Politics is Not Just a Man’s Game: Women in Democratic Local Governance of Odisha

Abstract

The central question examined in this article is whether women’s representation through quotas and subsequent participation in the local governance makes a difference in politics. Based on an empirical study of eight Gram Panchayats in the state of Odisha, the article explores whether the women elected members in decentralised government institutions considerably pronounce and document women’s issues and interests. Further, it outlines the overall political attitude and behaviour towards women’s entry and leadership in local politics. Taking insights from a theoretical review of the concept of representation and the issue of quota for women in government, the article narrates the empirical experiences of the attempts towards feminisation of rural politics and public sphere and engages with the larger debate of the implication of such feminisation to bring out transformation in women’s personal life as well as political life. Contrary to the commonly held belief that seat reservation would bring elitists women to politics, the study observed that three-fourth of the women representatives coming through quotas belong to middle and lower castes of society. Further, the findings highlight that association with political families is a trend as common among women as men, and therefore, it would be wrong to have a simplistic understanding that quotas would result in politically influential families putting their women members of the family as proxies in politics.

Keywords

Decentralisation representation participation women empowerment

Introduction

In India, women’s representation in political institutions has been ensured at local levels through affirmative action policies of the 73rd Amendment Act in 1993, albeit a failure to implement such laws at the national level.¹ With the constitutional provisions, women at the grass-root level have now entered the political arena in a large numbers. As a corollary, research on women in democratic local governments has flourished in recent years. However, past research has shown that women have less interest and less engagement in the political activities of the Panchayats which resulted in their limited participation (Inamdar, 1991; Mathew & Nayak, 1996; Sisodia, 2006; Vyasulu & Vyasulu, 1999). Several studies have also given emphasis to different constraints in terms of societal, institutional and individual which hinders effective participation (Behar & Kumar, 2002; Bryld, 2001; Ghosh, 2000; Johnson et al., 2003; Mishra, 1998). Notwithstanding the fact that women have less interest, experience and engagement in politics, it can be substantiated that women’s presence in democratic local governance either as members or as chairperson has manifold constructive implications. Some of the implications of the presence of women at the local level politics suggest that women’s issues/interests would be more pronounced and documented with women members more likely to work on issues related to them. Second, women’s presence in the positions of power is also expected to bring changes in the conventional attitude towards women’s leadership, and in rural politics at large.

Situated in the above context, the article tries to explore the question that does women’s representation through quotas, and subsequent participation in the local governance makes a difference in politics. Do the women members considerably pronounce and document women’s issues or interests in panchayats? Further, the article tries to outline the overall political attitude and behaviour towards women’s entry and leadership in local politics. The article narrates the empirical experiences of the attempts towards feminisation of rural politics and public sphere, and engages with the larger debate of the implication of such feminisation on bring out transformation in women’s personal life as well as political life. The empirical work for the article has been carried out in the Dhenkanal district of the state of Odisha in India.

The article is divided into five sections. Following the introduction, the second section engages itself with a theoretical discussion on gender, representation and political reservation through affirmative action. The third section discusses about the methodology adopted for the study and the sample distribution. The fourth empirically examines the implications of women’s presence in political institutions through seat reservations, and examines the question of representation, participation and empowerment of women in decentralised governance. The fifth concludes the article by way of explaining the manifestation of inclusion/exclusion and empowerment/disempowerment of women in the panchayats of Odisha.

Political Representation and Quotas for Women: Theoretical Approaches

This section engages with a discussion of theoretical approaches concerning the issue of women’s representation, and necessity for setting out quotas or reserving seats for women in political institutions to ensure their proper representation. Before discussing the need for quotas to ensure representation of women, we will focus on understanding the concept of representation and its various strands.

Understanding Representation

Representation is taken to mean ‘a relation between two persons, the representative and the represented or constituent, with the representative holding the authority to perform various actions that incorporate the agreements of the represented’ (Grazia, 1968: 461). Viewed in this sense, the authority that the representatives enjoy is always derived from the agreement of the constituents, which they bestow upon the representatives to act or make decisions on their behalf. The role of representation is multi-faceted. Edmund Burke (1774) considered the role of the representative as ‘one who ought to respect his constituents’ opinions, who ought to prefer their interest above his own, but who ought not to sacrifice his unbiased opinion in deciding for the good of the whole nation’ (cited in Rao, 1998: 30). The literature concerning political representation points towards two central strands of representation theory: substantive representation and descriptive representation. The following paragraphs make an attempt to conceptually clarify these two strands.

Substantive Representation

Substantive representation emphasises the issues, ideas and programmes to be represented, and the representative may not necessarily be one from the community which s/he is supposed to represent. Substantive representation is based on the premise that representatives are supposed to act on behalf of the constituents, and too much emphasis on who is presenting may divert the issue from the more urgent question of what the representatives do. For substantive representation, it is the activities of the representatives, rather than their characteristics, which matters. Delineating the true meaning of substantive representation, Pitkin (1967: 209) mentions, ‘representing means acting in the interests of the represented (constituents), in a manner responsive to them’. She further adds that, ‘representatives may and almost certainly will differ from those they act for, not only in their social and sexual characteristics, but also in their understanding of where the true interests of their constituents lie. Fair representation cannot be guaranteed in advance (by choosing one from the same group), but it is achieved in more continuous process, which depends on a level of responsiveness to the electorate’ (Pitkin, 1967).

Descriptive Representation

In contrast to substantive representation, descriptive representation emphasises ‘who represents’ rather than ‘what policies or ideas the representative is representing’. In this form of representation, the representative is supposed to belong to the group s/he represents and should share the same life experiences.² In descriptive representation, ‘representatives are in their own persons and lives in some sense typically of the larger class of persons whom they represent (Birch, 1993: 72). It is said that descriptive representation can denote not only visible characteristics such as colour of skin, ethnicity or gender, but also shared experiences (Mansbridge, 1999).

