One Nation, Many Worlds: Varieties of Developmental Regimes in India

Abstract

Why is it that political elites from marginal groups often seem to ignore development even when the vast majority of their constituents live in poverty? Theories of democratization and welfare after all predict that the working class should support redistribution. I argue that societies with long histories of group-based discrimination have a wider conception of social justice that is not just concerned with redistribution of material wealth, but aims at equalization of status hierarchy across groups through greater representation. I conceptualize states in multiethnic societies as one of three distinct developmental regimes – growth-oriented, re-distributive, and a third category that I develop and define – dignity-enhancing. Growth Regimes focus on economic growth and private sector development, while re-distributive regimes prioritize the welfare of the masses. In contrast, dignity regimes direct their attention towards representational policies with the aim of extending true citizenship across ethnic groups. I argue that understanding variation across developmental regimes requires an exploration of the identity of political elites and the level of status inequality across groups. Political elites from dominant groups are more likely to support growth-led development. Contrary to expectations, however, the policy preference of marginal groups is mediated by the level of social inequality. Under conditions of high status inequality, concerns of dignity and recognition find precedence over pure redistribute policies. The politics of dignity is most concretely manifested through representation of non-dominant groups in the state bureaucracy as well as inclusion of marginal cultures and symbols in public spaces. Concerns of redistribution find political support only once some equalization of social hierarchy is achieved through greater representation. I test this argument using a mixed-methods research design that combines a nation-wide longitudinal analysis of state-level public spending patterns with a paired comparative historical analysis of six states in India.