How Equal is Access to Public Services? The Impact of Sociodemographic Background on Public Service Delivery in Sri Lanka

Abstract

Existing evidence strongly supports the thesis that sociodemographic variables, such as ethnicity, various forms of identity affiliation (religion, caste, and language), social norms, and level of education, tend to influence citizens’ ability to gain access to public services in developing societies. This article explores the extent to which ethnicity, social identities, and level of education influence access to public services in the Sri Lankan context, taking the plantation community as a case in point. The article finds that though there are constitutional mandates ensuring citizenry rights and entitlements to public services, sociodemographic factors considerably limit those rights for deprived communities. Based on the evidence, it is argued that improving the quality of governance and access to education for marginalized communities tends to reduce the discrimination suffered by these communities and to hold public institutions accountable. Thus, this study seeks to contribute to the existing literature on good governance and the delivery of public services to marginalized communities through focusing on the importance of sociodemographic conditions.

Keywords

Access to public services sociodemographic variables developing societies Sri Lanka

Introduction

Existing evidence suggests that sociodemographic variables, such as ethnicity, various forms of identity affiliation (such as religion, caste, and language), social norms, and level of education, are more likely to influence citizens’ ability and capability to gain access to legally mandated public services in developing societies. These variables function as a form of eligibility criteria either to enable or inhibit citizens from enjoying their social rights, particularly in socially disadvantaged communities (Alesina et al., 1999; Banerjee & Somanathan, 2007; Banerjee et al., 2005; Betancourt & Gleason, 2000). In a similar vein, Bell (1992), Hacker (1995), Kozol (1991), Huckfeldt and Kohfeld (1989), Chandra (2004), and Easterly and Levine (1997) have shown that ethnolinguistic affiliation tends to influence policymaking and service provision in ethnically stratified societies. In such societies, marginalized people with multiple problems often depend on public services, but they are least capable of dealing with the bureaucracies associated with the vast range of organizational procedures involved in providing these services (Babajanian, 2015, p. 233). There are constitutional mandates ensuring rights and entitlements to legally mandated public services, yet sociodemographic factors influence their reception. This pattern leads to a dysfunctional relationship between the state and citizens, and it impairs responsive, fair, and accountable governance (Shah, 2008, p. 223).

In addition, numerous studies suggest that illiterate people and those with a low level of education are more prone to experience ill-treatment and discriminations in the developing world, where identity affiliations and clientelism or patronage systems take precedence in service delivery over equality, procedural justice, and fairness (Mendelson & Vicziany, 1998, p. 263; Kabeer, 2000, pp. 21-22; The World Bank, 2004). The global significance of citizens’ social rights is evident in Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which prescribes that each individual has the right to work, the right to free choice of employment, the right to just and favorable conditions of work, and the right to protection against unemployment. Article 25 of the same declaration stipulates that every citizen has the right to a standard of living adequate for their health and well-being, including adequate food, clothing, housing, medical care, and necessary public services (UDHR, 1948).

This is further reiterated in several other human rights instruments, including International Convention on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), etc. It implies that citizens have the right to public services and that it is the binding obligation of the state to ensure they receive them equally. This is an enforceable right, enshrined in the legal frameworks, and sets out the specific roles and responsibilities of the implementing agencies, along with the criteria and procedures for identification of eligible beneficiaries (Babajanian, 2015, p. 233). Yet, in reality, these rights have hardly been realized by marginalized, excluded, and socially vulnerable communities due to the influence of social and ethnic identities, poor governance, and various forms of malaise in administration (Haque, 1999, 2003; Keefer & Khemani, 2005; Ramesh, 2019).

Empirical evidence demonstrates that there are instances where public officials tend to exercise discretionary powers in favor of certain sections of society based on entrenched interests and informal relations (Keiser, 1999, p. 87; Mamgain & Diwaker, 2012, p. 26; Meier & Bohte, 2001; Sowa & Selden, 2003, pp. 701-703). Joseph (1997) argues that different ethnic and religious groups and social classes transport their identities and affiliation to the public sphere of state and civil society, and these identities and affiliations shape access to the considerable amount of state resources and services (cited in Kabeer, 2000, p. 19). Undoubtedly, public officials hold a crucial part of the public bureaucracy and play a significant role in establishing social justice, equity, and equality through service delivery (Mosher, 1982; Rourke, 1984; Sowa & Selden 2003, p. 700).

Citizens have to deal with them in fulfilling a number of services daily, and thus, they have become an important part of local-level governance structures. They translate vague legislative mandates, rules, and regulations into organizational procedures by using their discretionary power. Under discretionary approaches, service entitlement and access are not guaranteed and involve a significant degree of administrative judgment in determining eligibility (Babajanian, 2015, p. 233), so that discretionary powers are more likely to influence service access, responsiveness and performance of officials. In Asia, service access varies considerably, with the poor typically having the worst access and lowest quality of service. This is particularly appalling because public services are vitally important for poor and deprived people, who do not have the purchasing power to buy high-priced private services (Deolalikar & Jha, 2015, p. 324).

Against this backdrop, this article seeks to determine to what extent ethnic and social identities and education level influence access to public services in the Sri Lankan context, taking the plantation community as a case in point. The article aims to answer two research questions: (a) how equal is access to public services in Sri Lanka? and (b) how do sociodemographic variables contribute to unequal access and indifferent treatment in service delivery? The article also seeks to contribute to the existing literature on governance, administration, and service delivery through the lens of sociodemographic aspects, taking Sri Lanka as a case in point.

