When we look at who participates in PROOF and Ward Works, one of the major
concerns is that the urban poor are conspicuously absent. Except in the case of ward 54
and ward 100, there have not been documented cases of the urban poor participating in
the citizen engagement process. What reasons could explain this?
It could be that some of the issues taken up by the associations and federations do
not seem relevant to the lives of the urban poor. It could also be that it is harder for them
to invest the resources, such as time and money, which are required in order to
participate. For example, in Sanjaynagar, the monthly review meetings are held in the
elite RMV Club. This is not a public place, there is watchman posted at the gates. It is
possible that some members of the urban poor self help groups feel intimidated and do
not participate though they would like to. It might be worth exploring alternative
locations and how access might be gained.
Is low participation the result of expecting very little in return? Is it just lack of
income and wealth, which cause low participation by the urban poor or some other
individual attributes like lack of information that can be overcome? It is also possible that
the image of PROOF and Ward Works are intricately connected with Mr. Ramanathan
and his role in the BATF. Many people in Bangalore perceived the BATF as an elite task
force. This raises the larger question, to what extent do poorer citizens participate in
constituting local government and influencing its decisions? There could be a perception
224
that elite and influential citizens are able to capture both the process of deciding what
public expenditures are carried out at the local level and the benefits that ensue. While it
is useful to know that individuals from middle class backgrounds are participating in
local government, thus extending participation as far as possible within the existing
framework, there is a need to examine what factors prevent the poorer individuals from
participating and how this may be remedied. Without such work, ICTs may indeed turn
out to be another mechanism of control of the privileged over the poorer sections of the
population.
It is also true that women and individuals in the 25-45 age group are not
represented in large numbers though a large number of retired and senior citizens
participate in these initiatives. This could be due to the time constraints faced by these
groups. However, some of the issues require their inputs and participation and active
involvement in decision making – for example garbage disposal and solid waste
management.
Janaagraha has relied on its allied activities such as Balajanaagraha (for schoolage children, initiatives undertaken by volunteers in schools) and the urban poor micro
finance initiatives to engage these groups. However, they are not a part of the city wide
PROOF or Ward Works. Citizen engagement outcomes depend on the intersection of the
political framework and power dynamics that operate at the local level. As seen from
PROOF and Ward Works, though the level of participation from citizens has been low
when compared to the city’s population of 6.2 million, it is a start. There is a need to
analyze the reasons for the low participation levels, especially among the middle aged,
225
women and the poor. It is important to explore the reasons for non-participation of people
in other areas of Bangalore in PROOF and Ward Works.
8.8 Future Research
This study was exploratory in nature. There are many questions that need to be
investigated further such as how institutional structures like legislation or the budget
process affects development of governance processes and how information technology
might interact with these processes.
FBAS is just one example of how policy makers used IT to modify existing
organizational forms. There is a need to examine how IT can facilitate better coordination
and collaboration within government and between government and citizens in the context
of pervasive digital divides.
While this research looked at how citizens actually used the available online
government services, there is a need to examine the differences in expectations among
different categories of citizens to chart the future growth of e-government services.
The digital divide issues have to be examined in greater detail since it is not
limited to physical access to equipment, but extends to skill levels, language issues, and
local content availability. Further research is required to examine how e-government
services can be used to facilitate empowerment of citizens in a context where most people
have to worry about basic infrastructure such as roads, sewers and potable water.
There is also a need to observe how citizen engagement evolves over time.
Community members’ lives changes over time and this will affect the particular types of
bonding and bridging capital accessible to them. Also, civic associations could use the
Internet to circumvent digital divide issues. Thus it is important to examine how citizens
226
groups use IT. There is also a need to examine if these initiatives can be replicated in
other cities across India or in other countries.
Some questions such as the relationship between representative electoral
democracy and participatory democracy remain unanswered. If elected representatives
see citizen participation as a threat to their power, there is no reason for them to
encourage participation. Yet, decentralization and multiple actors sharing power are
becoming important in network societies though participatory democracy is not the goal
of all the actors. Some combination of representative and participatory democracy is
necessary. Future research has to examine how politicians and bureaucrats deal with this
tension and what factors promote power sharing beyond the obvious gains of improving
trust in government and efficient use of resources.
The results of this study seem to indicate that lack of good government
encourages citizen engagement in participatory democracy. ICTs can facilitate good
governance through encouraging transparency, exposing corruption, and helping citizens
hold officials accountable. ICTs can also provide newer channels for citizen participation.
In this context, it is necessary to examine the 3-way interactions between ICTs, good
governance and citizen participation.
Beyond the issue of whether government use of ICTs results in citizen
participation is the question of who participates. If it is mainly individuals from the
middle class, as suggested by the data in this study, how can ICTs be made relevant to the
poorer sections of society and their participation in governance?
227
Compared to computers and internet, mobile phones are ubiquitous in Bangalore
and India, as in other developing countries. Future research has to examine how mobile
telephony can act as bridging technology that people use to interact with government.
8.9 Significance and Broader Implications
The most significant aspect of PROOF and Ward Works is that for the first time
they provide mechanisms for citizens to participate in the decision making process of
local government initiatives, in a context where formal attempts such as Ward
Committees specified in the Nagarapalika Act 1993 have failed.
While the state government has discouraged decentralization and sharing of
power in practice, citizens groups have been able to take advantage of a simple
computerization process within local government to gain more space for participation in
governance. Citizen participation is desirable since it keeps in check corruption and
inefficient use of scarce resources.
One important question that has to be addressed here is the sustainability of these
initiatives. For example, how central is Janaagraha to these initiatives. If the Janaagraha
movement collapsed, will these initiatives survive? Is this just a local initiative that will
fizzle out or can it be extended to the entire city of Bangalore and beyond?
Since the field work for this research was completed, PROOF has become an
independent registered trust (operational at the end of 2005), in partnership with VOICES
and Akshara Foundation, with Janaagraha as the founding trustee. While the people who
participate are still affiliated with Janaagraha, PROOF is institutionalized and the
meetings will continue irrespective of Janaagraha’s activities. Janaagraha has changed
from a ‘citizens’ movement’ into a not-for profit institution that is now called the
228
Janaagraha Center for Citizenship and Democracy. It has a 9 member governing board
including the founders Ramesh and Swathi Ramanathan, and a community leaders
network. These individuals coordinate ward level activities and facilitate citizen
engagement by acting as resource persons to any individual who wants to participate in
local governance in Bangalore City.
Janaagraha is transitioning from being an integral part of citizen engagement
initiatives to acting as a catalyst to increasing opportunities for citizen participation. It has
moved beyond the local government level to lobby the central government of India. In a
measure of its success, its suggestions that there should be two amendments to the State
Municipal Acts – first, provide urban voters with a legitimate platform ‘Area Sabha’ to
participate in their neighborhood as part of the Ward Committees (modeled on ward
sabhas) and second, require municipalities to disclose quarterly audited statements of
performance (modeled on PROOF) have been accepted by the central government of
India.
