In a developing country like Bangladesh, the devolved local government system is widely recognized as one of the key institutional forms for the citizen-centric public service delivery system and ensuring democratic governance at the grassroots level. However, the democratic nature of local governments and their effective role in rendering services are contingent upon the political and institutional environments of the country. Competitive electoral process is key to local democratic governance. The purpose of this article is to analyze the implications of contemporary political order and institutional environments for the proper functioning of the Union Parishad (council), the lowest tier of the local government system in Bangladesh. More specifically, this study will reflect on how political clientelism, partyarchy and institutional environments have stymied competitive electoral politics at the local level which may result in democratic backsliding.
AdeneyK. (2015). A move to majoritarian nationalism? Challenges of representation in South Asia. Representation, 51(1), 7–21.
2.
AnsellA.MitchellK. (2011). Models of clientelism and policy change: The case of conditional cash transfer programs in Mexico and Brazil. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 30(3), 298–312.
3.
AzizS. S.RazzaqueF. (2016). Role of electoral competition in explaining political violence in Bangladesh: A district level analysis (BIGD Working Paper). Dhaka: BRAC Institute of Governance and Development, BRAC University.
4.
BardhanP. K.MookherjeeD. (2000). Capture and governance at local and national levels. American Economic Review, 90(2), 135–139.
5.
BlairH. (2000). Participation and accountability at the periphery: Democratic local governance in six countries. World Development, 28(1), 21–39.
6.
BRAC Institute of Governance & Development (BIGD). (2014). The state of governance Bangladesh 2013: Democracy party politics. Dhaka: BIGD, BRAC University.
7.
BuchmannD. C. (2013). Accountability at the local level in fragile contexts: Bangladesh case study (IDS Working Papers 419). Sussex: Institute of Development Studies.
8.
CaparasM. V. G.AgrawalA. (2016). Why citizens participate in local governance: A case of two Philippine LGUs. International Journal of Public Administration, 39(12), 952–962.
9.
ChattopadhyayS. (2013). Decentralized provision of public services in developing countries: A review of theoretical discourses and empirical evidence. Social Change, 43(3), 421–441.
10.
CoppedgeM. (1997). Strong parties and lame ducks: Presidential partyarchy and factionalism in Venezuela. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
11.
CrookR. C.ManorJ. (1998). Democracy and decentralization in South Asia and West Africa: Participation, accountability and performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12.
FaguetJ. P. (2014). Decentralization and governance. World Development, 53(C), 2–13.
13.
FaguetJ. P. (2018). Transformation from below in Bangladesh: Decentralization, local governance, and systemic change. Modern Asian Studies, 51(6), 1668–1694.
14.
FarringtonC. (2011). Putting good governance into practice III: Measuring intrinsic and instrumental empowerment in local government contexts. Progress in Development Studies, 11(2), 151–161.
GrindleM. (2016). Democracy and clientelism: How uneasy a relationship?Latin American Research Review, 51(3), 241–249.
17.
HageneT. (2015). Political clientelism in Mexico: Bridging the gap between citizens and the state. Latin American Politics and Society, 57(1), 139–162.
18.
HaqueM. S. (2008). Decentering the state for local accountability through representation: social divides as a barrier in South Asia. Public Administration Quarterly, 32(1), 33–58.
19.
HarbersI. (2010). Decentralization and the development of nationalized party systems in new democracies: Evidence from Latin America. Comparative Political Studies, 43(5), 606–627.
20.
HasanM.RoseJ.ZakariaS. M. (2016). The real politics of Bangladesh: The inside story of local power brokers. Dhaka: Embassy of Switzerland & Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).
21.
HassanM. (2016). A state of change: District creation in Kenya after the beginning of multiparty elections. Political Research Quarterly, 69(3), 510–521.
22.
HassanM.NazneenS. (2013). Assessing the political determinants of incentives of Union Parishad leaders in creating and strengthening inclusive, participatory and pro-poor governance. Dhaka: CARE-Bangladesh.
23.
HassanM.NazneenS. (2017). Violence and the breakdown of the political settlement: An uncertain future for Bangladesh?Conflict, Security & Development, 17(3), 205–223.
24.
HellerP. (2001). Moving the state: The politics of democratic decentralization in Kerala, South Africa, and Porto Alegre. Politics & Society, 29(1), 131–163.
25.
HellerP.HarilalK. N.ChaudhuriS. (2007). Building local democracy: Evaluating the impact of decentralization in Kerala, India. World Development, 35(4), 626–648.
26.
HodderR. (2015). What’s wrong with patronage?Society, 52(2), 166–173.
IslamM. M. (2015). Electoral violence in Bangladesh: Does a confrontational bipolar political system matter?Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 53(4), 359–380.
JohnsonC. (2001). Local democracy, democratic decentralization and rural development: Theories, challenges and options for policy. Development Policy Review, 19(4), 521–532.