The Plantation Community of Sri Lanka

In 1815, the British brought Sri Lanka (then called Ceylon) under their control and shortly introduced modern economic changes that led to the introduction of a new community of people, along with the cultivation of plantation crops in the hill country. The plantation people have maintained a distinct identity of their own, different from that of the Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils. For almost 200 years, they have lived and worked in plantations, while maintaining, protecting, and promoting their own language, religion, history, culture, and ancient traditions and customs (Nadesan, 1993). They have not detached themselves from their past but continue to have a close relationship with their people in those Indian villages where they came from. However, in 1948, they were made “stateless,” and successive governments that came to power since the country’s independence refused to accept them as legal citizens until the late 1980s, and they were debarred from joining or holding high positions in government service. They had been deprived of citizenship for five decades, and the prolonged problem was solved in 2003 through the introduction of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, No 16 of 2003 (Bass, 2012, p. 82).

Nevertheless, Sri Lanka is often considered as a “success story” in addressing statelessness, as it eventually granted citizenship to the plantation Tamils. In 1931, the plantation people constituted 15.43 percent of the country’s total population, yet the census report of 2011 indicates that the plantation people account for only 4.2 percent of the total population of the country. It was estimated that a total of 1,073,976 people live on the plantations and that some 88.4 percent of these people are Tamils of Indian origin, 10.7 percent are Sinhalese, and 0.97 percent are from other communities (Vijesandiran, 2005). The plantations are recognized as the “homeland” and domicile of this community, where they have lived for a long period. About two-thirds of the families living on the plantations are workers or their dependents. The rest one-third, although freed from estate labor and involved in other activities, continue to live in the plantations. Therefore, today, the plantations are recognized as the permanent residential areas of the hill people, encapsulating many social structures.

Sociodemographic Variables and Public Service Delivery: Theoretical Framework

Existing evidence indicates that sociodemographic variables, such as ethnicity, social identity, and education, have a significant influence in determining access to public services in plural societies where various forms of identity affiliations and relationships tend to shape the institutional culture and practices of public institutions and officials. This section aims to conceptualize and operationalize these variables in a manner to answer the main research question of the article. Identity is presently used in two linked senses, which can be termed as “social” and “personal.”

Social identity refers to a social category, a set of persons marked by a label and distinguished by rules deciding membership and characteristics. It also emanates from one’s profession in society. The personal identity denotes some distinguishing characteristics that a person takes special pride in or views as socially consequential but unchangeable (Fearson, 1999, p. 2). Hogg and Abrams (1988) show that identity is people’s concept of who they are, what sort of person they are, and how they relate to others/agencies. Identity is the way individuals and groups define themselves and are defined by others based on race, ethnicity, profession, language, religion, and culture (Fearson, 1999, p. 4).

It is argued that social heterogeneity of a population with respect to ethnicity, language, and religion has the potential to limit unfair resource allocation and public service delivery (Kabeer, 2000, p. 85). Perceptions and identities are created through interaction with the dominant structure of power and discourse. The dominant group of a society or organization determines and interprets the behaviors and needs of the other sections. Thompson (1993) precisely points out that racism is positively related to identity types, which are built into the structure of a society and its dominant institutions. He concludes, “discriminations and oppressions experienced by people from minority ethnic groups are not individual prejudice, but rather an institutional practice” (Taylor, 2010, p. 377).

Much scholarly and general writing suggests that preferences about public policies, service delivery, and ethnicity are strongly correlated, and that conflicts on public policies often arise along ethnic diversity lines (Bell, 1992; Hacker, 1995; Huckfeldt & Kohfeld, 1989; Kozol, 1991). In addition, Alesina et al. (1999) describe that conflicts over public policy and public service delivery are determined by ethnic cleavages, not by class cleavages. This indicates that the ethnic identity of service seekers directly influences the utility level of public services. It was argued that ethnic and language match increase citizen satisfaction in service delivery, especially minorities could be well equipped in public service and it engenders greater utilization of public services (Snowden et al., 1995). Similarly, an influential study by Banerjee and Somanathan (2007, p. 289) finds that identity strongly correlates with public service delivery; upper-caste people are well equipped in public service systems, and their socioeconomic status in terms of education, health, income, employment, and accessibility to other amenities is higher than that of religious, linguistic, and ethnic minorities and tribes. They further claim that areas with a presence of plural ethnic, religious, and caste groups have a lack of access to public services, and in contrast, geographical areas that are constituted by an ethnic, caste, and religious majority have better access to public services than the areas where marginalized people live (Banerjee & Somanathan, 2007, p. 289).

Mendelson and Vicziany (1998, p. 270) put forth the idea that public bureaucracy is a collection of people and bundle of rules and regulations, that public servants are from particular social backgrounds and social strata, and that their associations naturally reflect their social background or affiliation to service delivery. This shows that the institutional culture does not allow them to be free from their social origin. It can be concluded that access through various forms of identity profoundly affects the equal distribution of benefits and legally mandated public services-in such contexts, access is often mediated by social identity or membership in a community or group, including groupings by age, gender, ethnicity, religion, status, profession, place of birth, and other attributes that constitute social identity. This argument provides the impetus to explore how identity works in public institutions in Sri Lanka’s public institutions. From the above discussions, one could presume that various forms of identity may influence access to public services; for instance, identity could reflect institutional bias, prejudice, social norms, and other affiliations in service delivery. To capture the impact of identity in accessing public services, the study employs some empirical measures, such as assessing: identity perception in service delivery and the practice of citizenship rights; institutional bias in service delivery; nature of treatment in administrative institutions; influence of social identity; and diversity management in public institutions.