On December 3, 2005, the central government of India announced the Jawaharlal
Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM)– a seven year program to
financially support 63 cities and help urban renewal. The goals of this mission include
enabling modern and transparent budgeting and financial management systems in urban
government, city-wide frameworks for planning and governance, access to basic services,
transparent and accountable governance and introduction of e-government services.
Janaagraha’s suggested amendments have been included in the list of Mandatory
Reforms required in the JNNURM.
229
This Mission requires cities to submit City Development Plans, Detailed Project
Reports and a Checklist of Reforms to be undertaken. The City Development Plans are to
be generated in consultation with citizens in public meetings. Bangalore is one of the
cities participating in this Mission and Janaagraha members are actively participating in
this consultation process, which is expected to continue well into 2006/07. In the face of
these facts, PROOF and Ward Works initiatives can be expected to remain sustainable
over time.
At a broader level, this study adds clarity to the status of the network society in
Bangalore. It is clear that Bangalore has areas where there are signs of an information
society. However, the entire city could not be classified as being an information society.
There are many areas in the city where the characteristics of both network and industrial
societies are manifest so that the areas bypassed by the networks continue to operate
under the logic of industrial capitalism.
The logic of network society is evident in the city. The information technology
companies that operate in Bangalore are connected externally to global networks and to
capital markets within India, but they are internally disconnected from local populations
that are functionally unnecessary. The city is emerging as an urban landscape made up of
premium network spaces, constructed for socio-economically affluent users which are
increasingly separated and partitioned from surrounding spaces. Beyond the reach of
these networks, participation in the benefits of modern networked urbanism is
problematic. PROOF and Ward Works may be seen as democratic resistance and social
mobilization by the middle class to counter the concentration of resources on the
230
premium network spaces. They are attempts by citizens to maximize their chances of
representation for their interests by playing out strategies in the networks of relationships.
8.10 Recommendations
In spite of these successes, there are bottlenecks to citizen participation across the
city of Bangalore and sustaining it in the long run. For PROOF and Ward Works, the
most important issue is lack of cooperation from local elected representatives. Citizens
will have to find ways to overcome the lack of trust and uncooperative attitude among
elected corporators. Citizens could use the JNNURM to argue that citizen participation is
integral to governance and that it would be in the interest of elected corporators to
support such participation. This could turn out to be long drawn process since power
redistribution is difficult. However the momentum so far is with the citizens.
The second issue relates to encouraging citizens across the board, irrespective of
income, age, gender and language, to participate in the process. JNNURM has two
mission areas – urban infrastructure and urban poor poverty alleviation. This may help
remedy the lack of participation from the urban poor. However, greater efforts have to be
made to facilitate participation by citizens who are in the 26-45 age group and women.
Holding meetings at different times during multiple weekends and at venues that are open
to the public would help. In addition, non participating citizens need to hear about the
benefits of providing their inputs to resident welfare associations, federations and to ward
officials. There should be greater outreach activities to get the message across that
citizens have been successful in the past in getting their ideas and proposals into BMP
project plans. Some federations have started putting out newsletters. These newsletters
231
should be made available in public locations around the wards to inform and encourage
nonparticipating citizens to get involved.
The crucial factor for successful citizen engagement in governance seems to be
generating willingness among local government administrators to share information and
be willing to answer questions. JNNURM could help generate that willingness by
providing carrots in the form of financial resources and the stick of ‘transparency,
accountability and citizen participation is mandatory if you want the money’. This
process of institutionalization would help replicate PROOF and Ward Works in other
cities. These changes at the national policy level indicate that citizen participation in local
government is slowly gaining credibility among policy makers.
In terms of encouraging citizen participation through the formal e-government
websites, many alterations have to take place in local government processes before
information technology can play a big role. The Internet and other information
technology will only reflect and reinforce patterns that already exist within local
government.
Hence, the first thing that requires attention are current practices that encourage
viewing the citizen as a customer. This trend is relatively new in India, where
government at all levels assumed a paternal role and citizens received services as
patronage. A slow change is replacing this attitude with a ‘customer service’ perspective.
An alternative to this view would be the ‘citizen as partner’ perspective where citizens
actively participate in deciding what services they need, what improvements need to be
made in which sectors, and what role information technology should play. Thus, if
citizens prefer to receive information about local government as short messages on their
232
mobile phones, this should be provided as part of ‘e-government’ rather than relying on
the formula that e-government = computerization + internet service.
Such flexibility is critical in a country where the digital divide is enormous in
terms of access to computers, lack of local content in local language and lack of relevant
information search skills among a majority of the population.
Innovative methods of employing mobile telephony should become integral to
overcoming the digital divide in India. In 2004, the number of mobile phone users
outnumbered fixed-line customers according to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of
India (BBC, 2004, Nov 9). India is expected to be the world’s third largest mobile market
by numbers, after China and the United States since carriers began targeting India’s
poorer citizens with cheap handsets and prepaid services that guarantee a number for life
for just over $20 (Reuters, 2006, Jan 21).
One strategy that has been employed by the Government of Karnataka to
overcome the digital divide issues in e-government is to open kiosks. However, there are
not enough kiosks and they do not deliver the services promised. There is also lack of
coordination. These factors can be easily remedied.
It is a fact that governments are divided into competing agencies and jurisdictions
limit cooperation among bureaucrats (Fountain, 2001b). However, having one official
who is responsible for coordinating different agencies for every project undertaken is a
relatively easy task for a government that employs thousands. Government should also
ensure that commitments made by officials, and private companies providing services are
met. Failure to meet targets should carry consequences that should be specified at the
233
time of project conceptualization. Services should be tested to see that they are
operational as promised before being opened up to citizens.
Another relatively easy measure to earn citizens’ trust would be to make sure that
websites are constantly updated and relevant content is made available on the sites. In
addition, a box could appear on the websites stating the date on which the site was last
updated. This could help citizens decide whether to use the information posted online or
to use a telephone or visit.
More attention has to be paid to issues surrounding access exclusion, equity and
providing interactive services. Government websites that have been created over the past
years still have room for improvement in terms of usability, local language content and
user friendliness. There are very few interactive websites where people can engage in
transactions. There is a high degree of distrust in the government that is hindering people
from relying on government websites. Investments have been made by the government in
provision of services but not in making people aware of them or in convincing citizens of
the benefits of online access. This can be remedied by undertaking a dedicated campaign
to inform people about the services available.
Information technology offers many features that can be used to encourage
citizens to provide feedback about the website and the services offered. A simple
comment or feedback link on the websites would help make them a bit more interactive.
A search function would help so that citizens can look for material they want to see rather
than a set format of information that officials want to present to citizens.
Another important aspect of websites that can be easily fixed is the issue of
language. The Department of IT and Biotechnology has created Nudi, a Kannada
234
software. However this is not employed by all the official websites. BMP’s site can make
use of this to be seen as more citizen friendly. Encouraging departments to use Nudi
would greatly increase citizens’ access to material already online.
