- Indian cities are struggling with poor services in water, sanitation, roads, and many other areas.
- There is growing evidence that participatory governance can improve service delivery. India’s cities remain strikingly underdeveloped in terms of formal citizen engagement.
- Despite provisions for citizen participation under the 74th Constitutional Amendment, mechanisms such as ward committees are poorly implemented.
- The views in the commentary are those of the authors.
Across India’s cities, the consequences of poor urban services are all too familiar: overflowing garbage, erratic water supply, potholed roads, and flooded streets, to name but a few. These chronic issues are symptoms of deeper, systemic problems. In particular, there is an absence of well-functioning, inclusive platforms that enable citizens to meaningfully participate in shaping the services that affect the quality of their lives.
Despite growing evidence that participatory governance can improve service delivery, India’s cities remain strikingly underdeveloped in terms of formal citizen engagement. Janaagraha’s study on citizens and governance in urban India draws on a representative sample of 14,000 citizens across 7 cities and reveals just how low citizen participation levels are across the country today. Moreover, it also shows how, in pockets where participation does occur, it can positively impact services and infrastructure. This is particularly true for the most underserved communities. If we are to build more liveable and equitable cities, we must invest in institutionalising and activating platforms that allow people to be part of the solution. This approach also benefits the state by enabling more effective allocation of its limited financial and human resources to achieve improved outcomes.
Service gaps hit the urban poor hardest
Basic services continue to fall short, particularly in low-income settlements. The Basic Services, Delivery, and Infrastructure Index (BSDII), developed as part of the Janaagraha study of citizens and governance in urban India, highlights these shortcomings. The index, which ranges between 0 and 1, captures five key dimensions, namely: water, sanitation, electricity, drainage, and roads. Not surprisingly, the study finds that households living in self-built housing or shacks and notified slums score significantly lower on the index than those across all other housing types in every city. The classification spans from HT-1 (informal shacks) and HT-2 (informal slums) to HT-3 (lower middle class), HT-4 (middle class), and HT-5 (upper-class housing).
In cities like Ajmer and Lucknow, the BSDII for such households is less than half that of upper-income households. Notably, the largest positive jump in service access tends to occur from self-built houses/shacks to notified slums. This suggests that even minimal formal recognition of a settlement can dramatically change the quality of infrastructure provided.
Low levels of citizen participation
Across the world, citizen participation has proved an effective tool for ensuring better services and infrastructure. Examples include Porto Alegre, Brazil, and eThekwini in Durban, South Africa. India has its own examples as well, including Kerala’s Kudumbashree programme which empowers low-income women to influence service delivery, housing, and livelihoods. The Slum Dwellers Associations in Odisha are another example where, through the state’s JAGA mission, participatory mechanisms have enabled 1,72,656 urban slum households to receive land rights and upgraded infrastructure.
Despite the success of these examples, however, mechanisms for citizen participation have rarely been adopted at scale across India. While constitutional and legal mandates for participatory governance exist in India, most notably through the 74th Constitutional Amendment and state-level Community Participation Laws, the implementation of platforms such as ward committees remains limited. According to the recent audits by the Comptroller & Auditor General (CAG) of India, only 9 out of 15 states (focused on in the report and where data was available) have formed ward committees in at least one urban local self-government. However, it would be prudent to undertake ground truthing, given there has been little to no progress on ward committees across India’s cities.
To understand the full landscape of citizen engagement, a Citizen Participation Index (CPI) was developed as part of the aforementioned study. Across the board, CPI scores were low, below 0.5 out of 1 in all cities surveyed. Within that, households in self-built houses/shacks and notified slums reported the lowest levels of participation. In essence, citizens with the greatest need are the least embedded in decision-making processes.
Relationship between citizen participation and service delivery
Yet, the data shows that when participation does occur, even in limited pockets, it appears to matter. In almost every city (Kolkata being the exception), households with higher levels of participation than the city average generally have a higher quality of service score.
This relationship between citizen participation and service delivery is most pronounced for those living in self-built houses/shacks and notified slums. The differences are not always large, but they are consistent. Furthermore, as you move up the housing-type ladder, the relationship stagnates and then almost reverses for those in the housing types 4 and 5. This indicates that the connection between participation and service delivery emerges most clearly at the neighbourhood level, most notably in lower-income areas. It points to the potential of participatory governance to improve outcomes specifically for those most in need — the urban poor — when the right mechanisms are in place and activated.
Local context is also important to consider. The relationship between citizen participation and service delivery is particularly strong in cities like Delhi and Jalandhar, whereas in Bhopal, the trend almost reverses. A deeper understanding of this nuance would be beneficial. Some important caveats merit consideration as well. This is a point in time study for each city, offering a snapshot rather than a longitudinal view, which limits the assessment of how participation and service outcomes evolve over time. In some contexts, higher participation may actually result from poor service. More fundamentally, the opportunity to participate is itself uneven.
A call to activate participatory governance
While participation remains uneven, the pockets where it does occur are linked to improved services, underscoring what is possible when citizen voice is meaningfully activated. This study provides evidence that participation is not just an end in itself but a means to better service delivery as well.
India already has the legal architecture in place: the 74th Constitutional Amendment mandates the formation of ward committees and area sabhas. Yet, implementation has been patchy at best. We must prioritise the full enforcement of these mandates across all urban local bodies, ensuring ward committees and area sabhas are constituted in every city and town with transparent guidelines for their composition, roles, meeting frequency, and follow-through on actions.
However, participatory governance cannot function without representative governance. We need to ensure legitimate, elected city councils are in place to ensure meaningful engagement on these platforms. This is a significant challenge considering that the recent CAG audits found that 61% of urban local governments in 17 states had delayed elections as of late 2024.
The path forward is clear: hold timely municipal elections, empower elected councillors, and embed platforms like ward committees within these democratic structures. Only then can citizens be empowered to participate in the decision-making processes that determine the quality of their lives and shape their cities.
The legal groundwork exists; what is needed now is political will and administrative action to bring these institutions to life.
Katie Pyle is Director, Research and Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL), and Neha Malhotra Singh is Associate Director, Research and MEL, at the Janaagraha Centre for Citizenship and Democracy.
Banner image: Volunteers remove water logging in potholes after heavy rain in Kochi, Kerala, in 2022. (AP Photo/ R S Iyer)