A review of the literature and theories demonstrates that in diverse societies, public officials are more likely to employ discretionary power in line with ethno-social affiliations and other relationships. The influential work of Lipsky (1980), shows the way frontline officials tend to deliver some form of public services, inherently end up with prejudice, ignorance and stereotyping. Abuse of power seems to be a common practice among frontline officials; therefore, discretionary power is less likely to correlate with the principles of procedural fairness and equality before the law. Some claim that frontline officials often exercise political power to represent and fulfill the needs of citizens, and hence it becomes inherent in the exercise of discretionary power and in challenging a democratic government (Sowa & Selden, 2003).

Nevertheless, in practice, the way frontline officials impose rules and regulations is likely to prevent equal access to public services. Sowa and Selden (2003) suggest that one solution to the unfair exercise of discretionary power is representative bureaucracy, which can make bureaucratic power more responsive to the public if the officials of public institutions reflect the demographic characteristics of the public whom they serve. Citizens are likely to accept institutional actions if the demographic composition of these institutions is similar to that of society. If so, representative workforce or bureaucracy is more likely to provide an avenue for citizens to feel a connection with government institutions to fulfill their needs and desires reflected in these institutions (Levitan, 1946, cited in Sowa & Selden, 2003, p. 700). This explains that representation of various groups in the bureaucracy can minimize prejudice and other clientelist practices in service delivery. Street-level bureaucrats have a significant role in service delivery and determine eligibility for government services; therefore, they hold the key to the dimension of citizenship and the practice of citizenship rights. The citizenship practices reflect not only citizens’ knowledge of the state institutions’ duty but also the level of physical access to state institutions, where claims can be made. This leads to different types of treatments from these agencies, that is, differently positioned claimants receiving indifferent treatment (Houtzager & Archarya, 2010, p. 28). This article explores the influence of sociodemographic variables on the application of rules and regulations (power and control), selection procedure, and mode of service delivery.

Education is an act or process of imparting and acquiring general knowledge and developing skills of reasoning and judgment, and it helps in the leading of an adult life. Education allows one to think and realize social phenomena, and it empowers citizens to raise their voice for rights and entitlements. It is the route to the participation of citizens and practice of citizenship rights to address social inequality and discriminations, and it also enables one to enjoy rights and participate in various spheres (Walton, 2003, p. 59). Education engenders a sense of entitlement to equal treatment (Mendelson & Vicziany, 1998, p. 263; cited; Kabeer, 2000, pp. 21-22). As shown by Kabeer, the various formal and informal ways that excluded groups acquire knowledge and information about their status, rights, and capacity to reflect on their situation, to question it and act on it, constitute a common starting point to challenge exclusion (2000, p. 22). Nevertheless, the review of the literature shows that there are not many studies exploring the influence of level of education on access to public services in the South Asian context.

Thus, the research for this article examined how the level of education influences access to public services in Sri Lanka. The assumption is that educational attainments or improvements can have a positive influence on gaining access to legally mandated public services, practicing citizenship rights, and fighting against or surmounting some form of institutional and societal discriminations in public service delivery. To explain the influence of education on access to public service, the study applies the following empirical measures: awareness about public services that citizens are entitled to, awareness of service delivery institutions, available services, means of accessing public services, and language competency. The level of education is measured based on the duration of schooling. Based on the above analytical framework, it is assumed that social and ethnic identity and level of education might either facilitate or hinder public services in Sri Lanka.

Design of the Study

This article intends to provide a deeper understanding of how associational relationships, ethno-social dimensions, and literacy provide avenues for generating marginalization, agency, and vulnerability in diverse societies. For this purpose, this article employs a qualitative approach (Creswell, 2014), and it is part of a research project carried out in the districts of Nuwara Eliya and Kandy between 2015 and 2016 for 8 months. In this article, our main focus is on presenting and analyzing the qualitative data collected from 60 purposively selected respondents. The selection of study areas and public institutions was done in consultation with local leaders, civil society activists, and the public, along with being based on access to data and geographical accessibility. Thus, we selected the following public institutions: district and divisional secretariat divisions, village officers, local government authorities, the police, the agriculture department, hospitals, the education department, and the electricity board. Data were collected through semi-structured and in-depth interviews, along with eight focus group discussions (FGDs). We used two sets of interview guides: one for key informants and the other for plantation people. The language used for preparing and administering the interview guides was English. A professional translator translated the guides to Tamil to facilitate the respondents’ understanding.

A pilot study involving 15 respondents was conducted to test the validity of the interview guides. For the interviews, we focused on various categories of respondents, including plantation people, public officials, plantation managers, political leaders, and civil society activists, and youths, which helped minimize bias in the process of data collection and analyses. In addition to interviews, five FGDs were conducted in the study areas, which lasted from 1 to 1.5 hours, wherein 6-10 participants attended each discussion, including plantation workers, public officials from the ethnic majority, civil society activists, teachers, and youths. We also maintained a gender balance during the entire data collection process. Secondary data were collected from various published and unpublished material. The above measures helped determine the causal mechanism, taking the influence of independent and dependent variables into account. Respondents were selected from all ethnic groups based on the relevance, expertise, and availability of information.

Identity Affiliation and Public Service Delivery

In Sri Lanka, as the society is divided along ethnic lines, ethnic identity seems to have a considerable influence on who gets access to public services. The literature shows that areas with plural ethnicity lack access to public services. In contrast, geographical regions that are constituted by the ethnic majority have better access to public services than the areas where plantation people reside. It seems that with an ethnic preference in service delivery, one group may not allow other groups to enjoy services and resources, as it decreases their space or opportunities for enjoying them. Empirical evidence indicates that a large number of Sinhalese officials have been employed to serve a Tamil-speaking majority population in the plantation areas, which has created a mismatch between service seekers and providers. Such mismatch is more likely to limit access and utilization of public services. This not only indicates that public services for marginalized people suffer in a deeply divided society, but also highlights the question about administrative justice in Sri Lanka, which includes procedural fairness of administrative agencies in applying rules and regulations.