The Bangalore One portal is an important step forward in local e-government
initiatives. However, it currently does not offer many fully integrated and fully
executable services online. Adoption of a digital signature standard and privacy and
security policies would ensure that services such as submission of forms and requesting
secure information can immediately allow interactive transactions.
It would also help to have features where citizens can sign up to receive automatic
updates through emails or short messages sent to mobile phones on issues they care
about. These would be relatively cheap options that would enhance the interactive
features of the websites before transitioning to online consultation options.
However, the role of information technology in this process can vary across
governments. In Bangalore, the IT capital of India and information hub of Karnataka,
digital divide is still severe enough to make traditional forms of IT use in the governance
process, such as email, online consultation and feedback generation, impractical. IT is a
factor that facilitates transparency and allows administrators to be accountable if they
choose to share information with the citizens. IT is still not the key factor that encourages
citizen participation in governance.
India is currently undergoing changes in government philosophies and is
becoming more responsive to governance with citizens participation. Innovative
information technology use could facilitate citizen participation. PROOF and Ward
Works were possible because of partnerships forged across different sectors –
235
government, corporate entities, civic groups. On their own, each of these stakeholders
could not have accessed resources needed to make PROOF or Ward Works happen.This
research highlights that changes need to occur in all areas: within government, among
citizens and in the attitudes of all stakeholders towards the role of information technology
and its innovative uses.
236
Bibliography
Astone, N.M., Constance A., Nathanson, R. S., & Young, J. K. (1999).
Family Demography, Social Theory, and Investment in Social Capital.
Population and Development Review 25(1): 1-31.
Atkinson, P., & Hammersley, M. (1998). Ethnography and Participant Observation. In Y.
Lincoln (Ed.), Strategies of Qualitative Research (pp. 110-136). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Balasubramanyam, V. (1999). Bangalore is where the action is. Retrieved May 15, 2006
from www.lancs.ac.uk/people/ecavnb/bang.doc
Bangalore Cares (2000). Directory of Voluntary Organizations in Karnataka. Bangalore:
Bangalore Cares.
Bangalore Profile (2006). Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://www.bangaloreit.in/html/aboutbng/bangprofile.htm
Bangaloreit (2004, February 23). Bangalore Mysore Corridor. Retrieved May 15, 2006
from http://www.bangaloreit.com/src/newsDetails.asp?id=2&date=Feb-23-2004
Bangaloreit (2006) E-government in Karnataka. Department of It and Biotechnology,
Government of Karnataka. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://www.bangaloreit.in/html/egovern/egovernkar.htm
Barber, B. (2003). Which Democracy and Which Technology? In H. Jenkins & D.
Thorburn (Eds.), Democracy and New Media (pp.33-48). Cambridge, Mass: The MIT
Press.
BATF (2001). BATF: Way Forward. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from http://www.batf.org
BATF (2003). Bangalore Agenda. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://www.batf.org/About_Batf/about_corporates.html
BBC (2004, November 9). Mobile phones take over in India. Retrieved May 15, 2006
from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3994761.stm
Beary, H. H. (2002, April 23). Learning in India’s Silicon Valley., BBC News, World,
South Asia
Belgaumkar, G. (2001). For BMP website, Consul is still the Commissioner. The Hindu.
August 18, Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://www.hinduonnet.com/2001/08/18/stories/0418402o.htm
Bell, D. (1976). The Coming of Post Industrial Society. New York: Basic books
237
Bernard, R. (1995). Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative
Approaches, (2nd ed.) Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
Bimber, B. (2001). Information and political engagement in America: The search for
effects of information technology at the individual level. Political Research Quarterly,
54: 53-67.
Bimber, B. (2003). Information and American democracy: Technology in the evolution of
political power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brinkerhoff, D.W. (1999). State-civil society networks for policy implementation in
developing countries. Policy Review Studies, 16(1): 123-147.
Castells, M. (2000). Materials for an explanatory theory of the network society. British
Journal of Sociology, 51(1): 5-24.
Castells, M. (2000). The Rise of the Network Society. (2nd ed.). (Vol 1.). MA: Blackwell.
CBPS (2004). About CBPS. Retrieved July 25, 2004 from
http://www.cbpsindia.org/aboutus.htm
Center for Democracy and Technology & Infodev (2002). The E-government handbook
for developing countries. Retrieved May 15, 2006, from the Center for Democracy and
Technology Website: http://www.cdt.org/egov/handbook/part1.shtml
Chadwick, A. and May, C. (2003). Interactions between states and citizens in the age of
the Internet. ‘e-government’ in the United States, Britain and the European Union.
Governance 16(2): 271-300
Chamaraj, K. (1997). Ward of mouth. Deccan Herald June 13.
Chamaraj, K. (2000). A report on the functioning of Ward Committees in Bangalore
Mahanagara Palike. In Constitution of Wards Committees and Decentralization of
Administration in Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, City consultations, Bangalore.
Appendix to Draft Output 4, submitted to the Regional Office Asia, United Nations
Center for Human Settlements, Urban Management Programmme, New Delhi.
Chandrashekar, R. (2005, March 11). On The National E-Governance Plan - Approach &
Key Components. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from http://www.mit.gov.in/plan/negp.asp
Chatterjee, P. (1997).Beyond the Nation? Or Within? Economic and Political Weekly V
32: 1 / 2, p. 30-34
CIVIC (2004). Functions of the Ward Committee. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://education.vsnl.com/civic_bangalore/wardcommittee.html
238
Coleman, J.S. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge: Harvard University.
Press.
Coleman, S and Go, J. (2001) Bowling Together: Online Public Engagement in Policy
Deliberation. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from http://bowlingtogether.net/
Constitution of India. 12th schedule. Ministry of Law. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://lawmin.nic.in/coi.htm
Dasarathy, V. (2004). Bangalore: Silicon Valley or Coolie Valley? March 11, Message
posted to Rediff electronic mailing list, archived at
http://in.rediff.com/money/2004/mar/03guest1.htm
Deccan Herald (2000, 19 March). Krishna unveils new IT policy.
Deccan Herald (2004, June 30). Mayor; Commissioner slug it out over BMP budget..
Deccan Herald (2004, July 19). PM tells CMs to ensure stability in governance. Retrieved
May 15, 2006 from http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/july192004/i1.asp
Deccan Herald (2004, August 19). BangaloreOne portals by Dec, Deccan Herald News
Service, Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/aug192004/i6.asp
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (1998). Strategies of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Depart of IT and Biotechnology, Government of Karnataka, 2006. Retrieved May 15,
2005 from
http://www.bangaloreit.in/html/itsckar/itindustriesothercities.htm#Softwareexp
Dibben, P. and Bartlett, D., (2001) ‘Local Government and Service Users:
Empowerment through User-Led Innovation’, Local Government Studies, Vol. 27, No. 3,
Autumn, pp. 43-58.