33.
JohnsonC.DeshingkarP.StartD. (2005). Grounding the state: Devolution and development in India’s panchayats. Journal of Development Studies, 41(6), 937–970.
34.
JüttingJ.CorsiE.KauffmannC.McDonnellI.OsterriederH.PinaudN.WegnerL. (2005). What makes decentralization in developing countries pro-poor?The European Journal of Development Research, 17(4), 626–648.
KothariC. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques. New Delhi: New Age International.
37.
KrawczykK. A.Sweet-CushmanJ. (2017). Understanding political participation in West Africa: The relationship between good governance and local citizen engagement. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 83(1_suppl), 136–155.
38.
Local Government Division MLGRDC. (2009). Local Government Union Parishad Act 2009. Dhaka: Local Government Division, MLGRDC, Government of Bangladesh.
MagaloniB.Diaz-CayerosA.EstévezF. (2007). Clientelism and portfolio diversification: A model of electoral investment with applications to Mexico. In KitscheltH. I.WilkinsonS. I. (Eds.), Patrons, clients, and policies: Patterns of democratic accountability and political competition (pp. 182–205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MawhoodP. (1987). Decentralization and the third world in the 1980s. Planning and Administration, 14(1), 10–22.
43.
MirzaH. (2014). Political settlement dynamics in a limited-access order: The case of Bangladesh (BIGD Working Paper). Dhaka: BRAC Institute of Governance and Development, BRAC University.
OlumY. (2014). Decentralization in developing countries: Preconditions for successful implementation. Commonwealth Journal of Local Governance, 15, 23–38.
46.
PaikW.BaumR. (2014). Clientelism with Chinese characteristics: Local patronage networks in post-reform China. Political Science Quarterly, 129(4), 675–702.
47.
Pius KulipossaF. (2004). Decentralization and democracy in developing countries: An overview. Development in Practice, 14(6), 768–779.
48.
Power & Participation Research Center (PPRC). (2016). Bangladesh 2016 politics, governance and middle income aspirations: Realities and challenges: An empirical study. Dhaka: PPRC.
49.
PriyadarsheeA.HossainF. (2010). Decentralization, service delivery, and people’s perspectives: Empirical observations on selected social protection programs in India. International Journal of Public Administration, 33(12–13), 752–766.
RahmanH. Z. (1990). Landscape of violence: Local elections and political culture in Bangladesh. Economic and Political Weekly, 25(47), 2622–2624.
52.
RahmanH. Z.AhmedT. (2014). Strategy on local government strengthening (Background Paper for 7th Five Year Plan). Dhaka: Planning Commission.
53.
RahmanM. M.NasrinS. (2017). Maiden partisan rural local government elections: Bangladesh experience. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 7(1), 49–70.
RodrikD. (2016). Is liberal democracy feasible in developing countries?Studies in Comparative International Development, 51(1), 50–59.
57.
RondinelliD. A.McCulloughR.JohnsonW. (1989). Analyzing decentralization policies in developing countries: A political economy framework. Development and Change, 20(1), 57–87.
SarkerA. E. (2006). The political economy of decentralized governance: An assessment of rural local government reforms in Bangladesh. International Journal of Public Administration, 29(13), 1285–1309.
60.
SarkerA. E. (2014). The political context of decentralization, reflections on South Asia. In ContehC.HuqueA. S. (Eds.), Public sector reforms in developing countries: Paradoxes and practices (pp. 105–123). New York: Routledge.
61.
SarkerA. E. (2016, May29). Along the party lines. Dhaka Tribune.
SarkerA. E.KhalidS. (2018). An exploratory analysis of governance dynamics, institutional reforms and development: A comparative study of India and Bangladesh. Asian Journal of Political Science, 26(1), 121–140.
64.
SerraG. (2012). The risk of partyarchy and democratic backsliding: Mexico’s electoral reform. Taiwan Journal of Democracy, 8(1), 93–118.
SmokeP. (2015). Managing public sector decentralization in developing countries: Moving beyond conventional recipes. Public Administration and Development, 35(4), 250–262.
67.
SzwarcbergM. (2013). Building a following: Local candidates’ political careers and clientelism in Argentine municipalities. Latin American Politics and Society, 55(3), 1–18.
68.
TajA.NoumanM.GulS. (2014). Impact of authoritarianism on democratization and local governance in Pakistan: Historical perspectives. South Asian Studies, 29(2), 463.
WaheduzzamanMphandeC. H. (2014). Gaps in pursuing participatory good governance: Bangladesh context. Administration & Society, 46(1), 37–69.
73.
YilmazS.BerisY.Serrano-BerthetR. (2010). Linking local government discretion and accountability in decentralization. Development Policy Review, 28(3), 259–293.
