hile the
‘smart cities’ initiative of the Government of India has of late
captured the public imagination and continues to generate wide debate,
its rural counterpart - the ‘smart village’ clusters initiative has been
a relatively late entrant in public discourse. Considering that about
70% of India’s citizens still reside in villages, it is necessary that
the concept of smart villages also be accorded adequate public scrutiny
and debate as it holds the potential to impact the lives of millions.
The adjective smart in the context of ‘smart cities’
and ‘smart villages’ tends to get narrowly associated with
infrastructure development and information technology based services,
sometimes ignoring the idea that people must be at the centre of
development if it is to be truly sustainable. The official communication
on ‘smart villages’ initiative reiterates the idea of ‘provisioning’ and
‘providing’ of infrastructure and amenities, pointing towards a supply
side driven approach. It needs to be recognised that a village can only
be as smart as its citizens want it to be. Thus, there is a need to
empower and enable the citizens to envision, debate, design and drive
their own development and only then can development be sustainable.
Development Alternatives (DA) with the support of
Commonwealth Foundation, initiated a programme aimed at strengthening
people’s participation in local governance and development and to
promote the mainstreaming of environmental concerns in local development
and planning processes. The programme, operational in 20 villages of
Bundelkhand, an extremely backward region in Central India identified as
its key stakeholders - women, youth and Panchayati Raj Institutions
(PRIs). The programme graduated through phases of extensive
sensitisation, targeted capacity building and focused micro-planning and
convergence for environmental mainstreaming. Through the course of its
implementation, the programme yielded valuable insights on effective
strategies for participatory governance and sustainable development at
the village level.
One of the key insights emerging out of this
initiative has been that with enhanced participation of communities in
processes of local governance comes enhanced ownership of the
development process and stakeholders start perceiving themselves as not
just beneficiaries but as drivers and architects of the development of
their village. Thus in several villages where there was inadequate
infrastructure for drinking water delivery, the communities not only
demanded infrastructure improvement at the Gram Sabhas but also
took collective initiative often under the leadership of the women’s
groups to initiate action through community contribution.
It has also been observed that the strengthening of
local institutions such as women self help groups (SHGs) and village
development committees (VDCs) also leads to more active community
participation in processes of local governance and planning. An added
advantage is that as community groups meet prior to their participation
in Gram Sabhas, concerns such as those of local environmental
issues that affect the community as a whole get prioritised over
personal concerns of stakeholders for purpose of collective advocacy,
thereby leading to more equitable development. Investing in awareness
creation on available options for local development also enables
community advocacy and local planning to be more targeted and result
oriented. There is thus a need to sensitise communities to a basket of
appropriate options for local development.
The programme has also invested in creating platforms
for sharing of experiences on good governance across the 20 villages and
also with a wider civil society network. This has yielded positive
impact in not only generating pride amongst the featured communities but
also inspiring communities in other villages to initiate local
collaborative advocacy and action to address their concerns.
This initiative of Development Alternatives is
probably one of many diverse initiatives by both state and non-state
development actors across the country on strengthening people’s
participation in local governance and it is important for the lessons
emerging from these initiatives to be shared, analysed and adopted for
more effective design and implementation of mainstream government
programmes for village development.
q