A considerable number of respondents claimed that certain public officials are helpful and supportive in their gaining access to public services, on the grounds of sympathy and empathy. These officials are perceived as benevolent, as they tend to treat plantation people based on the perceptions that they are vulnerable in the society, are poor, belong to an excluded community, and so forth. As the respondents noted, in some cases, ethnic-majority officials tend to surpass the established rules and regulations intending to serve plantation people. In such occasions, public officials do not treat plantation people in accordance with rules, laws, and established normative principles, or as equal citizens, or as people with rights to claim mandated services and entitlements; rather, they just treat them as a group of marginalized people in the society. There have been instances where, administrative barriers are restricting access to services, namely, lack of birth registration and identity documents often exclude individuals from vulnerable communities from benefiting from their legal entitlements and to have a rightful share in social welfare programmes.

Empirical evidence shows that until recent times, there had been a lack of internal dynamism and demands for public service among plantation people, because prolonged statelessness continues to influence their claiming social rights as legal citizens. It should be understood that when officials fail to treat citizens in a manner consistent with their rights, citizens have the responsibility to voice and demand their rights and entitlements, which means though a formal citizenship status can open doors, but, citizens need to demand and negotiate for social rights. The Sri Lankan case explains that when stateless people regain the legal form of citizenship, they need to develop their capacity, civic virtues, skills, social capital, and other abilities to have fair knowledge and awareness regarding public service delivery, institutional working, rules, and regulations. This may help improve their access to services, reduce ill-treatment and discriminations, and eventually hold officials accountable. Nevertheless, this needs the gradual removal of unfreedom, including policy and institutional obstacles.

As the 2016 United Nations Human Development Report (2016) indicates, the status of ethnic minorities is associated with lower capabilities and opportunities in many developing countries; the reason for this emergence is unequal access, ill-treatment, and discriminatory laws, attitudes, behaviors, and institutional environment. This explains that deprivation of capabilities is linked with several issues that limit the potential of accessing services and fighting against discriminations. A larger proportion of the plantation people are born into geographically isolated areas, where they get fewer chances to access various services and public institutions. Lack of staff and institutional capacity on the part of the state further limit service delivery to the plantations, and public officials are disinclined to uphold the interests of ethnic minorities, though they (plantation people) constitute the majority in some areas. This pattern is similar to that in other South Asian countries (Haque, 1999; Jamil et al., 2013; Kabeer, 2000; Shah, 2008).

It is also safe to argue that the influence of dominant ethnic and social groups in service delivery and institutional working could be minimized through the application of theories of representative bureaucracy. To put it differently, when one particular group dominates public organization, it may limit the potential of other groups to gain access to and reap benefits out of social welfare programs. This is exactly the case in India, Bangladesh, and Nepal, where public servants are from dominant ethnic, religious, and caste groups and where the minority do not have a fair representation and share in bureaucracy to serve their community and are often singled out (Jamil & Dangal, 2009; Keefer & Khemani, 2005; Mamgain & Diwakar, 2012). When the bureaucracy represents the actual demography, it may represent the interests and needs of minorities and underprivileged sections in public policies and service delivery (Saltzstein, 1979; Selden & Selden, 2001; Thompson, 1976). A leading scholar in the field of representative bureaucracy, Selden (1997, p. 6), argues that when members of minority groups become public officials, they become “legitimate actors in the political process with the ability to shape public policy.” Thompson (1976) claims that lack of a sufficient number of appointments of minorities in high-level posts is an obstacle to access to services. It is also important to understand that in some cases although minority public servants do have representation in the bureaucracy, due to poor organizational citizenship behavior and poor diversity management within public institutions, they become impoverished, which in turn has an effect on the individuals’, as well as organizations’, performance and efficiency.

Identity Politics and Service Delivery

Politics remains the fundamental driver of service delivery in developing countries-rent-seeking, clientelist, populist, and neoliberal patrimonial polity and electoral agendas tend to single out certain groups from enjoying welfare rights. In an interview, a plantation worker reported, “If we have ample political representation, we can fight and get some works done by using political links, and it may help us to bring down government services into the estates.” The statement indicates something about the causality between identity politics and access to public services. This section, thus, attempts to seek the relationship between ethnic identity, identity politics, and service delivery in the Sri Lankan context. In general, there is an increased desire among plantation people to improve public service delivery by increasing political representation in their constituencies.

Interestingly, this community tends to rely on the election promises of their candidates to obtain certain services or benefits. If they are credible, they get services; if not, they get services neither from the government nor from the politicians. Elite domination in plantation politics is evident, and elites form a separate class in this society, which seems to be an obstacle to bringing about major policy and institutional changes to improve access. The theoretical argument is that political representation of minorities increases resource allocation to them, improves their access to public services, and enhances their influence in policymaking (Alesina et al., 1999; Chandra, 2004; Gaventa, 2002, p. 7; Keefer & Khemani, 2005; Pande, 2003).

In the case of plantation people, due to their initial apolitical status and non-representation in the Parliament, their entry into the country’s development process was largely delayed. Nonetheless, this position reversed gradually with their regaining of political rights and representation in the Parliament on a small scale. As a result, the basic services, usually provided by the state agencies such as education and health, took over on a limited scale by the successive governments. At the same time, the new political class and local elites emerged in this community tended to influence the policy process and welfare provisions by employing patron-clientelistic approach and power relations.

Yet, the study finds that political representation appears to have little impact on improving governance structures in the plantations due to several reasons. First, in the Sri Lankan context, policymaking, service delivery, and institutional pattern and working are highly polarized along ethnic lines, which diminishes the influence and demands of minority political leaders. Second, as a result, plantation people’s demands and claims receive little attention during the policy formulation and implementation process. Third, the continuation of elite politics in the plantation sector and the absence of working-class political leadership seem to be other factors in the continuation of this pattern. Finally, yet importantly, plantation political leaders appear to lack bureaucratic support in implementing some programs and projects in the plantation sector despite having ministerial portfolios, which results in greater delays and generates obstacles to implementing certain programs. It explains the negative effect of ethnic-identity politics over fairness, impartiality, the rule of law, and equality. This might also be the case in other contexts where the ethnic majority steer governance institutions.

Political rights and casting of votes determine democratic citizenship, which in turn influences access to various social rights. However, owing to ethnic-identity politics, there is a marginal impact of voting rights and political representation. In any functional democracy, election and voting are important to ensuring effective service delivery. According to a World Bank (2004) study, since 2003, the percentage of people living with political parties, representation, and universal suffrage has increased dramatically (which means that rapid democratization has increased representation at large), but, interestingly, there have been no rapid improvements in the sphere of improving the governance of deprived people. Although bureaucrats have been seen as agents of change, in general, the bureaucracy and service delivery institutions have remained embedded in local patterns of political behavior/influence and rent-seeking-top-down control over resources and service provision continue at different levels (Aiyar & Walton, 2015, p. 288; Chandra, 2004) and are likely to preclude certain groups.

Gisselquist (2014) argues that ethnic divisions lead to patronage politics; therefore, politicians favor their supporters and target a particular section to the exclusion of others. Chandra (2004, p. 1) argues that voters in patronage democracies choose between parties by conducting ethnic headcounts rather than by comparing party policies or ideologies. It seems to be the case in Sri Lanka, where political leaders are more prone to work along ethnic lines in order to secure electoral victories and subsequently target their supporters when making policies, which is more likely to limit the accessibility and availability of public services to those who lack political representation in society and are in need of state-funded welfare services. Resources and powers allow certain sections to claim their rights more forcefully than others. This explains that policies enacted by the electorally accountable government in line with identity affiliations are less likely to reflect the interests of disadvantaged minorities. Identity-based service delivery seems to diminish active citizenship and spaces for the civic and political life of marginalized communities. Poor, unresponsive, inefficient, and corrupt governance in developing societies continues to open avenues for such undesirable outcomes. Further, when public services cannot be accessed equally, or when the quality of services is substandard, people are more likely to believe that the government is not performing well-that it is inefficient, unresponsive, and corrupt. As Naseer (2010, p. 113) argues, developing countries, especially in South Asia, face the constant dilemma of poor governance that undermines the proficient and impartial delivery of public services and efficient implementation of programs in an evenhanded manner.

The article further indicates that public bureaucracy influences identity politics when officials tend to follow the instructions of their political masters in implementing policies and programs. Such practices inherently lead to the emergence of patron clientelism in service delivery, which allows some sections to access public services through using political and ethnic affiliations. It is more visible in selective welfare service provision (needs-tested), which denies impartiality, fairness, equality before the law in service provision, and neutrality of public officials. This pattern seems to have a detrimental effect on minorities, in general, and plantation people, in particular, enjoying some form of public services, as they are unlikely to have access to political patronage. Moreover, as public servants are from certain social backgrounds and social strata, their association naturally reflects their social background or affiliation in service delivery. Institutional culture does not allow them to be free from their social origin. As argued by Mendelson and Vicziany (1998, p. 270), public administration is one of the big enemies of marginalized communities, because it fails to deliver public services that it is lawfully charged to do impartially. The Sri Lankan case indicates that public service delivery is prone to the social/ethnic identity or membership in a community. Apart from the above, the prolonged ethnic conflict of Sri Lanka continues to have some impact on access. At the time of ethnic conflict, due to security reasons, plantation people had very limited access to state institutions, and successive governments recruited mostly Sinhalese citizens in public services, with a view of ensuring loyalty and integrity to state security. Thus, the securitization of ethnic relations limited the democratic space to interact with public institutions and access to services.

How the Level of Education Influences Access to Public Services

Education is an important social variable that seems to play a significant role in the practicing of citizenship rights, which in turn influences access to public services in developing societies. The study finds that the lack of educational attainment among the plantation community is more likely to have an impact on their negotiating for and demanding legally mandated public services. National indicators show a low level of education in this community, due to long-standing institutional and administrative hindrances and unfair policies. Lack of literacy affects the fulfillment of various procedures, including the filling up of application forms and processing of administrative transactions, which in turn diminishes the level of awareness about public services to which one is entitled. During the interviews and FGDs, we attempted to determine the level of the respondents’ awareness about public services. It was revealed that around 70 percent of the plantation people were aware of only 5 percent of services, such as national identity card, birth certificate, marriage certificate, passport, Samurdhi, employees’ provident fund, and employees’ trust fund (social security benefits). However, there is a visible change in the case of the youths; they are aware of over 50 percent of the services, and they are likely to access them amid institutional challenges. It implies that limited information and awareness on public services and citizens’ rights can undermine the articulation of demands for services and rights claims (Babajanian, 2015, p. 236).

