2010
DOI: 10.1080/01436591003712007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The ‘Poverty’ of Political Society: Partha Chatterjee and the People's Plan Campaign in Kerala, India

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The problem, in our view, is that they failed to adequately assess the actual outcomes on the ground. For a critique of the "deepening democracy" narrative, see Mannathukkaren 2008 and. Our own work on decentralization in Kerala (forthcoming) and a host of studies by local activists and scholars support our view.…”
Section: Can Decentralization Be the Solution?supporting
confidence: 63%
“…The problem, in our view, is that they failed to adequately assess the actual outcomes on the ground. For a critique of the "deepening democracy" narrative, see Mannathukkaren 2008 and. Our own work on decentralization in Kerala (forthcoming) and a host of studies by local activists and scholars support our view.…”
Section: Can Decentralization Be the Solution?supporting
confidence: 63%
“…However such achievements in poverty reduction, health and education, as Bhagwati and Pangariya (2013) claim, are associated with high, not low, per capita incomes and expenditures. In many ways, Kerala's growth experience has been cited to show a different trajectory from other developing contexts with successes of the masses being institutionalised and made part of the rational-legal order (Mannathukkaren, 2010).…”
Section: Social and Public Policy Interventionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further, the funds devolved were not dependent on the whims and fancies of the department of Local Self Government and the Minister. Allocation was integrated into the state’s budget with the local bodies given a clue well in advance as to how much funds they would be entitled to each year (Bandyopadhyay, 1997; Chathukulam and John, 2002; Chaudhuri and Heller, 2003; Chaudhuri et al, 2004; Chettiparamb, 2007; Heller et al, 2007; Isaac and Harilal, 1997; Isaac and Franke, 2000; Isaac, 2001; John and Chathukulam, 2002; Kannan, 2000; Mannathukkaren, 2010; Parameswaran, 2001; Veron, 2001).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%