Directorate of Economics and Statistics (2003). Economic Survey 2002-2003, Income
and prices. Government of Karnataka. Retrieved May 15, 2006, from
http://des.kar.nic.in/mainpage.asp?option=5
Duff, A. (2000). Information Society Studies. London: Routledge
Economic Times. (1999, November 2). Karnataka sets up a ministry for IT. Retrieved
May 15, 2006 http://www.economictimes.com/031199/03tech04.htm
239
Fahim, M. (2006). Local government in India still carries characteristics of its colonial
heritage. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://citymayors.com/government/India_government.html
FBAS (2003) Fund Based Accounting System Accounting Manual for Bangalore
Mahanagara Palike. NCRCL
Fetterman, D. (1998). Ethnography Step by Step (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Financial Express. (2004,October 26). Improve Bangalore’s infrastructure, else...
Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://fecolumnists.expressindia.com/full_column.php?content_id=72412.
Fountain, J. (2001b). Toward a Theory of Federal Bureaucracy in the 21st Century.
A: Governance.com: Democracy in the Information Age. Washington, D.C.: Brookings
Institution Press.
Gittell, R. & Vidal, A. 1998, Community Organizing: Building Social Capital as a
Development Strategy. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage Publications.
Golden-Biddle, K., & Locke, K. (1997). Composing Qualitative Research. Thousand
Oaks, CA.: Sage Publications.
Government of Karnataka (2001). Karnataka: The Millennium IT Policy, IT for the
Common Man. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from http://www.kar.nic.in
Graham, S. and Marvin, S. (1996). Telecommunications and the city. London: Routledge.
Graham, S. and Marvin, S. (2001). Splintering urbanism: networked infrastructures,
technological mobilities and the urban condition. New York :Routledge.
Grossman, L.K. (1995). The Electronic Republic: Reshaping Democracy in the
Information Age. New York: Viking.
Hacker, K.L. and van Dijk, J. (2000). Digital democracy: Issues of theory & practice.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Heeks, R. (1996) India's software industry: State policy, liberalisation and industrial
development. New Delhi: Sage.
Heeks, R.(ed.). (1999). Reinventing government in the information age: International
practice in IT-enabled public sector reform. London: Routledge.
Heeks, R. (2006). Implementing and Managing eGovernment : An International Text.
New Delhi: Vistaar
240
Heitzman, James. 1999. ‘Corporate Strategy and Planning in the Science City: Bangalore
as "Silicon Valley"?’ Economic and Political Weekly 34: 5 (30 January-5 February):
PE2-PE11.
Heitzman, J. (1999). Democratic participation in Bangalore: Implementing the Indian 74th
amendment. Cited in Madon, S. and Sahay, S. (2000). Democracy and information: A
case study of new local governance structures in Bangalore. Information, Communication
& Society 3(2): 173-191.
Held, D. (1996). Models of Democracy. 2nd ed. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Holmes, D. (2001). E.gov: e-business strategies for government. London: Nicholas
Brealey Publishing.
Holzer, M. & Melitski, J. (2003). A Comparative E-government Analysis of New Jersey’s
10 Largest Municipalities. Rutgers University, Cornwall Center Publication Series.
Retrieved May 15, 2006 from http://www.cornwall.rutgers.edu/pdf/Holzer.pdf
Hughes, K. (2005, May 9). India’s poverty: Help the poor help themselves. International
Herald Tribune
Hunter, A., & Staggenborg, S. (1986). Communities do act: Neighborhood
characteristics, resource mobilization, and political action by local community
organizations. The Social Science Journal, 23 (2): 169–180.
IDG (2001) India's Silicon Valley lures foreign companies. The Industry Standard
Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://www.industrystandard.com/article/0,1902,27396,00.html
India Together (2005). Connecting outlays to outcomes. July 12. Retrieved May 15, 2006
from http://www.indiatogether.org/2005/jul/eco-outlays.htm
Janaagraha (2003). Work done by Janaagraha for the PROOF campaign. Retrieved June
20, 2004 from
http://www.janaagraha.org/partner/images/work_done_by_Janaagraha_for_the
_PROOF_campaign.pdf
Jayapal, M. (1997). Bangalore: The story of a city. Bangalore: EastWest Books
Kamath, S. U. (1990). (Ed.). Karnataka State Gazetteer, Bangalore District, Bangalore:
Government of Karnataka.
Kamath, S.U. (1992). (Ed.). Karnataka State Gazetteer, part 1, Bangalore: Government
of Karnataka.
241
Kaur, J. (2005, April 16). $500 mn World Bank support for NEGAP, Retrieved May 15,
2006 from Dataquest at
http://www.dqindia.com/content/search/showarticle.asp?artid=69309
Kaur, J. (2005, April 16). Is Your State e-Ready. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from Dataquest
at http://www.dqindia.com/content/search/showarticle.asp?artid=69307
Kellner, D. (1999). New technologies: technocities and the prospects for democratization.
In J. Downey and J. McGuigan (Ed.). Technocities. London: Sage.
Kemmis, D. 1990. Community and the politics of place. Univ. of Okla. Press, Norman,
Oklahoma
Keniston, K. (2004). Experience in India: Bridging the Digital Divide. New Delhi, Sage
Klein, H., & Myers, M. (1999). A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating
Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 23(1),
67-93.
Kooiman, J. (ed) (1993). Modern Governance: New Government-society interactions.
London: Sage.
Kushala, S. (2004). Come CVS, pay more. Times of India, June 25
Lofland, J., & Lofland, L. (1995). Analyzing Social Setting (3 ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth
Publishing Company.
Machlup, F. (1962). The production and distribution of knowledge in the United States.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Madon, S. (1997). The Information-Based Global Economy and Socio-Economic
Development: The Case of Bangalore", The Information Society, 13 (3).
Madon, S.& Sahay, S. (2002). An information –based model of NGO-mediation for the
empowerment of slum dwellers in Bangalore. The Information Society, 18(1).
Meadows, A.J. (1996). The Global Information Society [Review of the book The Global
Information Society] The Electronic Library 14(3): 278-279.
Menon, P. (2005). Politics of Infrastructure. Frontline. November 05-18, V 22 (23)
Morse, J. (1998). Designing Funded Qualitative Research. In Y. Lincoln (Ed.), Strategies
of Qualitative Research. ( Vol. 3)., (pp. 56-85). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Myers, M. (1999). Investigating Information Systems with Ethnographic Research.
Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 2(23).
242
Nair, J. (2005). The Promise of the Metropolis : Bangalore's Twentieth Century. New
Delhi, Oxford University Press
Narayan, D. (1999). Bonds and Bridges: Social Capital and Poverty. Policy Research
Working Paper 2167. World Bank, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management
Network, Washington, D.C. Processed.
Negroponte, N. (1995). Being Digital. London: Hodder & Stoughton.
New Indian Express (2001, December 24). E-governance gets going by fits and starts.
Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://www.expresscomputeronline.com/20011224/focus1.shtml
New Indian Express (2004, July 1). BCC gets sixth commissioner in five years, MLAs,
corporators succeed in ousting Srinivasa Murthy.
New Indian Express (2005, July 28). Bangalore One portal still suffering from birth
pangs.
Norris, P. (2001). A digital divide: Civic engagement, Information Poverty, and the
Internet in Democratic Societies. New York : Cambridge University Press.
Norris, P. (2003). Deepening democracy via e-governance. Report for the UN World
Public Sector Report. Retrieved May 15, 2006
http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~pnorris/ACROBAT/e-governance.pdf
Outlook (2005, June 27). PM's fixed tenure proposal for bureaucrats gets mixed response.
Retrieved May 15, 2006 from, http://www.outlookindia.com/pti_news.asp?id=306970
PAC (2003). The Third Citizen Report Card on Public Services in Bangalore (2003).
Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://www.pacindia.org/rcrc/03Report%20Cards/THE%20THIRD%20CITIZEN%20RE
PORT%20CARD%20ON%20PUBLIC%20SERVICES%20IN%20BANGALORE
PAC (2005). Improving Local Governance and Service Delivery: Citizen Report Card
Learning Tool Kit. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://www.citizenreportcard.com/crc/pdf/manual.pdf
Parthasarathy, B. (2004). India's Silicon Valley or Silicon Valley's India? Socially
Embedding the Computer Software Industry in Bangalore. International Journal of
Urban and Regional Research, 28 (3): 664-685
Paul, S. (2002). New Mechanisms for Public Accountability: The Indian Experience.
Retrieved May 15, 2006 from the Public Affairs Centre, Bangalore,
http://www.undp.org/governance/eventsites/PAR_Bergen_2002/new-mechanismsaccountability.pdf
243
Peters, G.B. and Pierre, J. (1998). Governance without government? Rethinking Public
Administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8(2): 223-245.
Porter, D. (1997). Introduction. In D. Porter (Ed.). Internet culture. (pp. ix-xi). New
York: Routledge.
Prasanna, S., Aundhe, S. & Saldanha, L. ( 2000). Case Study of CIVIC, Bangalore
Report to PRIA on CIVIL SOCIETY & GOVERNANCE, Institute of Development
Studies
Press Trust of India (2004, December 20). Bangalore One kiosks to deliver services from
April. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://finance.indiainfo.com/news/2004/12/20/2012bangaloreone.html
Putnam, R. D. (1993) Making Democracy Work. Civic traditions in modern Italy.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community.
New York: Simon and Schuster.
Putnam, R. D. & Feldstein, M. F. (2003). Better together: Restoring the American
community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Raghunath, S & Sen, C. (2003). Public Private Partnership in Policy Innovation and
Implementation: Reflections on the Self-Assessment Scheme for Property Tax of The
Bangalore Municipal Corporation. In Public Administration and Globalization:
Enhancing Public-Private Collaboration in Public Service Delivery. Retrieved May 15,
2006 from
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UN/UNPAN022445.pdf
Rai, S. (2006, March 20). Is the next silicon valley taking root in Bangalore? New York
Times. Retrieved May 15, 2006, from http://nytimes.com.
Rao, B.N.S. (1985), Bengalurina Itihasa. Bangalore: Vasanth Sahitya Granthamala
Rediff (2004, July 27). Wipro threatens to quit Bangalore. Archived at
http://inhome.rediff.com/money/2004/jul/27wipro.htm
Rediff (2004, July 27). Bangalore's woes, Murthy's cure. Archived at
http://in.rediff.com/money/2004/jul/27infy.htm
Rediff (2005, January 19). Bangalore still hottest for IT firms. Archived at
http://us.rediff.com/money/2005/jan/19spec.htm
244
Reuters (2006, January 21). India to be world’s No. 3 in mobile phone users. Retrieved
May 15, 2006 from
http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=61762#compstory
Review of the Karnataka Economy (2004). Government of Karnataka. Retrieved May 15,
2006 from http://www.bangaloreit.com/html/itscbng/itinfra.html
Rhodes, R.A.W. (1997). Understanding Governance, policy networks governance
reflexivity and accountability. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Robins,K.,& Webster, F. (1986). Information technology: post industrial society or
capitalist control? Norwood, NJ: Ablex
Roy, S., Badrinath, R. & Raghavendra, R. (2004). Bangalore: Cyber city or Silicon slum?
August 11, Message posted to Rediff electronic mailing list, archived at
http://us.rediff.com/money/2004/aug/11spec.htm?headline=Bangalore:~Cyber~city~or~S
ilicon~slum
Sampson, R. J. (1988). Local Friendship Ties and Community Attachment in Mass
Society: A Multi-Level Systemic Model. American Sociological Review. 53:766-779.
Sassen, S. (1996). Losing Control? Sovereignty in an age of globalization. New York:
Colombia University Press.
Saxenian, A. (2000, May). Bangalore: The Silicon Valley of Asia? Paper presented at
Conference on Indian Economic Prospects: Advancing Policy Reform, Center for
Research on Economic Development and Policy Reform, Stanford.
Schement, J.R. (1990). Porat, Bell and the information society reconsidered: The growth
of information work in the early twentieth century. Information Processing and
Management, 26(4), 449-465.
Schement, J.R. & Lievrouw, L. (Eds.). (1987). Competing visions, complex realities:
Social aspects of the information society. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Schement, J.R. & Curtis, T. (1995). Tendencies and tensions of the information age.
New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Schiller, H.I. (1983). Information for what kind of society? In J.L. Salvaggio (Ed.).
Telecommunications: Issues and choices for society (pp. 24-33). New York: Longman.
Schofer, E. & Fourcade-Gourinchas, M. (2001).The Structural Contexts of Civic
Engagement: Voluntary Association Membership in Comparative Perspective. American
Sociological Review, Vol. 66(6): 806-828.
245
Schudson, M. (1998). The good citizen: A history of American Civic life. Cambridge :
Harvard University.
Schultze, U. (2001). A Confessional Account of an Ethnography about Knowledge Work.
MIS Quarterly, 23(1), 1-39.
Schumpter, J. (1950). Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York: Harper and
Row.
Sherwood, S. (2006, Feb 26). In India’s silicon Valley, Partying like it’s 1999. New York
Times. Retrieved May 15, 2006, from http://nytimes.com
Sify (2004, January 24) India can take a lead in e-governance, Retrieved May 15, 2006,
from http://sify.com/news/internet/fullstory.php?id=13373720
Singhal, A. and Rogers, E. M. (2001). India's communication revolution: from bullock
carts to cyber marts. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Skocpol T., & Fiorina, M. P. (Eds.) (1999). How Americans became civic. Civic
Engagement in American Democracy. Brookings Institution Press and Russell Sage
Foundation.
Slack, J. & Fejes, F. (1987). The ideology of the information age. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Somanadh, S. (2004). Lets do a Bangalore: John Kerry, Times of India, June 28,
Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/756801.cms
Stearns, P.N. (1984). The idea of post-industrial society: Some problems. Journal of
Social History, 17, 685-694.