Except for the youths, a significant number of respondents noted that due to lack of education and awareness, they tended to seek the help of a broker/middleman to gain access to services. The brokers seem to be a powerful third party in the gaining of access to public officials or in the obtainment of government services. This involves an asymmetry in power, and more importantly, citizens trade away some of their rights to brokers to gain access to legally mandated services. Evidence reveals that the language barrier also prompts plantation people to seek brokers. Those with limited or no Sinhala¹ language competencies approach these offices accompanied by someone from their community with better knowledge in Sinhala to access public services. Very few respondents mentioned that in many instances the accompanying person delivers his/her services as a favor rather than taking any payment for them. The service seeker pays the broker’s bus fare, food costs, and, occasionally, the amount of his/her daily wage.

In contrast, a significant number of respondents mentioned that apart from the above expenses, the service seekers pay the accompanying person an extra amount, with a view to sustaining his/her support for future transactions with public institutions. Interestingly, about 99 percent of those who play the role of a middleman for the plantation community are men. A considerable number of the youths reported that they are unlikely to seek brokerage, as they are aware of service delivery systems and institutions and the procedures involved in them. Public officials stated that they discourage this practice, as it can lead to abuse and excessive charges on the part of the intermediaries, and they further added that language relief counters and communication facilitators and other designated persons are available to help and assist those with limited competencies in the Sinhala language. When seeking brokers, people often tend to look at language competency, exposure to public institutions, and maintenance of informal networks with public officials. Surprisingly, plantation people are likely to trust brokers more than public officials, because, in most instances, brokers are from their community, and there seems to be a long-standing relationship (as a known person, community member, relative, leader, activist, and so forth) between one and the other, which inherently leads to better relationship and trust.

The FGDs with the youths revealed that among the plantation people, those belonging to the older generations are disinclined to raise their voice when they are subjected to discrimination based on language, ethnic, and social identity, or based on other grounds. Lack of education and awareness on their rights and entitlements are closely linked with such a pattern. This, in turn, has generated a mindset among public servants that this community is unlikely to fight against ill-treatment by public institutions/officials. Such thinking is likely to encourage public servants to systematically exclude plantation people from access to certain services. It seems that plantation people are scared of seeking legal action against injustices and discriminations, and they have an insecure feeling that if they seek legal action, it may affect them in the future when pursuing some service. In general, when they interact with public institutions, they usually position themselves as passive recipients of welfare services. It is worth mentioning that though national-level grievance mechanisms are present for them to seek legal redress against such acts (Ombudsman, Human Rights Commission, and Supreme Court of Sri Lanka, Right to Information Act and Commission), this community’s members are less likely to approach these institutions to seek redress against ill-treatment, due to bureaucratic red tape and economic constraints.

Moreover, low level of education appears to be another constraint in their seeking institutional support. It implies the need for empowering the grievance redress system in all aspects in a manner to build trust and confidence among marginalized segments of society, so that they can seek institutional and legal support when they encounter discrimination. If access to these institutions by individuals with certain social characters such as ethnic minorities, the poor, women are not ensured, the extent of responsiveness for the complaints unlikely to bring positive results. As argued by Babajanian (2015, p. 237), effective grievance redress requires an adequate institutional capacity of public institutions to deliver quality services and inclusive access to all.

Table 1 illustrates the current status of education in the plantation community. It is evident that the community has poorly performed in many aspects of education. The data show that schooling, computer literacy, and enrollment in upper secondary and collegiate schools are extremely low in this community when compared to those in other communities, and due to chronic poverty and economic vulnerability, plantation people spend a fairly small amount on education every month. Moreover, around 42 percent of the plantation people have merely completed school education up to grade 5, just primary education, and only a small percentage have finished General Certificate of Education (GCE) Ordinary and Advanced Level studies-the latter is the minimum requirement to apply for decent employment in Sri Lanka. This pattern seems to have a substantial influence for multiple marginalizations in governance structures and lower level subjective human well-being.

Table 1.

Level of Education in the Plantation Sector, 2017-2018.

Indicators	Urban	Rural	Plantation	National
Adult literacy	94.6	91.8	74.3	91.4
No schooling (%)	2.2	3.5	12.2	3.7
Schooling up to grade 5 (%)	19.2	25.0	42.0	24.7
Passed grade 6–10 (%)	39.8	44.8	38.7	43.6
Passed O/L (%)	18.2	15.5	4.9	15.5
Passed A/L and above (%)	20.5	11.1	2.2	12.4
Not engaged in educational activities (age 5–14) (%)	4.5	3.9	7.2	4.2
Computer literacy (%)	36.8	22.1	8.8	24.2
Monthly expenditure for education (LKR)	2,762	1,210	532	1,448
Upper secondary enrollment (%)	86.2	81.4	53.8	80.6
Collegiate school enrollment (%)	45.8	39.7	12.8	39.4

Source: Compiled by the author based on field research data and various secondary sources of data, including the Department of Census and Statistics, Sri Lanka.

A visible change is observable among the younger generation in the plantations, despite enormous challenges. For instance, there is an increasing tendency of completing secondary education, and the youth are aware and have gained fair knowledge about public institutions and services. Above all, they have developed the ability and competency to undertake administrative transactions in the Sinhalese language-it seems that they have developed the required skills to demand services for which they are entitled to and to fight against indifferent and unfair treatment by public officials. Analysis of the empirical evidence further revealed that there is a visible difference between the older and younger generations in access to public services in this community-the former remains more vulnerable and less capable of enjoying public services. From the above discussion, it is possible to claim that educational progress is more likely to provide many forms of avenues to access public services. Nevertheless, education cannot be considered as a prerequisite for the delivery of public services. Yet, it may help break the barriers in access to services among marginalized people, through which they get empowered to fight against ill-treatment and discriminations. This partly answers the question as to whether disadvantaged communities can participate in service delivery and whether their voice is heard.