Perhaps the most influential argument in favour of descriptive representation is that of Anne Phillips’ (1995) seminal work The Politics of Presence, which makes a strong case for political presence of women in institutions of decision making. Phillips feels that even the reformist argument of substantive representation—where the emphasis on accountability mechanism minimises the importance of who the representatives might be—‘do not engage sufficiently with a widely felt sense of political exclusion by groups defined by their gender or ethnicity or race’ (1995: 5). Phillips problematises the current engagement with democracy as an argument revolving around what we might call demands for political presence: demand for equal representation of women with men, demand for more even handed balance between different ethnic groups that make up each society, demands for political inclusion of groups that have come to see themselves as marginalised or silenced or excluded.³

Central to the thesis of ‘Politics of Presence’ is notions of difference, which are conceived in relation to experiences and identities based on gender, ethnicity or race. Once difference is conceived in this manner, it may not, therefore, be possible to meet the demands for political inclusion without also including members from these groups. As Phillips rightly points out, ‘... men may conceivably stand in for women when what is at issue is the representation of agreed policies or programmes or ideas. But how can men legitimately stand in for women when what is at issue is representation of women per se’ (Phillips, 1995: 6).

Why are Women Under-represented?

Despite their emphasis on individual liberty, equal citizenship rights, and the opportunity of citizens to participate in the process of decision making, democratic systems increasingly face the criticisms with respect to actual configurations, that is, who are the people who constitute the democratic governments. A fundamental criticism comes from scholars who argue that most democracies are not representative in terms of an adequate presence of various social groups, and therefore, lack legitimacy (Geissel & Hust, 2005). Empirical evidences also point towards inadequate representation of certain groups and classes based upon class, religion, gender and in the Indian context caste (see IDEA, 2005). Such a situation has led feminist scholars to tag democracy as ‘androcracy’, namely the rule of men and not of the people (see Biester et al., 1994; Egan, 1989).⁴

Several justifications are provided for such an under-representation and inadequate participation of women in political affairs. Geissel and Hust (2005) identify three clusters of approaches, operating at an individual and structural level, which explain the current debate of participation or lack of it in institutionalised politics. The first cluster emphasises the individual motives and political or personal goals as important variables. This approach, based on theories of rational choice, assumes that political participation is a result of rational considerations of autonomous individuals. Accordingly, people become politically involved after a rational weighing of the costs and benefits of participation. Therefore, if women are absent from political arenas that may be because of their own personal choice of not entering into the field of politics (Beyme, 1994; Kaase, 1997, cited in Geissel & Hust, 2005). The second approach focuses on socio-economic factors, such as resources and skills. It is well known that, for example, family background (social, economic and political), education, occupational status or income affects political participation tremendously. Since women lag behind men in most of these resources, they fail to participate equally in politics (Fowlkes, 1992, cited in Geissel & Hust, 2005). The third approach stresses structural aspects, such as the recruiting strategies of parties. This strand indicates that women are less represented in majority voting systems, due to recruiting strategies of political institutions, which have a preference for male candidates over female (Leijenaar, 1996; Hoecker, 1998; cited in Geissel & Hust, 2005).

The gender biased nature of democratic systems has resulted in larger debates over reconsidering the framework of liberal representative democracy, and several democratic reforms have been tried to ensure greater inclusion and participation of women in political systems. Affirmative action policies with the provision for setting out quotas for women in institutionalised politics have emerged as one of the major solutions for the problems of underrepresentation of women in political institutions.⁵

Representation of Women through Quotas

Conceptualisation of (descriptive) representation in terms of ‘political presence’ indicates towards setting out quotas for women in institutionalised politics. The historical failure of liberal representative democracy to ensure adequate representation of women speaks for itself that few more alternatives are available than to reserve seats for them to ensure their presence. Albeit Anne Phillips’ emphasis on differences based on lived experience to argue for descriptive representation, theoretical literature justifying quotas for women rely upon two conflicting arguments: equality and difference (Tinker, 2004). The equality argument perceives that women and men are same, and women constitute almost half of the population, so it is only fair and right that women have equal representation in legislatures that makes decisions over their lives. In this regard, quotas compensate for the actual barriers that prevent women from their fair shares of political seats (Dahlerup, 2006).

The second argument justifying quota for women in political institutions mirror the views expressed by Phillips (1995) in her thesis on politics of presence. The ‘difference’ argument in justification of quotas, appeal to the idea that the women’s experiences are distinct, and women are different from men and bring to government distinct and insightful attributes that encourage a more compassionate society (Tinker, 2004). The scholars of descriptive representation also based their argument in this notion of ‘difference’, and thus stressed that these difference interests can be best represented by women themselves rather than by men. Further, it is also argued that women representatives will better introduce women’s perspectives into policymaking and implementation. Phillips (1991) also invokes a similar argument, when she states that

… [T]here are particular needs, interests and concerns that arise from women’s different experiences, and these will be inadequately addressed in a politics dominated by men. Equal rights to vote have not proved strong enough to deal with this problem, there must also be equality among those elected to office. (Phillips, 1991: 233)

Empirical evidences from North America, Scandinavia and Western Europe suggest that, while not transforming parliaments, women legislators do raise distinctive concerns, issues and priorities (Carroll, 2001; Dolan, 1997; Duerst-Lahti & Kelly, 1995; Karvonnen & Reingold, 2000; Karvonnen & Selle, 1995; Swers, 1998, 2001; Tremblay, 1998; Tremblay & Pelletier, 2000).

