When Chandrababu Naidu became Chief Minister in Andhra Pradesh in 1995, a new phase in the southern Indian State’s reform process began. Is good governance really receiving due attention? How successful has the reform process been in delivering on the regime’s pledge to keep politics out of policy? This paper from the Overseas Development Institute, investigates the reality of the policy reform processes in Andhra Pradesh and set this in the context of a review of policy processes in general.
Interest in policy processes gained momentum as neo-liberal economic ideology triumphed. Despite the reduced role of the state in the neo-liberal model, governance has also received increased attention. Policy processes vary significantly between developed and developing countries in terms of the role of the state, the participation of actors at different stages and the influence of donors. However, the process of bargaining and the particular discourses that structure those negotiations are inherently political in any context.
In Andhra Pradesh, Chief Minister Naidu has been keen to publicly identify himself with the explicit reform process. The reforms programme aims to separate power between the administrators and politicians, emphasise delivery and performance, achieve accountability and transparency through technology and increase stakeholder participation in development efforts. The extent to which these have been achieved, however, remains questionable:
- Naidu’s method of governing remains highly centralised. He retains control and even his closest aides are marginalised in terms of powers and responsibilities.
- Stakeholder participation has been dominated by economic and political elites, rather than operating in a top-down manner involving the supposed beneficiaries.
- A variety of state-sponsored development schemes have been used to maintain political support through the favouring of contractors affiliated to Naidu’s political party.
- The regime has withdrawn power and funds in some areas. This has increased state control rather than bolstering decentralisation.
- Naidu’s focus on technology has less to do with good governance and focuses more on his desire to distinguish himself from his popular predecessor and enhancing his image as a ruler in his own right.
Chandrababu Naidu has successfully projected an image of himself as a reformer. His focus on modern management practices has had positive ramifications in terms of donor assistance and foreign investment in Andhra Pradesh. The actual extent to which the respective contradictions between good governance, centralisation and depoliticising the policy process have been confronted, however, remains a topic for future discussion:
- As a developing country, state control of the policy process is typically stronger, particularly in the formulation phase, whilst opposition remains weak affording scope for further power centralisation in the implementation phase.
- Policy processes are likely to remain predominantly state-driven in the absence of powerful measures aimed at strengthening and engaging independent, non-party-based civil society organisations.
- In order to increase participation, stakeholders must have reason to believe that they are partners, and by extension, owners of the policy process, thereby assuming responsibilities in agenda setting and overall policy design.
- Where party politics has a high profile in the policy process, there is little scope for real reform within government itself. Change will only be achievable if non-state actors are able to mobilise and make use of opportunities for increased government accountability.
