Existing evidence strongly supports the thesis that sociodemographic variables, such as ethnicity, various forms of identity affiliation (religion, caste, and language), social norms, and level of education, tend to influence citizens’ ability to gain access to public services in developing societies. This article explores the extent to which ethnicity, social identities, and level of education influence access to public services in the Sri Lankan context, taking the plantation community as a case in point. The article finds that though there are constitutional mandates ensuring citizenry rights and entitlements to public services, sociodemographic factors considerably limit those rights for deprived communities. Based on the evidence, it is argued that improving the quality of governance and access to education for marginalized communities tends to reduce the discrimination suffered by these communities and to hold public institutions accountable. Thus, this study seeks to contribute to the existing literature on good governance and the delivery of public services to marginalized communities through focusing on the importance of sociodemographic conditions.
AiyarY., & WaltonM. (2015). Rights, accountability and citizenship: India’s emerging welfare state. In DeolalikarA. B., JhaS., & QuisingP. F. (Eds.), Governance in developing Asia: Public service delivery and empowerment (pp. 260–294). Edward Elgar.
2.
AlesinaA., BaqirR., & EasterlyW. (1999). Public goods and ethnic divisions. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(4), 1243–1284.
3.
BabajanianB. (2015). Citizen empowerment in service delivery. In DeolalikarA. B., JhaS., & QuisingP. F. (Eds.), Governance in developing Asia: Public service delivery and empowerment (pp. 229–259). Edward Elgar.
4.
BanerjeeA., & SomanathanR. (2007). The political economy of public goods: Some evidence from India. Journal of Development Economics, 82(2), 287–314.
5.
BanerjeeA., SomanathanR., & Iyer (2005). History, social divisions and public goods in rural India. Journal of the European Economic Association, 3(2–3), 639–647.
6.
BassD. (2012). Everyday ethnicity in Sri Lanka: Upcountry Tamil identity politics. Routledge.
7.
BellD. (1992). Faces at the bottom of the well: The performance of racism. Basic Books.
8.
BetancourtR., & GleasonS. (2000). The allocation of publicly–provided goods to rural households in India: On some consequences of caste, religion and democracy. World Development, 28(12), 2169–2182.
9.
ChandraK. (2004). Why ethnic parties succeed: Patronage and ethnic head counts in India. Cambridge University Press.
10.
CreswellJ. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
11.
DeolalikarA. B., & JhaS. (2015). Concluding remarks. In DeolalikarA. B., JhaS., & QuisingP. F. (Eds.), Governance in developing Asia: Public service delivery and empowerment (pp. 323–332). Edward Elgar.
12.
EasterlyW., & LevineR. (1997). Africa’s growth tragedy: Policies and ethnic divisions. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), 1203–1250.
13.
FearsonJ. D. (1999). What is identity? (Unpublished Manuscript). University of Stamford. https://web.stanford.edu/…/fearon…/What-is-Identity
GisselquistR. M. (2014). Ethnic divisions and public goods provision revisited. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37(9), 1605–1627.
16.
HackerA. (1995). Two nations: Black and white, separate, hostile and unequal. Scribner’s.
17.
HaqueM. S. (1999). Citizenship and public administration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 65(3), 309–325.
18.
HaqueS. M. (2003). Reinventing governance for performance in South Asia: Impacts on citizenship rights. International Journal of Public Administration, 26(8/9), 941–964.
19.
HoggM., & AbramsD. (1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. Routledge.
20.
HoutzagerP. P., & ArcharyaA. K. (2010). Associations, active citizenship, and the quality of democracy in Brazil and Mexico. Theory and Society, 40(1), 1–36.
21.
HuckfeldtR., & KohfeldC. W. (1989). Race and the decline of class in American politics. University of Illinois Press.
22.
JamilI., & DangalR. (2009). The state of bureaucratic representativeness and administrative culture in Nepal. Contemporary South Asia, 17(2), 193–211.
23.
JamilI., SteinarA., & DhakalT. (2013). Understanding governance in South Asia. In JamilI., SteinarA., & DhakalT. (Eds.), In search of better governance in South Asia and beyond (pp. 13–36). Springer.