Data and Method

The article is based on personal interviews with 173 elected representatives of Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) in the Dhenkanal district of the state of Odisha in India. Out of the 30 districts of the state of Odisha, the Dhenkanal district is chosen for the purpose of empirical work. Dhenkanal is land-locked district located in the central part of the state of Odisha, consisting of two ex-princely states, i.e., Dhenkanal and Hindol. The Dhenkanal district lies between 20⁰29' to 21⁰ 26' North latitude, and between 85⁰7'^{to 86⁰12' East longitude. The district is bounded on the north by Kendujhar district and in the south by Nayagarh district. In the east lies Jajapur district and in the west Anugul district. The area of the district is 4,452 sq. km, which is 2.86 per cent of the total area of the State occupying 15th rank among the 30 districts of the State.}

The Panchayati Raj structure of the Dhenkanal district consists of 1 Zilla Parishad (at the district level), 8 Panchayat Samitis (at the Block level) and 172 Gram Panchayats (at the village level). For the purpose of empirical work, two Panchayat Samitis (PS), that is, Dhenkanal Sadar and Parjang were identified from the Dhenkanal Zilla Parishad; and from each Panchayat Samiti, four Gram Panchayats (GP) were chosen. The Gram Panchayats were selected from the two chosen Panchayat Samitis based on the criterion that these panchayats should have, (a) a president who is scheduled caste male from a SC reserved constituency, (b) a president who is a scheduled tribe male from a ST reserved constituency, (c) a president who is a woman from a constituency reserved for women, and (d) a general category male president from an unreserved constituency. The data constituted all the elected representatives of the Dhenkanal ZP, Dhenkanal Sadar and Parjang PS, and the representatives from eight GPs chosen from the two mentioned Panchayat Samitis. The empirical data were collected from representatives of all three tiers of PRIs. Besides the elected representatives of the chosen PRIs, group discussions and in-depth interviews were also carried out with local elites and citizens to gain a perspective into the attitude towards women representative. Table 1 elaborates the fieldwork sites and the data, and provides details of the ZP, PS and GPs chosen for fieldwork and their number of elected representatives. In total, 173 elected representatives were interviewed, which constituted 21 from the Zilla Parishad, 49 from the Panchayat Samitis and the remaining 103 from the Gram Panchayats (see Table 1).

Women’s Political Engagement: Empirical Findings

Keeping the central objective of the article in mind, and taking insights from the theoretical approaches discussed above, the present section analyses the empirical data gathered from the field to elaborate upon women’s political engagement and its impact on the public sphere of panchayat as well as the private sphere of women’s own life. The section relies upon the empirical data collected from 173 elected representatives of the PRIs in the Dhenkanal district of Odisha, and the key informant interviews and group discussions made with the local elites and citizens of the studied panchayats. The results depicted here are analysed both in terms of gender and tiers of PRIs.

Table 1.

Details of Selected PRIs and Number of Elected Representatives

Zilla Parishad (ZP)	No. of Elected Representatives	Panchayat Samiti (PS)	No. of Elected Representatives	Gram Panchayat (GP)	No. of Elected Representatives
		Dhenkanal Sadar	24	Gengutia	15
				Tarava	16
				Nagiapasi	12
Dhenkanal	21			Baladiabandh	15
		Parjang	25	Pitini	11
				Basoi	10
				Lodhani	12
				Basulei	12
Sub Total	21		49		103
Total	173

Source: Field survey.

Women’s Political Presence: Making a Difference

While focusing upon the political presence of women in the rural political institutions, it is important to examine the socio-economic background of the representatives. Out of the 173 representatives 67 (38.7 per cent) are female and 106 (63.1 per cent) are male. It is, therefore established that little more than the required number of not less than 33 per cent of women is indeed elected to the PRIs. The relevance of reservation of seats for the new political presence of women has been reiterated by several studies (Patnaik, 2005; Sisodia, 2006). However, the findings of this study indicate that women are also elected from seats, which are not reserved for them, albeit in small numbers. Out of the 67 women interviewed for the present study, 14 (20.9 per cent) were elected from seats, which were not specifically reserved for women candidates (see Table 2). Such an observation demystifies the myth that women are not suitable for politics, and are not interested to participate in the public sphere.

Table 2.

Reservation Category of Representatives

	Male	Female	Total
Un-reserved	54 (51.0)	7 (10.4)	59 (34.1)
Reserved for Woman	Nil	23 (34.3)	25 (14.5)
Reserved for SC	18 (17.0)	Nil	18 (10.4)
Reserved for ST	9 (8.5)	3 (4.5)	12 (6.9)
Reserved for SCW	Nil	14 (20.9)	14 (8.1)
Reserved for STW	Nil	5 (7.5)	5 (2.9)
Reserved for BCCW	Nil	11 (16.4)	12 (6.9)
Reserved for BCC	25 (23.5)	4 (6.0)	28 (16.2)
Total	106 (100.0)	67 (100.0)	173 (100.0)

Source: Field survey.

Note: Figures in parentheses are percentages to respective gender.

In contrast to the Zilla Parishad, where there was just one-third representation of women, the percentages of women elected from unreserved seats were more (39.8 per cent) at Gram Panchayat level (see Table 3). Such an observation suggests that Zilla Parishads being centers of intense politics with active involvement of political parties, women find it difficult to be elected from unreserved seats. It should be pointed out that while elections are contested on party lines at Zilla Parishads, such official involvement of political parties is absent in Gram Panchayats. It becomes evident that contesting with the support of family and community members at the Gram Panchayat level turns out to be easier for women than to contest Zilla Parishad elections with a valid party ticket. It indicates further inquiry into the attitude of political leaders and parties towards women’s capability to make effective representatives, which is beyond the scope of this article.

While dealing with the presence of women in rural politics, we made an attempt to understand who are these women who have now come forward to participate in rural politics along with men. Contrary to the debate that seat reservation for women would bring elite women to politics, which would result in axing the rising leadership of middle and lower caste and class (men), our study depicted that three-fourth of these representatives belong to middle and lower castes of society.⁶ Table 4 depicts that out of the total 67 women representatives, only one-fourth (25.37 per cent) belong to upper castes, where as nearly one-third (32.84 per cent) belong to the Other Backward Castes (OBC) and more than one-fourth (28.36 per cent) belong to Scheduled Castes.

