State of Democracy in South Asia by Centre for the study of Developing Societies
description
Transcript of State of Democracy in South Asia by Centre for the study of Developing Societies
State of Democracy in South Asia
by Centre for the study of Developing Societies
Project supported by Ford Foundation, International IDEA, and EU-India Cross Cultural Program of the EU
Research Partners
International IDEA Professor Jayadeva Uyangoda, Sri Lanka. Professor Mohammed Waseem, Pakistan. Dr. Krishna Hachhetu, Nepal. Professor Imtiaz Ahmed, Bangladesh.
Objectives of the study
To investigate what democracy has done to South Asia and what South Asia has done to democracy.
Discontent with existing discourses as being inattentive, hegemonic and ethnocentric.
Limitations of current thinking on governance
‘Deficit’ based thinking: of information, administration, resources and political will.
‘System’ centric thinking: inputs, processes, outputs.
‘Politics’ is missing: of agents, interests, elites, ideologies, and institutions.
No sense of the dialectics between institutions and processes.
Our Research Grid
Promise-what moral burden does democracy carry in South Asia-what futures does it advance
Design-Institutional structure: political, social, economic-Parties/ Civil Society Organizations
Working-Sociology, Economy and Anthropology of institutions-practices of political leaders, parties, organizations etc
Outcomes -democratization of state and society, elite rule.
Futures -likely trajectories.
Four Research Pathways of Democracy Assessment
– Cross-sectional survey – Qualitative Assessment– Dialogues – Case Studies
Component 1: Survey –Some Questions
How do ordinary South Asians view democracy How do perceptions vary according to country, class,
gender and social divisions What/ Who do they identify as the main threats to
their security What is their level of trust in the capacity of
institutions to meet their needs How does the perception of the elite relate to that of
the cross section of the population
Component 1: Different aspects of inquiry
– Questions that have been asked Globally, across South Asia, and specific to each country.
– Qs on: Battery on: legitimacy, efficacy, trust, participation
– Qs on: Identity, dignity, notion of self-hood.
– Qs on: Security and freedom from fear.
– Qs on: Material outcomes and freedom from want
– Qs on: Satisfaction with democracy.
-
Methodology: Total elector, no of parliamentary constituencies, and proposed sample units.
Country Voters( million)
Total no of PCs
No of sampled constit(15%)
No of sampled booths
Targeted interviews (per booth)
B’desh 56.7 300 45 45*6=270 4320 (16)
India 617.01 3912 298 298*2/3=622 9330 (15)
Nepal 13.52 205 39 31*6=186 4000 (22)
Pakistan 55.74 207 31 31*6=186 4092 (22)
S’Lanka 12.07 196 30 30*6=180 4500 (25)
Total 755.13 26,242
Component 1: Methodology: Preparation for Survey
Draw upon questionnaires of CSDS and various barometers
Dialogues with activists Country coordinators to discuss draft questionnaire Common questions and country specific questions Translation into local languages Pilot survey Canvassing by field teams in each country Data processed and computerized Analysis plan collectively prepared
Component 2: Qualitative Assessment
Agreement over main thrust of IDEA framework
Assessment of ‘old’ as well as ‘new ‘ democracies People of the country to undertake assessment Assessment to be broad-based and objective Assessment to be the anchor for democracy
discourse Two-fold anchorage: theoretical and historical-
sociological
Component 2: Expert led Assessment - Some questions
What are the main components of the ‘promise’.?
What is the nature of the of the economic institutions and how does it relate to the political structure?
Is there a gap between the design and actual working?
Is the working characterized by limitation or closure in terms of participatory spaces, agendas and/or participants?
Has democracy been an instrument of social transformation?
What is the relationship between the procedural and substantive aspects of democracy?
Component 2: Methodology
Country coordinator constitute a team of experts to prepare the background papers for the respective nodes.
These papers and the relevant findings from the case studies and survey would be presented to the activists and experts from that country.
On the basis of their comments the coordinator would prepare the final report of QA for the country.
Component 3: Dialogues
Series of dialogues to be conducted at regional, national and local levels
Dialogues to involve activists, journalists, academics, politicians, etc.
Ownership of study broad based Conversation between different knowledge
universes
Component 3: Types of dialogues
General: State of Democracy in South Asia
Thematic: (i) Democracy: Majorities and Minorities, (ii) Democracy and Human Security
Both types to be held in all 5 South Asian countries in different locations to ensure diversity of perspectives
Component 3: Methodology
Duration over two days for building trust among participants
Invitees from a cross section of interests, ideologies, social strata, and groups.
Special effort to have minority viewpoints attend.
Selection of Chair important.
Dialogue loosely structured.
Entire dialogue recorded, digitized and finally uploaded on website.
Separate report of dialogue prepared where the views of speakers are presented sequentially.
Component 4: Case Studies
Based on the recognition that the survey, qualitative assessment and dialogues would still miss important aspects of democracy in practice.
Deliberate selection of aspects of practice that can be constructed as “puzzles” of democracy.
Goal to problematize the discourse on democracy by presenting “inconvenient facts”.
These “inconvenient facts” although located in South Asia have more general implications.
Evaluation of the case not straightforward e.g., families in politics, extension of women’s rights under dictatorship, life of file.
Component 4: Methodology
Selection of cases after listening to dialogues
Use different methodologies to illustrate the issue e.g ethnographic approach to study working of a law court
Case study not “illustration” of a feature of democratic practice but elaboration of an “inconvenient fact”.
Commission of studies to be completed over 8 months.
Output
Dissemination of first ever South Asia wide survey on citizens attitudes through media
Publication of a Citizen’s report on Democracy in South Asia
Report available in more than one South Asian Language
Data archive open for public access
Outcomes
Promote public discourse with political parties, people’s movements, and civil society organizations
South Asian Survey to join the ranks of other Barometers
Contribute to the development of a Human Security Index
Transform the global discourse on democracy and governance.
Our website: WWW.LOKNITI.ORG