24.
KabeerN. (2000). Social exclusion, poverty and discrimination: Towards an analytical framework. IDS Bulletin, 31(4), 83–97.
25.
KeeferP., & KhemaniS. (2005). Democracy, public expenditure, and the poor: Understanding political incentives for providing public services. The World Bank Research Observer, 20(1), 1–27.
26.
KeiserL. R. (1999). State bureaucratic discretion and the administration of social welfare programs: The case of social security disability. Journal of Public Administration: Research and Theory, 9(1), 87–106.
27.
KozolJ. (1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America’s schools. Crown Publishers Inc.
28.
LevitanD. M. (1946). Responsibility of administrative officials in democratic society. Academy of Political Science.
29.
LipskyM. (1980). Street–level bureaucracy: The dilemmas of individuals in the public service. Russell Sage Foundation.
30.
MamgainR. P., & DiwakarG. D. (2012). Elimination of identity–based discrimination in food and nutrition programs in India. IDS Bulletin, 43, 25–31.
31.
MeierK. J., & BohteJ. (2001). Structure and discretion: Missing links in representative bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(4), 455–470.
32.
MendelsonO., & ViczianyM. (1998). The untouchables: Subordination, poverty, and state in modern India. Cambridge University Press.
33.
MosherF. C. (1982). Democracy and the public service (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
34.
NadesanS. (1993). History of Up–Country Tamils in Sri Lanka. Nandalala Publications.
35.
NaseerS. (2010). Building trust in government in Asia. In CheemaG. S. & PopovskiV. (Eds.), Building trust in government: Innovations in governance reform in Asia (pp. 113–134). United Nations University Press.
36.
PandeR. (2003). Can mandated political representation increase policy influence for disadvantaged minorities? Theory and evidence from India. The American Economic Review, 93(4), 1132–1151.
37.
RameshR. (2019). Incomplete citizenship of the plantation community: Access to governance institutions and public service delivery. In BassD. & SkanthakumarB. (Eds.), Upcountry Tamils: Charting a new future in Sri Lanka, Colombo (pp. 23–53). International Centre for Ethnic Studies.
38.
RourkeF. E. (1984). Bureaucracy, politics and public policy (3rd ed.). Little, Brown.
39.
SaltzsteinG. (1979). Representative bureaucracy and bureaucratic responsibility problems and prospects. Administration & Society, 10(4), 465–475.
40.
SeldenS. C. (1997). The promise of representative bureaucracy: Diversity and responsiveness in a government agency. M. E. Sharpe Inc.
41.
SeldenS. C., & SeldenF. (2001). Rethinking diversity in public organizations for the 21st century: Moving toward a multicultural model. Administration and Society, 33(3), 303–329.
42.
ShahA. (2008). Demanding to be served: Holding governments to account for improved access. In De JongJ. & GowherR. (Eds.), State of access: Success and failure of democracies to create equal opportunities. Brookings Institution Press.
43.
SnowdenL., HuT-W., & JerrellJ. (1995). Emergency care avoidance: Ethnic matching and participation in minority–serving programs. Community Mental Health Journal, 31(5), 463–473.
44.
SowaE. J., & SeldenS. C. (2003). Administrative discretion and active representation: An expansion of the theory of representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 63(6), 700–710.
45.
TaylorG. (2010). Empowerment, identity and participatory research: Using social action research to challenge isolation for deaf and hard of hearing people from minority ethnic communities. Disability and Society, 14(3), 369–384.
46.
The United Nations Development Programme (2016). Human development report. United Nations.
47.
The World Bank (2004). The world development report. United Nations.
48.
ThompsonF. J. (1976). Minority groups in public bureaucracies: Are passive and active representation linked?Administration and Society, 8(2), 201–226.
49.
United Nations (1948). Universal declaration of human rights. United Nations.
50.
VijesandiranS. (2005). A re–assessment study of the Tamils of Indian origin. Centre for Community Transformation.
51.
WaltonF. (2003). Education and training. In SmithJ. P. (Ed.), Policy responses to social exclusion: Towards inclusion (pp. 59–83). Open University Press.