One may counteract our arguments favouring the role of quotas in bringing subaltern women into politics on the ground that in the PRIs assignment of quotas take an account of caste into consideration, and there have been provisions for quotas within quota. It is true that the 73rd Amendment made provisions for reserving seats not only women in general, but also women belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Castes (see Table 2). To inquire this issue further, we investigated the caste profile of those 23 women representatives, who came through seats reserved for ‘women’ (without any specification regarding caste).⁷ Out of these 23 women, who came through quotas (irrespective of caste), nearly one-third (34.78) belonged to backward castes and another 17.39 belonged to Scheduled Castes (see Table 5). The findings, therefore, deconstruct the myth that quotas for women would bring only ‘elite women’ into politics, thereby, ignoring the caste question. Rather it is proved that quotas for women would result in bringing a ‘critical mass’ of women belonging to different castes/classes into politics, which bring a new perspective to politics and would harbinger the process of women’s empowerment in society.

Table 3.

Gender and Representation at Various Tiers of PRIs

Gender/Tiers of PRI	ZP	PS	GP
Female	7 (33.3)	19 (38.3)	41 (39.8)
Male	14 (66.7)	30 (61.2)	62 (60.2)
Total	21 (100)	49 (100)	103 (100)

Source: Field survey.

Note: Figures in parentheses are percentages to respective tiers of PRI.

Table 4.

Caste Division of Representatives

Caste/Gender	Female	Male
Scheduled Caste	19 (28.36)	20 (18.87)
Scheduled Tribe	9 (13.13)	9 (8.49)
Other Backward Castes	22 (32.84)	47(44.34)
General Caste	17 (25.37)	30 (28.30)
Total	67 (100)	106 (100)

Source: Field survey.

Note: Figures in the parentheses are percentages to their respective gender.

Along with an inquiry into the caste structure of representatives, we also examined the family background of the elected representatives. Critiques to women’s quota put forth the claim that the benefit of quota would be cornered by the elites, and women would predominantly be recruited from the ‘political families’. This argument also indicates that these women would act as proxies, standing for politically active family members.⁸ Our empirical results indeed pointed to the fact that a substantial majority of women members came from families, where other members are too active in politics. Only 17.91 per cent of the women (out of 67) opined that no one other member in their family are involved in politics, and they are the first member in the family to be elected to any political position. However, this holds true for male representatives as well, where nearly in three-fourth (73.58 per cent) of the cases, members came from politically active families (see Table 6). Therefore, political family background seems to be a factor associated with contesting elections to achieve seats of power, which is not necessarily associated with gender.

Table 5.

Caste Profile of Representatives Coming through ‘Women’s’ Quota

Caste	Frequency	Percentage
Scheduled Caste	4	17.39
Scheduled Tribe	1	4.35
Other Backward Castes	8	34.78
General Caste	10	43.48
Total	23	100.00

Source: Flied survey.

Table 6.

Number of Members from Family Involved in Politics

Members Involved in Politics	Female	Male
No One	12 (17.91)	28 (26.42)
1 Member	9 (13.43)	13 (12.26)
2 Members	46 (68.66)	65 (61.32)
Total	67 (100.00)	106 (100.00)

Source: Field Survey.

Note: Figures in the parentheses are percentages to their respective gender.

Therefore, we cannot say with certainty that politically active families put their women as ‘proxies’ in the PRIs, and reservations lead to surrogate representation. Rather, it would be convincing to argue that politically ambitious families encourage their family members (both female and male) to contest for elections. It was, therefore, not surprising that women representatives placed high value and regard for the support, which they received from their family members. Contrast to those scholars, who viewed such support as subordination of women to male members of family and proxy politics, the qualitative data of this study inform us that many women used this support as an instrument to participate in public sphere in an otherwise male-dominated society. This becomes obvious from the remarks made by a young women representative from the Zilla Parishad:

My husband and family members encouraged me to contest the election, when the seat got reserved for women. I depend upon my husband for fulfilling many of my responsibilities as a representative. Without the help and support of male members, it would be difficult on our part to manage alone. Starting from campaigning for elections to coming to Zilla Parishad Meetings, I had to take the help of my husband. Being a woman, I cannot do these outside works alone. He accompanies me to the Zilla Parishad office, but that does not mean he speaks for me. I think I have my own capabilities to speak for myself and for my constituents. For me, my family member’s help is a positive support rather than dependence. I enjoy being in politics.

It would also be too utopian to expect these new entrants into politics to overcome all forms of domination and structural barriers of patriarchy, and function completely independently in an otherwise patriarchal society. However, it is important to note that within the existing patriarchal society, these women are trying to create a niche for themselves in rural public sphere, and ironically using the patriarchal support to overcome the barriers. Such a phenomenon definitely point towards the success of quotas in transforming rural political space as well as personal life of women. While we cannot completely rule out proxy politics and women elected representatives as ‘stand-ins’ for their politically ambitious husbands and fathers-in-law, we should also understand that such dependence of women on men can be treated as a function of time—women who in the beginning might depend upon their male political guardians, will possibly develop political profile and agency of their own.

An argument which is always posed against the quota for women in institutions of politics, especially in the case of PRIs is that, it would result in bringing incompetent and novice women into important positions, who would neither be capable of managing those nor be interested for it. Our in-depth interview with the elite members of the panchayats also gave us a similar perspective, many of whom stated that women are best suited for kitchen and inside work of the household, and they simply cannot manage the Panchayat. While such views echo the orthodoxy of patriarchy, they are far from ground reality. Our empirical findings enlighten us that these women representatives, who mostly came to the seats of power through quotas, are in the process of developing the necessary skills and awareness required to function as representatives, albeit lagging behind from their men counterparts. To investigate this issue, we inquired about the political history of the candidates and looked into their current political awareness and future political aspirations. It was indeed true that many of the women representatives were novice when they entered PRIs. However, this holds the same for the male representatives as well (see Table 7).

Table 7.

Level of Interest and Aspiration in Politics of Elected Representatives

Activities/Gender/Levels of PRI	ZP	PS	GP	All Tiers
Prior Political base	Female	42.9	38.9	12.2	22.7
	Male	64.3	25.0	16.1	25.0
Prior Political Experience	Female	14.3	26.3	7.3	13.4
	Male	64.3	17.9	11.3	20.2
Contested election out of own interest	Female	71.4	31.6	26.8	32.8
	Male	57.1	64.3	43.5	51.0
Interest in politics before contesting this Panchayat election	Female	57.1	36.8	26.8	32.8
	Male	92.9	63.3	46.8	57.5

Source: Field survey.

