Customary village councils are generally perceived as the fading remnants of a pre-democratic, hierarchical society. However, their role is being revived in Indian states such as Karnataka. These traditional institutions are working with formally elected local councils, adapting to democracy and extending their services to communities they are increasingly representative of.

A paper published by the Institute of Development Studies, in the UK, provides evidence from the south Indian state of Karnataka that counters misconceptions surrounding customary village councils (CVCs) today. Researchers generally do not seem to appreciate how widespread, active and important CVCs are, and the Indian media tends to portray them as bodies that harshly enforce caste and gender inequality. Evidence from 30 villages in Karnataka – arguably the most democratic state in India – provides a very different overall picture of CVCs.

In 1992, democratically elected village councils became mandatory in all Indian states. In Karnataka, these Grama Panchayats (GPs) typically cover five villages. But CVCs, which have jurisdiction only over the village they inhabit, continue to exist throughout the state, although they are not part of any network. CVC membership consists almost exclusively of men representing different caste groups, including lower castes if they make up a significant part of the population.

CVCs have no official authority, but they have adapted to accommodate the reality of their coexistence with elected GPs. Their key roles are:

• dispute resolution: this is traditionally associated with CVCs; nearly 80 percent of local disputes are resolved by CVCs, even though official courts exist
• organising religious activities: CVCs organise many religious ceremonies and festivals, build and maintain local temples, and raise funds for such events
• social welfare: some CVCs provide material support to disadvantaged villagers, organise mass marriages, and support education
• matching development funds: some government development programmes require matching contributions at local level, which 17 of 30 CVCs helped raise
• autonomous development activities: in 23 of 30 villages, CVCs recently initiated their own development activities
• interaction with GPs: CVC members may contest GP elections or decide on candidates, or influence decisions on GP development projects.

Interactions between CVCs and GPs are not always positive, but villagers (especially women) appreciate the CVCs for the range of services they offer, and the stability they contribute to within the village. The authors find certain patterns in CVC activities, which they attempt to explain:

• The more wealthy, developed and populated the district, the higher the levels of CVC activity, contrary to the idea that CVCs might disappear with modernity.
• This also applies to GP activities, suggesting CVCs and GPs might be complementary or synergistic rather than competitive.
• Recently, CVCs have begun to interact more with formal state institutions, and have become more inclusive, even consulting GP women members on specific issues.
• The modernisation of CVCs is linked to the need to get local support to better influence GPs and access resources for development. Villages situated closer to their GP are able to do this more easily.
• Ultimately, CVCs are unofficial bodies with little real power; what trust they enjoy in villages depends on their performance.

Source(s):
‘Ambiguous Institutions: Traditional Governance and Local Democracy in Rural India’, IDS Working Paper 282, IDS: Brighton, by Kripa Ananth Pur and Mick Moore, 2007 Full document.
‘Rivalry or Synergy? Formal and Informal Local Governance in Rural India’, Development and Change 38(3): 401-421, by Kripa Ananthpur, 2007
‘Dynamics of Local Governance in Karnataka’ part of the special feature on 'Governance and Development in Karnataka', Economic and Political Weekly Vol 42 No 8: 667-673, 24 February 2007, by Kripa Ananthpur Full document.

id21 Research Highlight: 29 June 2008

Further Information:
Kripa Ananth Pur
Madras Institute of Development Studies
79, Second Main Road
Gandhinagar
Adyar
Chennai 600 020
Tamil Nadu, India

Tel: +91 44 24412589
Fax: +91 44 24910872
Contact the contributor: kripa@mids.ac.in; kripur@hotmail.com

Madras Institute of Development Studies, Chennai, India

Mick Moore
Institute of Development Studies
University of Sussex
Brighton BN1 9RE
UK

Tel: +44 1273 678689
Fax: +44 1273 621202
Contact the contributor: m.p.moore@ids.ac.uk

Institute of Development Studies (IDS), UK

Other related links:
'Can decentralisation make local administration more accountable?'

'School decentralisation and parent power in Nicaragua: a model to copy?'

'Measuring pro-poorness: does decentralisation help the poor?'