Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T05:34:10.224Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mired in Reservations: The Path-Dependent History of Electoral Quotas in India

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 December 2014

Francesca R. Jensenius
Get access

Abstract

Since independence, India has had electoral quotas for Scheduled Castes (SCs, Dalits, “untouchables”). These quotas have been praised for empowering members of a deprived community, but have also been criticized for bringing to power SC politicians who are mere tools in the hands of the upper castes. Tracing the history of these quotas through four critical junctures, I show how a British attempt to strengthen their own control of India eventually resulted in one of the world's most extensive quota systems for minorities. The quota system was in the end a compromise between several political goals, and was not strongly supported by anyone. Also, while the quotas were designed to integrate SC politicians into mainstream politics, there was a subtle and gradual shift in the debate about them, to being about development for the SC community as such. This created a disjuncture between the design of the quota system and the expectation of what it would achieve. The case of quotas in India illustrates how policy choices often result from long path-dependent processes, how policy makers struggle with trade-offs when trying to design institutions, and also the power of expectations in shaping the perceptions of the outcomes of those institutions.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 74 , Issue 1 , February 2015 , pp. 85 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

List of References

Ambedkar, Bhimrao Ramji. 1916. Castes in India: Their Mechanism, Genesis and Development. Jullundur, India: Bheem Patrika Publications.Google Scholar
Ambedkar, Bhimrao Ramji. 1919. “Evidence before the Southborough Committee on Franchise.” http://www.ambedkar.org/ambcd/07.%20Evidence%20before%20the%20Southborough%20Committee.htm (accessed October 2012).Google Scholar
Ambedkar, Bhimrao Ramji. 1943. Mr. Gandhi and the Emancipation of the Untouchables. Bombay: Thacker & Co.Google Scholar
Ambedkar, Bhimrao Ramji, and Srinivasan, Rao Bahadur R.. 1982. “A Scheme of Political Safeguards for the Protection of the Depressed Classes in the Future Constitution of Self-Governing India, Appendix I to the Report of Sub Committee No. Ill (Minorities).” http://www.ambedkar.org/ambcd/15A.%20Dr.%20Ambedkar%20at%20the%20Round%20Table%20Conferences.htm#api (accessed October 2012).Google Scholar
Austin, Granville. 1999. Working a Democratic Constitution: The Indian Experience. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bayly, Christopher Alan. 1990. Indian Society and the Making of the British Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brock, Robert, and William John Allsebrook Simon. 1930. The Simon Report on India. London: J. M. Dent.Google Scholar
CAD (Constituent Assembly Debates: Official Report). 1999. New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat.Google Scholar
Chanchreek, K. L., Prasad, Saroj, and Kumar, Rakesh. 1991. Social Justice and Political Safeguards for Depressed Classes. New Delhi: Shree Publishing House.Google Scholar
Delimitation Commission of India. 2008. Changing Face of Electoral India: Delimitation 2008. New Delhi: Delimitation Commission of India.Google Scholar
Galanter, Marc. 1984. Competing Equalities: Law and the Backward Classes in India. Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Government of India. 1928a. Indian Constitutional Reforms: Reports of the Franchise Committee and the Committee on Division of Functions. Calcutta: Government of India Central Publication Branch.Google Scholar
Government of India. 1928b. Report of the Committee Appointed by the Conference to Determine the Principles of the Constitution for India: Together with a Summary of the Proceedings of the Conference Held at Lucknow. Calcutta: Government of India Central Publication Branch.Google Scholar
Government of India. 1932. Communal Award. Calcutta: Government of India Central Publication Branch.Google Scholar
Government of India. 1942. Government of India Act, 1935. London: H. M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Ilbert, Courtenay Peregrine. 1910. The Government of India: Supplementary Chapter: Indian Councils Act, 1909. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Jaffrelot, Christophe. 2005. Dr Ambedkar and Untouchability: Analysing and Fighting Caste. London: C. Hurst & Co.Google Scholar
Jalal, Ayesha. 1994. The Sole Spokesman: Jinnah, the Muslim League and the Demand for Pakistan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jensenius, Francesca Refsum. 2013. “Was the Delimitation Commission Unfair to Muslims?” Studies in Indian Politics 1(2):213–29.Google Scholar
Lok Sabha Debates. 1959–2009. New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat.Google Scholar
Mahajan, Gurpreet. 1998. Identities and Rights: Aspects of Liberal Democracy in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Minto, MaryElliot-Murray-Kynynmound, Caroline Grey. 1934. India, Minto and Morley, 1905–1910: Compiled from the Correspondence between the Viceroy and the Secretary of State. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Montagu, Edwin Samuel, and Chelmsford, Lord. 1918. Report on Indian Constitutional Reforms. Calcutta: Great Britain India Office, Superintendent Government Printing.Google Scholar
Poona Pact. 1932. http://www.ambedkar.org/impdocs/poonapact.htm (accessed October 2012).Google Scholar
Ram, Kanshi. 1982. The Chamcha Age: An Era of the Stooges. New Delhi: Kanshi Ram.Google Scholar
Samujh, Ram. 2005. Reservation Policy: Its Relevance in Modern India. Mumbai: Samrudh Bharat.Google Scholar
Sheth, D. L., and Mahajan, Gurpreet. 1999. Minority Identities and the Nation-State. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar