Clientelistic Politics and Pro-Poor Targeting: Rules versus Discrtionary Budgets

Past research has provided evidence of clientelistic politics in delivery of program benefits by local governments ( gram panchayats (GPs) ), and manipulation of GP program budgets by legislators and elected officials at upper tiers in West Bengal, India. Using household panel survey data spanning 1998-2008, we examine the consequences of clientelism for distributive equity. We find that targeting of anti-poverty programs was progressive both within and across GPs, and is explained by greater ‘vote responsiveness’ of poor households to receipt of welfare benefits. Across-GP allocations were more progressive than a rule-based formula recommended by the 3rd State Finance Commission (SFC) based on GP demographic characteristics. Moreover, alternative formulae for across-GP budgets obtained by varying weights on GP characteristics used in the SFC formula would have improved pro-poor targeting only marginally. Hence, there is not much scope for improving pro-poor targeting of private benefits by transitioning to formula-based budgeting. These facts

[1]  Alisha C. Holland Forbearance as Redistribution: The Politics of Informal Welfare in Latin America , 2017 .

[2]  S. Dey,et al.  Is Partisan Alignment Electorally Rewarding? Evidence from Village Council Elections in India , 2016, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[3]  F. Finan,et al.  Electoral Incentives and the Allocation of Public Funds , 2016, Journal of the European Economic Association.

[4]  Dilip Mookherjee,et al.  Evolution of Land Distribution in West Bengal 1967-2004: Role of Land Reform and Demographic Changes , 2014 .

[5]  Valeria Brusco,et al.  Brokers, Voters, and Clientelism: The Puzzle of Distributive Politics , 2013 .

[6]  Ghazala Mansuri,et al.  Localizing Development: Does Participation Work? , 2012 .

[7]  A. Banerjee,et al.  Targeting the Poor: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia , 2010, The American economic review.

[8]  S. Stokes Perverse Accountability: A Formal Model of Machine Politics with Evidence from Argentina , 2005, American Political Science Review.

[9]  R. Reinikka,et al.  Making Services Work for Poor People , 2004 .

[10]  Steven D. Levitt,et al.  The Impact of Federal Spending on House Election Outcomes , 1995, Journal of Political Economy.

[11]  Lisa Tarquninio The Politics of Drought Relief: Evidence from Southern India , 2022, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[12]  Dilip Mookherjee,et al.  How Do Voters Respond to Welfare vis-a-vis Infrastructure Programs? Evidence for Clientelism in West Bengal∗ , 2020 .

[13]  M. Azulai Public Good Allocation and the Welfare Costs of Political Connections : Evidence from Brazilian Matching Grants , 2017 .

[14]  Dilip Mookherjee,et al.  POLITICAL PARTICIPATION, CLIENTELISM AND TARGETING OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS: Results from a Rural Household Survey in West Bengal, India , 2011 .

[15]  Dilip Mookherjee,et al.  Impact of Political Reservations in West Bengal Local Governments on Anti-Poverty Targeting , 2010 .