Note: All figures are percentages to Gender in the Respective Levels of PRI, N = ZP: 7 (F), 14 (M); PS: 19 (F), 30 (M); GP: 41 (F), 62 (M).

We also asked the representatives about their interest in contesting the election and interest in politics before contesting election. On both the counts women scored less than men, with only one-third of women representatives stating that they contested elections out of their own interest (see Table 7). The article highlighted the role played by family members and the village community in persuading the candidates to come to institutionalised politics. While such role and influence was more in the case of women representatives, it was not completely ruled out in the case of male representatives. It suggests that lack of autonomy in making decisions about contesting elections and lack of political base and experience, is not necessarily related to gender, rather is a function of larger socio-political framework. Since the PRIs consists of many lower caste/class representatives (both men and women), influence by local elites and important community members, points towards the larger socio-economic framework, which monopolises power and politics, rather than just gender.

To substantiate our argument that women are gaining confidence, being in the political system through quotas, we can present the following data regarding the awareness of representatives regarding functioning of PRIs. Having spent some years in the institution, these women are now in a position to understand the working of the Panchayati Raj Institutions. Table 8 indicates that women representatives do not lag far behind their men counterparts with respect to awareness about purpose of PRIs and several developmental schemes implemented by PRIs. We, however, got a difference of awareness regarding development schemes launched by PRIs amongst women representatives at different tiers, indicating a relatively higher rate of awareness at the Zilla Parishad level. This calls for the need to impart training and build the capacities of rural women in the Gram Panchayats, most of whom are new entrants to politics.

Table 8.

Level of Awareness of Elected Representatives

Measures of Awareness/Gender/Levels of PRI	ZP	PS	GP	All Tiers
Awareness about purposes/objectives of PRIs	Female	100.0	89.5	100.0	97.0
	Male	100.0	100.0	96.8	98.1
Awareness about developmental schemes implemented by PRIs	Female	100.0	84.2	73.2	79.1
	Male	100.0	85.7	91.9	90.4

Source: Field survey.

Note: All figures are percentages to Gender in the Respective Levels of PRI, N = ZP: 7 (F), 14 (M); PS: 19 (F), 30 (M); GP: 41 (F), 62 (M).

To gain deeper insights into the issue, we inquired about the future political aspirations of these representatives. Indeed women representatives in general (taking all tiers into account) exhibited a lower degree of aspiration that their male counterparts in all the four indicators that we took to test their political aspirations. However, there are three points which are crucial for our understanding here. The first is a comparison between previous political experience before joining the PRIs and their future ambitions to be in the public sphere. While less than 20 per cent of women representatives had any political base before contesting the PRI elections (see Table 7), more than half (58.2 per cent) of them now state to be a member of any political parties now. Similar also is the case with their intention to contest next election (see Table 9). Second, we observed a difference between women representatives belonging to different tiers of PRIs with respect to their current political engagement and future political aspirations. More women at the Zilla Parishad level have now an active political base and future political aspirations than their female counterparts at the Gram Panchayat level (see Table 9). This indicates towards the role of education, support from political networks and parties in bringing women into public sphere. While all the women in the Zilla Parishad had access to political networks and were a member of political party, which supported their candidature, less women in the Gram Panchayat level had similar access.

Table 9.

Future Political Aspirations of Representatives

Aspirations/Gender/Levels of PRI	ZP	PS	GP	All Tiers
Member of any political party (at present)	Female	100.0	63.2	48.8	58.2
	Male	100.0	92.2	54.8	71.2
Aspirations for contesting next election	Female	85.7	36.8	58.3	61.2
	Male	85.7	50.0	59.7	60.4
Aspirations for future political career	Female	71.4	10.5	46.3	38.9
	Male	71.4	43.3	51.6	51.9
Aspirations for involvement in party activity	Female	85.7	57.9	51.2	56.7
	Male	100.0	73.3	66.1	72.6

Source: Field survey.

Note: All figures are percentages to Gender in the Respective Levels of PRI, N = ZP: 7 (F), 14 (M); PS: 19 (F), 30 (M); GP: 41 (F), 62 (M).

The third point that we would like to highlight here is with regard to women’s aspirations for future political career. While relatively higher percentage of women stated that they are members of some political parties now and cherish the dream to contest the next election, only few of them informed that they would be able to maintain a future political career. It was reported that maintaining a full time public profile and active engagement in politics often come in the way of their gender specific role of managing house and fulfil their reproductive role of child bearing and rearing. It is therefore, evident that maintaining a public profile for these women does not only require changes in their personal attitudes, but a change in the larger patriarchal structure, which limits women to their gender stereotypical and reproductive roles. Unless the day-to-day household works of managing family, kitchen and child care are shared in the family, women will continue to face difficulties in creating a space for themselves in the public sphere of politics.

Women’s Substantive and Descriptive Representation

Taking clue from the theoretical review, we tried to investigate both substantive and descriptive representation of women elected members in the three tiers of Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs). The issue of substantive representation and its impact on women is judged through an investigation of the action of the representative or the way in which they participate in the functioning of the panchayat. Similarly, descriptive representation is empirically examined by looking into its three fundamental aspects: representation of group-specific interest, construction of social meaning for gender and establishment of de facto legitimacy at PRIs.

Substantive Representation of Women in the PRIs

Broadly, one can identify two ways of assessing the level of participation of elected representatives, that is, their participation inside the panchayat activities, and second, their overall involvement in political affairs and public life of the locality. Since we considered participation as an essential element of substantive representation, an attempt was made to gauge the level of participation of these women representatives. The data presented in Tables 10 and 11 reveal lesser degree of participation for women in all the seven measures that were identified. Further, participation by women representatives at the Gram Panchayat level is far less than their female colleagues at the Zilla Parishad.

Table 10.

Participation in Local Political Activities Outside PRIs

Activities/Gender/Levels of PRI	ZP	PS	GP	All Tiers
Participation in election activities of the locality	Female	71.4	21.1	17.1	23.9
	Male	92.9	63.6	40.3	53.8
Participation in campaigning for political leaders in the elections	Female	85.7	10.5	17.1	22.4
	Male	92.9	63.3	27.4	46.2
Participation in political meetings in the locality	Female	100.0	31.6	29.3	37.3
	Male	100.0	80.0	51.6	64.2
Participation in non-political (cultural/social/conflict resolution, etc.) meetings in the locality	Female	100.0	63.2	61.0	65.7
	Male	85.7	86.7	83.9	84.9

Source: Field survey.

Note: All figures are percentages to Gender in the Respective Levels of PRI, N = ZP: 7 (F), 14 (M); PS: 19 (F), 30 (M); GP: 41 (F), 62 (M).

Despite lower rates of participation by women representatives, which is quite understandable given the larger socio-political and cultural set up, the interesting findings that the study reveals is their higher rates of participation within the PRIs than outside it. In contrast to the participation of women representatives in political activities outside PRIs, an observation of the measures of their participation inside PRIs reveal relative higher rate of involvement (see Table 11).

Descriptive Representation of Women in the PRIs

For the purpose of analysis, we defined descriptive representation as a case of ‘mirror representation’, where the representatives are in their own persons, and lives in some sense typical of the larger class of persons whom they represent. Following Mansbridge (1999), we made an attempt to gauge the descriptive representation of women through an examination of three fundamental issues: representation of group-specific interest, construction of a social meaning for women’s engagement in public sphere, and upholding de facto legitimacy at PRIs.

Table 11.

Participation in Panchayat Activities (Inside PRIs)

Activities/Gender/Levels of PRI	ZP	PS	GP	All Tiers
Attendance in Regular PRI meetings	Female	100.0	89.5	78.8	83.6
	Male	100.0	90.0	87.1	89.6
Raising problems of locality in Panchayat meetings	Female	100.0	50.0	61.0	62.1
	Male	100.0	89.7	83.9	87.6
Participation in discussions held during meetings	Female	85.7	61.1	46.3	93.9
	Male	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0

Source: Field survey.

Note: All figures are percentages to Gender in the Respective Levels of PRI, N = ZP: 7 (F), 14 (M); PS: 19 (F), 30 (M); GP: 41 (F), 62 (M).

Representation of Group-specific Interest

To gauge the efforts of the women representatives in voicing matters that concern their group, we posed them with the question regarding their attempts to voice their group-specific concerns in the PRIs. Data depicted in Table 12 indicate that nearly three-fourth (76.1 per cent) of the women representatives opined to have identified concerns and issues specific to women, and have taken up those group-specific issues in PRIs. Issues such as pensions to widows and old women, availability of drinking water facilities, toilets for students (especially girl students) in schools, assistance to children for education, providing anganwadi and reproductive health care to pregnant and child rearing women, implementation of several developmental programmes to improve the livelihood options of poor women, etc. were identified as group-specific interests of women, which the women elected members would like to address. Similarly, a higher percentage of women representatives (71.6 per cent) also opined that other women of the locality bring to them their group-specific problems (see Table 12).⁹

Table 12.

Representation of Group-specific Interest by Women Representatives {All figures in percentages, N =67 (Women)}

	All Tiers	ZP	PS	GP
Do you take up any issue in ZP/PS/GP which is specific to women?	76.1	85.7	73.7	75.6
Do women of your locality bring to you any specific problems related to women?	71.6	71.4	68.4	73.2
Do they prefer to take these women’s issues to other male representatives?	31.2	28.6	31.6	34.1
Are you expected by women of your locality to give more importance to women’s problems?	76.1	57.1	78.9	78.0
Is it possible that other male representatives too could be sensitive to women’s problems and concerns?	37.3	57.1	31.6	36.6
Do you think that the problems concerning women can be better solved by a women representative?	65.7	42.9	57.9	73.2
Does your selection as a member to the ZP/PS/GP have an impact on articulation of women’s issues?	62.7	42.9	63.2	65.9

Source: Field survey.

Descriptive representation believes that representatives can represent the group-specific problem in a better way, since they share the same lived experiences and have easy and enhanced communication with the constituents. The findings of our study confirm such an assumption about descriptive representation. A significant percentage of women elected members (76.12 per cent) stated that women in general expect from these representatives to give more importance to women’s issues. Further, hardly one-third of the women representatives (37.3 per cent) believed that male representatives could be sensitive to women’s interests. Similarly, 65.7 per cent of the women representatives believed that problems concerning women can be solved in a more efficient way only by women representatives.

Construction of Social Meaning of Grass-roots Democracy

From the qualitative data that we gathered through personal interview and discussions with these women representative, we can deduce that inclusion of women into PRIs through quotas has constructed a new meaning for local democracy in general and for the identity of the women representative in particular. The quotas for women to PRIs have been successful in bringing more women to public sphere and make them a part of the mainstream village politics, who otherwise would have limited to private sphere of home and kitchen. The empirical data confirms that descriptive representation through the system of seat reservation has given a new meaning to women’s identity, and has exposed the myth that ‘men make good leaders than women’. As we discussed earlier, being members of PRIs has given a new kind of confidence to the women representatives, who otherwise were characterised as illiterate, unaware, passive and unfit to rule. It has deconstructed the dominant political idea, which has much prevailed in a patriarchal political arena that women ‘do not rule’, ‘are not able to rule’, and ‘are unfit to rule’. The rising political awareness and aspirations amongst these women representatives talk about a new social meaning to women’s (political) identity.

Upholding de facto Legitimacy

The descriptive representation of women through policies of affirmative action has increased the legitimacy of the PRIs. Since democracy derives its essence from involvement of people in matters of decision making, such efforts of inclusion of women members in institutions of decision making necessarily work towards gaining inclusiveness and legitimacy for the democratic system. Such representation proves the point that local democracy is not anymore a government by the men, but women too can play a crucial role in local democracy. In other words, a political institution which does not reflect the presence of diverse social groups and gender of the society would hardly qualify to be called a legitimate one.