Several studies have identified that education engenders a sense of entitlement to equal treatment at various levels (Kabeer, 2000; Mendelson & Vicziany, 1998, p. 263; World Bank, 2004). Thus, it can be argued that education provides knowledge, and knowledge provides the condition of being aware and well-informed on rights, duties, and entitlements. A comparative study on public service delivery in Kerala and Uttar Pradesh in India found that there is an impact of literacy on access to public services (Keefer & Khemani, 2005). Similarly, a comparative study by Houtzager and Archarya (2010, p. 25) in “Mexico and Brazil” found that education plays a vital role in the practicing of citizenship rights. Educational progress among plantation people can have a positive impact on their practicing citizenship rights and gaining access to public services. Moreover, it may help them counter and act against various forms of visible and invisible ill-treatment by public officials. The empirical evidence suggests that individuals with higher levels of education are more likely to be active citizens than those with lower education levels. In other words, when the level of education and awareness increase among marginalized communities, they are more likely to open the avenues for accessibility to rights and entitlements. Hence, the study finds a causal relationship between the level of education and access to public services, which means higher the level of education, higher the access to public services and practice of citizenship rights. It also becomes evident that the younger generation in this community is likely to challenge the influence of identity-based service delivery through educational attainment and awareness, exposure, civic engagement, increasing social capital, and so forth.

Conclusion

It is evident in this study that sociodemographic variables have a considerable effect on access to public services in the Sri Lankan context. Evidence presented in this article provides a better understanding of the two questions: (a) how equal is access to public services in Sri Lanka? and (b) how much do sociodemographic variables contribute to unequal access and indifferent treatment in service delivery? The variable of education seems to have both positive and negative effects on access to public services and social citizenship rights. A low level of education remains a barrier to accessing certain services and overcoming both overt and covert forms of differential treatment. In the plantation community, the younger generation is more likely to enjoy access to public services compared to the older generation. One reason for this situation is the increasing level of education among the younger generation.

In a similar manner, a low level of awareness among the plantation people about their rights and the legal system appears to be an impediment to their enjoying their social rights and various entitlements. People of the older generation generally do not know that they are legally protected from discrimination, or if they do know, they may not know how to report acts of discrimination and ill-treatment. In a hierarchical society, lack of education keeps them from accessing government services and from raising their voice against ill-treatment and discriminatory practices. This study reveals that most plantation people are scared of entering into conflicts and disputes with officials and tend to avoid pursuing legal action, fearing that doing so would subject them to more scrutiny, stigma, and/or reprisals.

As this case study has revealed, improving educational opportunities considerably increases the demand for access to public services, and it can have a positive influence on holding officials and institutions more accountable to marginalized people. This makes it more likely to minimize the abuse of power, discrimination, ill-treatment, and other malpractices. In contrast, the variable of identity can have a negative impact on access to public services; ethnicity, social identity, and/or identity politics are more likely to limit access to public services for certain segments of society. This can lead to various forms of patronage, favoritism, clientelism, particularism, personalism, ill-treatment, and discrimination.

Improving the quality of governance in terms of impartiality, fairness, efficiency, neutrality, integrity, rule of law, trustworthiness, and accountability tends to improve the access to public services by marginalized and disadvantaged ethnic minorities in developing societies, such as Sri Lanka. In turn, improving access to education for socially marginalized groups tends to help these groups overcome forms of discriminations associated with their ethnicity and social identity.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Note

References

Aiyar

, & Walton

(2015). Rights, accountability and citizenship: India’s emerging welfare state. In Deolalikar

A. B.

, Jha

, & Quising

P. F.

(Eds.), Governance in developing Asia: Public service delivery and empowerment (pp. 260–294). Edward Elgar.

Alesina

, Baqir

, & Easterly

(1999). Public goods and ethnic divisions. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(4), 1243–1284.

Babajanian

(2015). Citizen empowerment in service delivery. In Deolalikar

A. B.

, Jha

, & Quising

P. F.

(Eds.), Governance in developing Asia: Public service delivery and empowerment (pp. 229–259). Edward Elgar.

Banerjee

, & Somanathan

(2007). The political economy of public goods: Some evidence from India. Journal of Development Economics, 82(2), 287–314.

Banerjee

, Somanathan

, & Iyer (2005). History, social divisions and public goods in rural India. Journal of the European Economic Association, 3(2–3), 639–647.

Bass

(2012). Everyday ethnicity in Sri Lanka: Upcountry Tamil identity politics. Routledge.

Bell

(1992). Faces at the bottom of the well: The performance of racism. Basic Books.

Betancourt

, & Gleason

(2000). The allocation of publicly–provided goods to rural households in India: On some consequences of caste, religion and democracy. World Development, 28(12), 2169–2182.

Chandra

(2004). Why ethnic parties succeed: Patronage and ethnic head counts in India. Cambridge University Press.

10.

Creswell

J. W.

(2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

11.

Deolalikar

A. B.

, & Jha

(2015). Concluding remarks. In Deolalikar

A. B.

, Jha

, & Quising

P. F.

(Eds.), Governance in developing Asia: Public service delivery and empowerment (pp. 323–332). Edward Elgar.

12.

Easterly

, & Levine

(1997). Africa’s growth tragedy: Policies and ethnic divisions. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), 1203–1250.

13.