Stoker, G.(1998a). Governance as theory: five propositions. International Social Science
Journal. 155, 17-28.
Stren, R. and Polese, M. (2000). The Social sustainability of cities: Diversity and the
management of change. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
The Hindu (2004, June 25). BMP ward committees yet to start functioning.
The Hindu (2004, December 4). Krishna says campaign against him led to defeat of
Congress.
The Hindu (2005, January 30). Janaagraha comes under fire. Retrieved May 15, 2006
from http://www.hindu.com/2005/01/30/stories/2005013014600300.htm
246
The Hindu (2006, May 17). Decentralization process largely unfruitful in Bangalore:
study.
The Hindu (2006, May 17). Urban local bodies should learn from village panchayats.
Tilly, C. (1973). Do Communities Act? Sociological Inquiry 43(3-4):209-240.
Verba, S., Schlozman, K.L. & Brady, H.E. (1995). Voice and Equality: Civic
Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Vishwanath, S. (2003). CITIZENS VOLUNTARY INITIATIVE FOR THE CITY
(CIVIC). Paper presented in New Approaches to Decentralized Service Delivery,
Santiago, Chile, March 16-20, 2003.
VOICES (2004). About VOICES. Retrieved July 27, 2004 from
http://www.voicesforall.org
VOICES (2004, b). The PROOF Energy Centre. Retrieved July 27, 2004 from
http://www.voicesforall.org/proof/proof_energy_centre.htm
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Webster, F. (2002). The Information Society Revisited. In L. Lievrouw & S.Livingstone.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
West, D. (2005). Global e-government 2005, Retrieved May 15, 2006 from
http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt05int.pdf
Woolcock, M. (1998 ). Social capital and economic development: Toward a theoretical
synthesis and policy framework. Theory and Society, 27: 151-208
World Economic Forum (2005). Global Information Technology Report 2005. Retrieved
May 15, 2006 from
http://www.weforum.org/pdf/Global_Competitiveness_Reports/Reports/gitr_2006/rankin
gs.pdf
Yasmeen, A. (2005). BMP website goes off screen, The Hindu, October 8, Retrieved
May 15, 2006 from http://www.hindu.com/2005/10/08/stories/2005100819260300.htm
247
Appendix A
Information technology use and e-government Questionnaire
ID # :
Gender:
Marital Status ________ (unmarried, married, divorced, widow/widower)
# of Children: ________
Age : ________
Level of education:
□ Grade 10
□ some college not graduate
□ College graduate (specify: BSc, BCom, BA, BE, other_____)
□ Post graduate and higher
Occupation : Title at work ___________.
Employment status:
□ Employed full time
□ employed part time
□ unemployed
□ retired
□ other ____________
Place of residence in Bangalore city : Name of location __________; Ward # ______
Computer, Internet use Status:
□ User
□ non user
□ request help from family
□ request help from friends
# of years of use _________
Reason_________________
Reason ________________
Reason_________________
248
Location of access to computer terminal
□ cyber café
□ PC at work
□ PC at home
□ access PC at other locations describe ________________
1. Please mention the activities you engage in when you use a computer
□
□
□
Email
News/ financial information
Academics/ education
□ Chat
□ Job information
□ Other ___________________________________
2. Please mention the E-government initiatives you know about
_________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
3. What are your sources of information about e-government initiatives?
□ Newspapers
□ Magazines
□ Television / Radio
□ Friends
□ Other __________.
4. Have you ever used e-government services
□ No □ Yes
If yes, please mention the government websites you have visited in the last six months
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
249
5. Please mention the activities you engaged in when you visited government websites?
□ downloaded forms
□ Look up information (please mention what information __________________)
□ Fill forms, applications and provide information online
□ Pay bills
□ Other __________.
6. Please mention if you have visited a government office in the last one month?
□ No □ Yes
If yes, mention number of times ________
7. Have you visited a kiosk where you can access e-government services in the last one
month?
□ No □ Yes
If yes, mention number of times ________
8. How do you prefer to get information about local government services?
□ visit government office
□ telephone
□ government websites
□ Other __________.
9. If you have used e-government websites, was the information found online different
from the information you access from other sources?
□ No □ Yes
If yes, please mention in what way ___________
250
10. The information on government websites is (circle a number between 1-5 for each)
□ Up to date
Not at all
1
Very much
2
3
4
5
Not at all
□ Relevant
1
Very much
2
3
4
5
Not at all
□ Useful
□ Reliable
1
Very much
2
3
4
5
Very much
Not at all
1
2
3
4
Not at all
□ Easy to understand
1
5
Very much
2
3
4
5
11. Did you vote in the last BMP council election?
□ No □ Yes
12. Have you ever campaigned for a local council candidate?
□ No □ Yes
13. Have you ever attended a rally or meeting organized by your councilman?
□ No □ Yes
14. Have you contacted your local government official during the past year?
□ No □ Yes
15. Have you had any problems in accessing information from government websites?
Please describe the problems
251
16. Has use of IT enabled you to interact with government more than you did before
computers were available?
□ No □ Yes
17. In the last year, have you contacted your local political representative through email?
□ No □ Yes
If yes, mention number of times ________
18. In the last year, have you sent an email to a local government official (BMP officials,
BWSSB, BESCOM, Health officer, ward Executive or Assistant Engineer)?
□ No □ Yes
If yes, mention number of times ________
19. Have you made use of any Government schemes in the last one year?
□ No □ Yes
20. SES
a. Do you live in a
□ house/apartment you rent
□ house/apartment you lease
□ own house/ apartment
□ live with family members/ relatives/
□ Other _____________________
252
b. Do you commute by
□ Walk
□ Public Transport
□ own vehicle
– 2 wheeler _________, car _________.
□ vehicle provided by employer _________
c. Do you own any of the following? Please mark all that apply
□ Television
□ Computer
□ Cell phone
(PC or Laptop)
□ VCR or VCD
□ Music System (with AM/FM, CD audio, video; cassette)
d. Source of Income
□ daily wages □ monthly salary
□ own business □ rent
□ other _______________.
Thank you for participating in this survey.
253
IMPLIED INFORMED CONSENT FORM
The Pennsylvania State University
ORP USE ONLY:
The Pennsylvania State University
Office for Research Protections
Approval Date: 10/29/03 – J. Mathieu
Expiration Date: 10/28/04 – J. Mathieu
Title of the Project: Information technology use and e-government
Principal Investigator: Veena V. Raman, 115 Carnegie Building, University Park,
PA 16802; (814) 8615295; vvr101@psu.edu
Advisor:
Dr. Dennis K. Davis, 122 Carnegie Building, University Park,
PA 16802; (814) 8652171; dkd3@psu.edu
1. Purpose of the Study: The purpose of this research study is to explore how people use information
technology in their interactions with government agencies.
2. Procedures to be followed: You will be asked a few questions about your use of information
technology.
3. Discomforts and Risks: There are no risks in participating in this research beyond those experienced
in everyday life.
4. Benefits:
a. You might learn more about use of information technology in government and new initiatives in
e-government.
5. Duration: It will take about 20 minutes to complete the conversation.
6. Statement of Confidentiality: This interview will not involve any information that would identify
who the responses belong to. Therefore, your responses are recorded anonymously. Audio record of
the conversation is made only to help taking notes about the valid points. The tapes will be stored in
the personal desk of Veena Raman and accessed only by her. Tapes will be destroyed by December
2005. No identifying information will be collected. If this research is published, no information that
would identify you will be written since your name is in no way linked to your responses.
7. Right to Ask Question: You can ask questions about the research. The person in charge will answer
your questions. Contact Veena Raman (814) 861-5295 with questions. If you have questions about
your rights as a research participant, contact Penn State’s Office for Research Protections at (814)
865-1775 or ORProtections@psu.edu.
8. Voluntary Participation: Participation in this research is completely voluntary. You can stop your
participation at any time. You do not have to answer any questions you do not want to answer.
You must be 18 years of age or older to consent to participate in this research study.
Completion of interview implies that you have read the information in this form and consent to
participate in the research.
Please keep this form for your records or future reference.
254
Script used to recruit participants for the e-government survey
The purpose of this research study is to explore how people use information technology
in their interactions with government agencies. Research volunteers are being sought for
the study. Volunteers must be 18 years of age or older to consent to participate in this
research study. Minors, i.e. individuals below 18 years of age are not eligible to
participate in this study. This research is conducted by Veena Raman, a PhD candidate at
The Pennsylvania State University. If you have any questions please contact Veena
Raman, the principal investigator at veenavr@psu.edu.
255
Appendix B
List of survey locations
Survey location
R.V.S. Complex, HMT Layout, 80
Ft. Road
Ramaiah Complex 100 Feet Road
Jalahalli
No 42 Prashanth Hotel Bazaar Street
Yeshwanthpur
Yeshwanthpur Railway station
Sify I-Way - HMT Main Road
Mathikkere
No.3, Ranka Corner, 1/25, M.S.
Ramaiah Road, Gokul I Stage, 2nd
Phase, Mathikere
Canara Bank, Malleshwaram,
Dattatreya Temple
Sify I-Way - Malleswaram
Saxon, 6th cross, Malleshwaram
Janatha Hotel, 8th cross
Malleshwaram
646, Dr Rajkumar Road, Second
Stage, 1st Main Gayatrinagar
Saxon, 50th cross, 3rd block
Rajajinagar
Sify I-Way - Subramanya Nagar
70 / 16 , 1st "A" Main Road
Mahalakshmi Layout Extension
BDS Land
#42, Peenya I Stage, 6th Main Road,
I Block, Tumkur Road
Nandini Layout Post Office, 3 SFS
Colony, Nandini Layout
Central Bank of India,
Kamalanagara, Geleyarabalaga
Extn.
Nandini Deluxe Bar & Restaurant
#1, 5th Main Road, West of Chord
Road,,Shivnagar
Sify I-Way - MKK Road Rajaji
Nagar
US Pizza, 945/23,M.K.K.Road,2nd
Type of survey
location
Public arcade
Number of
participants
9
Ward
number
1
Public arcade
12
2
Restaurant
9
3
Public arcade
Cybercafe
8
11
3
4
Public arcade
8
4
Public Street
17
6
Cybercafe
Cybercafe
Restaurant
4
5
6
7
7
7
Public Arcade
11
8
Cybercafe
7
9
Cybercafe
Public Arcade
4
7
9
10
Public Arcade
5
11
Public Street
7
12
Public Street
13
13
Restaurant
8
14
5
15
7
15
Cybercafe
Restaurant
256
Stage, D-Block,,Near Navrang
Theatre
Ravinandan, 1st Main Road,
Kaveripura, Kamakshipalya
Shop No.5, 1st Main Road, IV Stage
3rd Floor, Basaveshwaranagar
Sify I-Way - KHB Colony
Basaveswara Nagar
Classic Photo Centre 11 Shiva
Nagar Rajajinagar
Cake World 29/4 5th Main,
Bhashyam Nagar Srirampuram
Sify I-Way - Bhashyam Circle
Sujatha Theater, 2nd main,
Ramachandrapuram, Srirampuram
Nandini Delux Restaurant #20,
Hanmanthappa Road, Gandhinagar
SJM Towers, No. 18 Sheshadri
Road Gandhinagar
City Railway Station, Chickpet area
Sapna Book House Tunga
Complex,,Opp. Tribhuvan Threatre,
560 009
Ganesh Bhavan, Tank Road,
Cottonpet
Imedia, 1st Cross, Kalasipalya
Gandhi Youth Association, 4th
Cross, 12th Main Road
Kempapura Agrahara
Syndicate Bank, Agraha Tankbund
Road Binnypet
Divyashree, No.89/12,,KGS Colony,
Vijayanagar
8/1, Ist Main Road, RPC Layout,
Vijayanagar 2nd Stage,
53, Magadi Chord Road, Hosahalli
Extension (Vijayanagar)
Movie Land 20th Main, Marenahalli
Main Road Vijayanagar
No. 2934E & 2935E Magadi Chord
Extension Vijayanagar Club Road
A-One Departmental Stores 4/2, 2nd
Stage, Chord Road, Attiguppe
Sify I-Way - Attiguppe Bus Stand
State Bank of India complex,
Mysore Road, Galianjineya Temple
Public Street
5
18
Public Arcade
14
19
Cybercafe
8
19
Public Street
9
20/22
Public Street
13
24
Cyber cafe
Public Arcade
8
11
24
25
Restaurant
7
27
Public Arcade
10
27
Train station
Public Arcade
19
8
28
28
Restaurant
9
29
Photocopy center
Public Street
15
9
30
31
Public Street
6
32
Food store
7
33
Public Arcade
9
33
Public Arcade
14
34
Public Arcade
10
35
Public Arcade
11
36
Public Arcade
13
40
Cybercafe
Public Street
9
8
40
41
257
Sify I-Way - 5th Main Chamarajpet
Dharmarayaswamy Temple
complex, Nagarathpet
2nd Main Road, 5th Cross,
Sudhamanagar, Wilson Garden
Prems Greeting Gallery #4&5, 8th
Cross, Sapthagiri Complex,Wilson
Garden
Street corner, Masthi Venkatesha
Iyengar road,
2nd Cross, Gavipuram Extension
ICICI Bank, 64/1, Ground Floor,
Sajjanrao Circle, V.V. Puram
Sify I-Way KR Road, Vishweswarapuram
Sify I-Way - DVG Road
Basavangudi
Shamanna Park, DVG Road,
Basavangudi
Linux Learning Centre, 635, 6th
Main Road, Near 4th Cross,
Hanumanthnagar
Arvind Super Baazar No. 980-1,