Mobilisation through Quotas and Transformative Politics

The first and foremost outcome of mobilisation of women through quota is their sheer number in the PRI institutions, verifiable through quantitative data. However, it is not only that mobilisation through quotas has resulted in just increasing their numbers quantitatively. Certainly, it has brought out some qualitative change in women’s life. Second, it encourages women to engage themselves in public sphere and enable them to acquire skills required to function in it. As we discussed before, there were many inexperienced and novice women, who entered into the PRIs with the help of the quota, but having spent some years in the panchayats have gained the confidence to negotiate between their personal gender roles as wife, mother and daughter-in-law and their role in public sphere as a representative. For many women representatives, panchayat itself has turned out to be a platform for learning how to sand up and speak in public, in front of others, especially male colleagues. Taken in the right attitude, such a learning process keeps the potential to develop agencies within the women representatives to realize their individual identity and self-dignity.

The third impact of political mobilisation of women through quota that comes out of this article is with respect to its ability to groom future women politician at the local level. The empirical findings pointed it out that there are many women who are now interested to contest the next PRIs elections. It is also quite convincing that few of them also stated that they will contest the election even if the seat is not reserved for women in the next election. However, in a socio-political context like India, such ambitions of women to contest the next election is not without hurdles. It is true that these few ambitious women have to overcome the structural, societal and personal barriers to sustain their political dreams. At the societal and personal level, these women have to struggle with the institutions of patriarchy to create a space for them in the political arena. The following quote from a woman representative makes the point more clear:

I was not interested in the panchayats in the beginning. My family members and other members of the community encouraged me to contest the election, since the seat got reserved for woman. But now I realize the importance of being a representative. Now I got an opportunity to do something for our locality. I have started enjoying the work that is related with the panchayats. I also intend to contest the next panchayat election. But if my husband and family members oppose it I will have no option. I cannot go against my family to contest the election. If this happens, I will regret for it, but I will try to request them to support me.

An answer to such a situation may be more gender sensitisation for the political parties and a larger political commitment to encourage women candidates to contest elections and provide them with necessary required support. It, therefore, becomes clear that quotas at the local level may encourage and facilitate development of political ambitions among women, but sustaining these ambitions and realising them in a long term depends to certain extent upon existence of quotas at the higher political levels.

The last point that we would like to mention about the impact of mobilisation of women through quotas, pertains to the way in which women representatives negotiate and transgress the boundaries between the private and the public. While on occasions women’s private sphere has intruded upon the public sphere of panchayat, at other times women it has rendered itself for public sphere of village politics. We will site two examples to make our point clear. During the meetings, it was observed that women members of the panchayat seat prefer to seat together and maintain some distance from the other men representatives. While this observation inside the panchayat may seem on its face as exclusion of women, our qualitative discussions with women prompt us to describe it as being within a comfort zone, which increases the confidence women. Many female representatives stated that they feel comfortable in the panchayat meetings, and do not have any issues talking and dealing with other male representatives. To this they also added that the presence of other women positively supports that feeling of being confidence and able to talk to other male members. During the course of panchayat meeting, it was observed that women members come out their house with their veil (pallu) covering their face. But when they enter inside the panchayat office, they remove the veil and feel comfortable with other women representatives. This shows that the rural women are now learning (or may have learnt) the act of negotiating between the public and the private sphere, and have made the division thinner.¹⁰

The second example that we provide here point towards the way in which women transgress between the public and the private, and try to rupture the strict division between these two by shifting from one to the other at ease. It was realised from the field work that political discussions are not a subject matter of public sphere alone. Some women representatives reported that they now discuss about village politics at home, in the kitchen, and even in the bedroom with their husbands. Almost all the women representatives opined that they discuss politics with their husbands whenever they get time at home. Such instances suggest that these women have tried to accommodate the public, that is, the village politics, in their private sphere, making the once strict distinction between these two blurred and making it easy for them to move from one to other.

Conclusion

To conclude we may state that women’s presence made possible through quotas in PRIs does make a difference in rural politics as well as in their personal lives. More than anything, it has given them an ability to realize their own individual self, and construct a new identity for them, an identity which does not make themselves just daughters, wives, mothers and daughters-in-law, but someone as an individual. The mobilisation through quotas may have had a less impact on the larger framework of political system, women as a collective or gender relations, but it has surely led to some positive and promising shifts at the individual level of these women representatives. These shifts in individual life of women representatives definitely create some spillover effects on family relations, (gender) division of labour and on rural politics. The transgressing of private and public spheres has resulted in renegotiating the family relations and gender division of labour within the family. Women do feel that their opinions now get more importance both at the private sphere of home as well as public sphere of the panchayat. The transformative politics at the public sphere have proved that ‘women can’ and ‘women do’ make good political leaders, and has made it clear that politics is no more just a man’s game.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The data presented in this article is a part of a larger study on ‘Power, Influence and Decision Making in the Panchayats of Odisha’, funded by Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR), New Delhi. The financial support provided by the ICSSR, New Delhi, is duly acknowledged. The author would like to thank the Council for Social Development (CSD), Hyderabad, for the institutional support provided for the research work.

Notes

References

Behar

Kumar

(2002). Decentralisation in Madhya Pradesh: Panchayati Raj to Gram Swaraj (1995–2000) (Working Paper No. 170). London: Overseas Development Institute.∆172

Biester

Holland-Cunz

Sauer

(Ed.). (1994). Demokratie oder Androkratie. Frankfurt & New York: Campus.

Birch

A. H.

(1964). Representative and responsible government. London: Routledge.

Birch

A. H.

(1993). The concept and theories of modern democracy. London: Routledge.

Bryld

(2001). Increasing participation in democratic institutions through decentralisation: Empowering women and Scheduled Castes and Tribes through Panchayat Raj in rural India. Democratisation, 8(3): 149–72.