Fearson

J. D.

(1999). What is identity? (Unpublished Manuscript). University of Stamford. https://web.stanford.edu/…/fearon…/What-is-Identity

14.

Gaventa

(2002). Introduction: Exploring citizenship, participation and accountability. IDS Bulletin, 33(2), 1–18.

15.

Gisselquist

R. M.

(2014). Ethnic divisions and public goods provision revisited. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37(9), 1605–1627.

16.

Hacker

(1995). Two nations: Black and white, separate, hostile and unequal. Scribner’s.

17.

Haque

M. S.

(1999). Citizenship and public administration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 65(3), 309–325.

18.

Haque

S. M.

(2003). Reinventing governance for performance in South Asia: Impacts on citizenship rights. International Journal of Public Administration, 26(8/9), 941–964.

19.

Hogg

, & Abrams

(1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. Routledge.

20.

Houtzager

P. P.

, & Archarya

A. K.

(2010). Associations, active citizenship, and the quality of democracy in Brazil and Mexico. Theory and Society, 40(1), 1–36.

21.

Huckfeldt

, & Kohfeld

C. W.

(1989). Race and the decline of class in American politics. University of Illinois Press.

22.

Jamil

, & Dangal

(2009). The state of bureaucratic representativeness and administrative culture in Nepal. Contemporary South Asia, 17(2), 193–211.

23.

Jamil

, Steinar

, & Dhakal

(2013). Understanding governance in South Asia. In Jamil

, Steinar

, & Dhakal

(Eds.), In search of better governance in South Asia and beyond (pp. 13–36). Springer.

24.

Kabeer

(2000). Social exclusion, poverty and discrimination: Towards an analytical framework. IDS Bulletin, 31(4), 83–97.

25.

Keefer

, & Khemani

(2005). Democracy, public expenditure, and the poor: Understanding political incentives for providing public services. The World Bank Research Observer, 20(1), 1–27.

26.

Keiser

L. R.

(1999). State bureaucratic discretion and the administration of social welfare programs: The case of social security disability. Journal of Public Administration: Research and Theory, 9(1), 87–106.

27.

Kozol

(1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America’s schools. Crown Publishers Inc.

28.

Levitan

D. M.

(1946). Responsibility of administrative officials in democratic society. Academy of Political Science.

29.

Lipsky

(1980). Street–level bureaucracy: The dilemmas of individuals in the public service. Russell Sage Foundation.

30.

Mamgain

R. P.

, & Diwakar

G. D.

(2012). Elimination of identity–based discrimination in food and nutrition programs in India. IDS Bulletin, 43, 25–31.

31.

Meier

K. J.

, & Bohte

(2001). Structure and discretion: Missing links in representative bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(4), 455–470.

32.

Mendelson

, & Vicziany

(1998). The untouchables: Subordination, poverty, and state in modern India. Cambridge University Press.

33.

Mosher

F. C.

(1982). Democracy and the public service (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

34.

Nadesan

(1993). History of Up–Country Tamils in Sri Lanka. Nandalala Publications.

35.

Naseer

(2010). Building trust in government in Asia. In Cheema

G. S.

& Popovski

(Eds.), Building trust in government: Innovations in governance reform in Asia (pp. 113–134). United Nations University Press.

36.

Pande

(2003). Can mandated political representation increase policy influence for disadvantaged minorities? Theory and evidence from India. The American Economic Review, 93(4), 1132–1151.

37.

Ramesh

(2019). Incomplete citizenship of the plantation community: Access to governance institutions and public service delivery. In Bass

& Skanthakumar

(Eds.), Upcountry Tamils: Charting a new future in Sri Lanka, Colombo (pp. 23–53). International Centre for Ethnic Studies.

38.

Rourke

F. E.

(1984). Bureaucracy, politics and public policy (3rd ed.). Little, Brown.

39.

Saltzstein

(1979). Representative bureaucracy and bureaucratic responsibility problems and prospects. Administration & Society, 10(4), 465–475.

40.

Selden

S. C.

(1997). The promise of representative bureaucracy: Diversity and responsiveness in a government agency. M. E. Sharpe Inc.

41.

Selden

S. C.

, & Selden

(2001). Rethinking diversity in public organizations for the 21st century: Moving toward a multicultural model. Administration and Society, 33(3), 303–329.

42.

Shah

(2008). Demanding to be served: Holding governments to account for improved access. In De Jong

& Gowher

(Eds.), State of access: Success and failure of democracies to create equal opportunities. Brookings Institution Press.

43.

Snowden

, Hu

T-W.

, & Jerrell

(1995). Emergency care avoidance: Ethnic matching and participation in minority–serving programs. Community Mental Health Journal, 31(5), 463–473.

44.

Sowa

E. J.

, & Selden

S. C.

(2003). Administrative discretion and active representation: An expansion of the theory of representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 63(6), 700–710.

45.

Taylor

(2010). Empowerment, identity and participatory research: Using social action research to challenge isolation for deaf and hard of hearing people from minority ethnic communities. Disability and Society, 14(3), 369–384.

46.

The United Nations Development Programme (2016). Human development report. United Nations.

47.

The World Bank (2004). The world development report. United Nations.

48.

Thompson

F. J.

(1976). Minority groups in public bureaucracies: Are passive and active representation linked? Administration and Society, 8(2), 201–226.

49.

United Nations (1948). Universal declaration of human rights. United Nations.

50.

Vijesandiran

(2005). A re–assessment study of the Tamils of Indian origin. Centre for Community Transformation.

51.

Walton

(2003). Education and training. In Smith

J. P.

(Ed.), Policy responses to social exclusion: Towards inclusion (pp. 59–83). Open University Press.