13th Cross ,,Opp Karanataka Bank
Ltd. Banashankari
Sify I-Way - Srinagar
ICICI Bank, 407, 80 Feet Main
Road, 3rd Cross, 3rd Cross,
Girinagar 1 Phase
Sify I-Way - Padmanabha Nagar
Sri Prasanna Ganapathi Temple,
Puttalingaiah Road, BSK 2nd stage,
Padmanabhanagar
Needs Corner 370, 13th Cross,,30th
Main Road, B.S.K.2nd Stage
LIC of India, JP Nagar, Ist Phase
Sify I-Way - Phase 2 JP Nagar
Jayanagar shopping complex,4th
Block, Jayanagar
Sify I-Way - 4th Block Jayanagar
Hotel Nandhini, 14/A/37, 27th
Cross,Karnataka Bank, 4th Block,
Jayanagar
U.S. Pizza, 1814, 25th Main,,41st
Cross,9th Block, Jayanagar
Street corner, Eastern, 'C' Main
Cybercafe
Public Street
17
13
46
47
Public Street
9
48
Public Arcade
17
48
Public Street
13
49
Public Street
18
50
Cybercafe
17
50
Cybercafe
11
51
Public Park
8
51
Public Street
9
52
Public Street
13
53
Cybercafe
Public Street
11
19
53
54
Cybercafe
Public Street
9
17
55
55
Public Street
20
56
Public Street
Cybercafe
Public Arcade
11
12
12
57
57
58
Cybercafe
Restaurant
7
15
58
58
Restaurant
6
59
Public Street
13
59
258
Road, 9th Block,,opp Raja Gallery,
Next to Jaydeva Cardiology
Sify I-Way - 2nd Stage BTM Layout
Sify I-Way - Madiwala Shopping
Complex
Gangotri, 1st Main Road,
K.H.R.Colony,,(Near JNL),
Koramangala 6th block
Amaravathy, # 20, I Main Road,
Inner Ring Road,,Koramangala
Venugopal Swamy Layout
Daily Bread, 43, 4th B Cross,5th
Block, Koramangala Industrial
Estate
Sify I-Way - Ejipura
BDA Complex, Next to SBI, Austin
Town
Bangalore Artists Centre, 1, Shanti
Road, Shantinagar
Sify I-Way - Domlur 1st phase
Opposite Vijaya Bank, 208, 5th
Cross, 1st Main Road, Domlur
Layout
Sify I-Way - Jeevan Bhima Nagar
Corporation Bank, 5th Cross, HAL
2nd Stage, Opp. K.E.B. Quarters
Koshys Bakery, 1 Wellington Street,
Richmond Town
Coffee Day, Mission Road
1st Main Road, Sampangiram Nagar
Shiv Sagar, Millers Tank Bund
Road, Vasanth Nagar
Shivajinagar Bus Stand
Mount Kailash # 33/5 Meane avenue
Road Ulsoor
New City Super Market 5 & 6,
Shree Balaji Complex,Kagadapura
Main Road, C.V. Raman Nagar
Canara Bank, No. 19, 15th Cross
Sagayapuram, Davis Road
Sify I-Way - Banaswadi Main Road
Golden Arcade,Ramamoorthy Nagar
Main Road, Near BET College
Globalnet, # 5 Mosque Road, Fraser
Town
Konkan, Coles Road, Frazer Town
Cyber cafe
Cybercafé &
Public Arcade
Public Street
17
9
65
66
16
67
Public Street
18
67
Public Street
7
68
Cyber cafe
Public Arcade
6
17
68
69
Public Street
9
70
Cyber cafe
Public Street
6
9
72
72
Cyber cafe
Public Street
6
7
74
74
Public Street
8
76
Public Street
7
77
Restaurant
15
78
Public Arcade
Public Street
16
6
79
81
Public Street
16
83
Public Street
8
85
Cyber cafe
Public Arcade
7
9
88
88
Cyber cafe
11
90/91
Public Street
9
91
259
Opposite Jayamahal Palace Hotel,
No. 1, Jayamahal Road
Street corner of Baptist Hospital,
Hebbal
R.T. Nagar Bus stand
Jai Departmental Store #10, 5th
Main Rd., Ganganagar
Bangalore Blooms, Sanjaynagar
Main Bus Stop, Sanjaynagar
Public Street
7
92
Public Street
9
96
Public Street
Public Street
8
15
97
98/99
Public Street
Public Street
9
14
100
100
260
Interview protocol for questions on Ward Works, Ward Vision and Ward Sabhas
1. How did you get involved with Janaagraha?
2. What Janaagraha activities have you been involved in so far?
3. Please talk a little about your association’s experience with Ward Works?
4. What was your experience in working on generating a Ward Vision document in your
ward?
5. a. What is the status of community participation in your monthly review meetings
(Ward Sabhas)?
b. What is the experience of this ward in interacting with government officials?
6. What is the progress on your program of works and Ward Vision?
7. Let us discuss community participation in your ward – in activities such as
volunteering for mapping properties, federation or association work, verification of
progress on Program of works. How do you get people to volunteer?
8. Does your ward have a federation? What is the benefit of having formed a federation?
How many associations are members?
9. What is the difference in having a federation ask questions as opposed to having an
Residents Welfare Association asking the questions?
10. Are there any urban poor pockets in your ward – do people who live in those areas
get involved in the Ward Sabhas?
11. In your opinion, what are some of the issues that the ward has successfully tackled?
What are some challenges the community has faced?
12. Are there any other issues that we should talk about?
261
Veena V. Raman
Pennsylvania State University
303B James Building
University Park, PA 16802
E-mail: vvr101@psu.edu
EDUCATION
Ph.D in Mass Communications
Pennsylvania State University
Dissertation: Information Technology and Participatory Democracy: A Case Study of
Bangalore City; August 2006
Chairs: Prof. Dennis Davis & Prof. Jorge Schement
Master of Arts in Media Studies
Pennsylvania State University, December 2001
Thesis: Communication for Social Change: India, A Case Study
Postgraduate diploma in Journalism
Asian College of Journalism, Bangalore, India, April 1998
(Associated with The Indian Express, one of India’s leading newspapers)
Bachelor’s degree in Commerce (B. Com)
Mount Carmel College, Bangalore University, India, April 1997
EXPERIENCE
Post Doctoral Researcher,
Berkeley Center for Globalization and Information Technology, University of California
Berkeley, August 2006
Reporter, The Times of India (Bangalore Edition) 1998
Free lance writer, The Deccan Herald, April-May 1998
HONORS AND AWARDS
Top three papers, Graduate Student Research Award, College of Communication,
Pennsylvania State University, April 2005
Selected to Webshop 2003, An NSF funded 3 week research program on Internet and
Society conducted at U. Maryland and U. Berkeley, June 2003
Pothan Joseph Gold Medal for the Best Student at Asian College of Journalism,
Bangalore April 1998
Best Academic Award for class valedictorian, Mount Carmel College, Bangalore,
March1997