Beyme

K. V.

(1994). Politikverdrossenheit und Politikwissenschaft. In Leggewie

(Ed.), Wozu Politikwissenschaft? Uber das Neue in der Politik (pp. 21–33). Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

Burke

(1774) (1889). Speech to the Electors of Bristol. In The Works of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke (Vol. 2). Boston: Little Brown.

Carroll

(Ed.). (2001). The impact of women in public office. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Dahlerup

(Ed.). (2006). Women, Quotas and Politics. New York and London: Routledge.

10.

Dahlerup

(2008). Gender quotas: Controversial but trendy. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 10(3): 322–28.

11.

Duerst-Lahti

Kelly

R. M.

(Eds). (1995). Gender, power, leadership and governance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

12.

Dolan

(1997). Gender differences in support for women candidates: Is there a glass ceiling in American politics? Women & Politics, 17(2): 27–41.

13.

Egan

M. L.

(1989). Evolutionary theory in the social philosophy of Charlotte Perkins Gilman. Hypatia, 4(1): 102–19.

14.

Fowlkes

D. E.

(1992). White political women: Path from privilege to empowerment. Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press.

15.

Gay

(1996). Race and political context: The impact of black congressional representation on the voting behavior of white and black constituents. Paper Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.

16.

Geissel

Hust

(2005). Democratic mobilisation through quotas: Experiences in India and Germany. Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 43(2): 222–44.

17.

Ghosh

B. N.

(2000). Women leadership in Gram Panchayat: Prospects and constraints. Journal of Indian Anthropological Society, 35: 47–52.

18.

Grazia

A. De.

(1968). Representation: Theory. In International encyclopaedia of social sciences. New York, NY: Macmillan.

19.

Griffiths

Wollheim

(1960). How can one person represent another? Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes, 34: 187–224.

20.

Hoecker

(Ed.). (1998). Handbuch politische Partizipation von Frauen in Europa. Opladen: Leske and Budrich.

21.

Hust

(2002). Political representation and empowerment: Women in the institutions of local Government in Odisha after the 73rd Amendment to the Indian Constitution. Heidelberg Papers in South Asian and Comparative Politics. Working Paper No. 6. Heidelberg: South Asia Institute, Department of Political Science, University of Heidelberg.

22.

IDEA (Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance) (2005). Women in Parliament: Beyond numbers—A revised edition. Retrieved 11 December 2013, from http://www.idea.int/publications/wip2/

23.

Inamdar

N. R.

(1991). Panchayati Raj leadership: Emerging dimensions. Journal of Rural Development, 10(5): 561–73.

24.

Inbanathan

(2001). Representation and accountability in local government: The Panchayats of Karnataka (Working Paper No. 96). Bangalore: Institute for Social and Economic Change.

25.

Johnson

Deshingkar

Start

(2003). Grounding the state: Poverty, inequality and the politics of governance in India’s Panchayats (Working Paper No. 226). London: Overseas Development Institute.

26.

Kaase

(1997). Politische Beteiligung/Politische Partizipation. In Andersen

Woyke

(Eds), Handworterbuch des Politischen Systems der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (pp. 444–90). Bonn: Bundeszentrale fur Politische Bildung.

27.

Karvonnen

Selle

(Eds). (1995). Women in Nordic politics: Closing the gap. Aldershot: Dartmouth.

28.

Leijenaar

(1996). How to create a gender balance in political decision making: A guide to implementing policies for increasing the participation of women in political decision making. Brussels: Document of the European Commission.

29.

Mansbridge

(1999). Should blacks represent blacks and women represent women? A contingent yes. The Journal of Politics, 61(3): 628–57.

30.

Mathew

Nayak

R. C.

(1996). Panchayats at work: What it means for the oppressed? Economic and Political Weekly, 31(27): 1765–71.

31.

Menon

(1997). Reservation and representation. Seminar, Special Issue on ‘Empowerment of Women’, No. 457.

32.

Menon

(2000). Elusive ‘women’: Feminism and women’s reservation bill. Economic and Political Weekly, 35(43/44): 3835–44.

33.

Mishra

(1998). Devolution of power to women in Panchayati Raj in Odisha: Challenges and opportunities. Kurukshetra, 47(2): 19–24.

34.

Patnaik

(2005). Affirmative action and representation of weaker sections: Participation and accountability in Odisha’s panchayats. Economic and Political Weekly, XL: 4753–61.

35.

Phillips

(1991). Engendering democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

36.

Phillips

(1995). The politics of presence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

37.

Pitkin

(1967). The concept of representation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

38.

Rai

(1999). Democratic institutions, political representation and women’s political empowerment: The quota debate in India. Democratization, 6(3): 84–99.

39.

Rao

(1998). Representation in local politics: A reconsideration and some new evidence. Political Studies, 46(1): 19–35.

40.

Reingold

(2000). Representing women: Sex, gender, and legislative behavior in Arizona and California. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

41.

Sisodia

Y. S.

(2006). Participatory democracy and women’s performance in Panchayati Raj institutions: Evidence from Madhya Pradesh. In Arunachalam

Jaya

Kalpagam

(Eds), Development and empowerment: Rural women in India (pp. 225–44). Jaipur: Rawat Publications.

42.

Swers

(1998). Are women more likely to vote for women’s issue bills than their male colleagues? Legislative Studies Quarterly, 23(3): 435–48.

43.

Swers

(2001). Understanding the policy impact of electing women: Evidence from research on congress and state legislatures. Political Science and Society, 34(2): 217–20.

44.

Tinker

(2004). Quotas for women in elected legislatures: Do they really empower women? Women’s Studies International Forum, 27(5–6): 531–46.

45.

Tremblay

Pelletier

(2000). More feminists or more women? Descriptive and substantive representations of women in the 1997 Canadian federal elections. International Political Science Review, 21(4): 381–405.

46.

Tremblay

(1998). Do female MPs substantively represent women? Canadian Journal of Political Science, 31(3): 435–65.

47.

Vyasulu

(1999). Women in Panchayati Raj: Grassroots democracy in Malgudi. Economic and Political Weekly, XXXIV(52): 3677–86.