Coalition governments and their influence on the balance of power in indian federalism: An analytical perspective

Beena K¹*, Dr. Shardool Singh²

1 Research Scholar, Sunrise University, Alwar, Rajasthan, India

beenaradhakrishnan73@gmail.com

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Sunrise University, Alwar, Rajasthan, India

Abstract: Coalitions have emerged to link the federal division of powers with sub-national pluralism in India, following the collapse of the national consensus on a parliamentary majority—a phenomenon typical of the functioning of parliamentary governments in developing nations. Coalitions in India owe their existence mostly to a group of ambitious individuals who band together to rule for party and personal gain; these coalitions have become ubiquitous in modern Indian politics, both at the national and provincial levels. The strength that unites is its magnitude. Together, we are pursuing our goals. It is not true that regional parties are now sharing power at the centre and contributing to the consensus process. Actually, they aren't required to take part in national politics. Their perspective remains narrow. Their strategy for rallying support is populism. As a result, regional parties are here to stay in India's political system, and their influence is seen both inside and outside of their home states.

Keyword: Coalitions, governance, federal, ambitions, politics.

INTRODUCTION

Coalition administrations have grown more significant in democracies that are based on parliamentary systems. This is due to the fact that no one party has been able to accumulate a simple majority. Under these circumstances, it begins to serve as a vehicle for the logistical component of forming the government with the support of a large number of political parties. In Latin, the word "coalition" literally means "to grow," and the word "coalition" that we use in English is a derivation of that Latin word. This genesis tale is an illustration of the political process that may be used to bring together many polities in order to form a united political entity. The government is both complicated and dynamic as a result of the power-sharing that occurs between opposition political groups in a coalition. As contrast to the rigorous basis of a one-party administration, coalitions operate according to a fundamental program that all of the parties who are participating in the coalition agree upon sharing. Environmentally responsible behaviour: This agenda serves as a framework that directs the action of the coalition, while at the same time understanding that each party is responsible for upholding certain aspects of the political systems that they support.

India's democracy as well as the genuine problems associated with cooperative politics

The ideal situation for alliances like this would be for them to be pliable and dynamic, with members readily switching sides or renegotiating agreements in order to better meet the requirements of the coalition. Over the course of the late 1990s, coalition politics has become more prominent in the political scene of India. Coalitions are established at both the national and state levels as a result of the many political parties that exist in the countries and the fact that the diversified electorate makes it impossible for any one party to win an election outright. Pre-election coalitions, in which parties agree to give a single and compound list of issues to the voters, have been shown to be an additional kind of short-term collaboration that contributes to the achievement of considerable benefits. On the other hand, in the event that the election results do not provide a majority, the parties may carefully work out post-election arrangements in order to guarantee that the government would continue to hold its position.

Alliances of a more strategic kind are required in modern democracies because of the need of garnering majorities in the political system. Those who are interested in becoming members of the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) would be wise to become familiar with the practices of coalition governments. This would give them a glimpse into the inner workings of a political democracy that is characterised by the prevalence of multi-party systems, as well as the mechanisms for negotiating and managing crises. Through the examination of coalition formation and the implications of it, we may, thankfully, get further knowledge about India's democracy as well as the genuine problems associated with cooperative politics. The purpose of this research is to get an understanding of coalition governments, including their primary features and the strategic significance they have, with a particular emphasis on the Indian context.

OBJECTIVES

1. To examine coalition governments and how they affect the distribution of power under Indian federalism.

2. To Examine Coalition Governments' Organisation and Operation.

RESEARCH METHOD

The literary survey research is based on fundamental objective of creating such a government is to obtain actual or material advantages, particularly in situations when political parties are equally divided and no one can secure a majority of the vote. On account of the fact that it is predicated on the compatibility of temporary and individual interests, the presence of at least two partners is required. Coalition politics is inherently unstable because of the ever-changing character of political institutions. This refers to the fact that coalition politics is always developing and changing forms.

RESULT

Features Of Coalition Government

In light of the fact that functioning with a coalition government entails compromise, ideological rigidity is an impossible position to take. On the other hand, coalitions do their operations based on the concept of a minimum agreement since one of their goals is to advance the interests that are prevalent among its members. However, it is probable that this degree of engagement will not be sufficient to adequately satisfy the policy objectives of all parties involved. It is always the case that politics triumphs over policy, and when it is necessary to expose the harsh realities in order to accomplish a significant victory, compromise is the expectation. Within the realm of coalition politics, the fundamental objective is to acquire and maintain power. Before and after the election, health coalitions were formed in India. These alliances have been created. Coalitions before elections make it possible for parties to approach voters with cohesive manifestos, while coalitions after elections make it possible for power to be shared and for a government to be established.

Formation of Coalition Governments in India

Because of the country's complex and ever-evolving political landscape, India serves as a case study in coalition politics. This is because the country's political landscape gives rise to a wide variety of coalition combinations, which are defined by the establishment of governing coalitions in response to broken mandates at the national and regional levels. Immediately after the Emergency period, Prime Minister Morarji Desai's Janata Party coalition government (1977–1979) was the first instance of this trend happening. This combination was used by Charan Singh in order to build the Janata Party (Secular) during the years 1979 and 1980; nevertheless, their time in government was rather brief after that. A second kind of alliance is the National Front coalition, which V.P. Singh led from 1989 to 1990. This coalition is an example of a second sort of alliance. This group of politicians from both the national and regional levels collaborated in order to accomplish a common objective. In addition, the Janata Dal (Socialist), which was led by Chandra Shekhar and was active from 1990 to 1991, continued the cycle of coalition governments that had been going on before.

An evident example of a coalition consisting of multiple extremely tiny parties is the United Front coalitions, which were in power from 1996 to 1998 and were led by H.D. Deve Gowda and I.K. Gujral, respectively. These coalitions were led by members of the United Front. One might make the case that the coalition administration that A.B. Vajpayee led from 1997 to 1998 established the foundation for coalition politics. This government was led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The National Democratic Alliance (NDA) was under Vajpayee's leadership from 1999 till 2004, during which time the situation was much more stable. Coalitions were firmly established in its pragmatic tone as a basis for long-term governance structures. The power of coalitions was shown by Singh's United Progressive Alliance (UPA), which was a blend of national and regional parties for two terms, beginning in 2004 and ending in 2014. Because of its continuous and dependable support in both houses of parliament as well as its strong central leadership, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) under the leadership of Narendra Modi from 2014 till the present day is an outstanding example of a coalition government that has been effective. According to the findings of this historical study, the current political environment in India is characterised by political alliance policies. These policies are an essential and ongoing component of the parliamentary system that is used in the nation.

Salient Features of Coalition Government

Coalition governments are distinguished from majoritarian governments by a number of qualities that determine their inception, operations, and longevity. These traits are what characterise coalition governments. In addition, the ability to mobilise support from almost every demographic is another advantage that comes with coalition governance. It is primarily owing to the fact that coalition governments consist of several individuals, each of whom contributes to the general aims of the party, that they are distinguished from single-basin administrations. The availability of this sort of accessibility makes it possible for a wide variety of social, economic, and cultural topics to be discussed throughout the legislative process, which in turn expands the range of options available to state governments. Due to the fact that it is composed of members from a wide variety of backgrounds, the coalition government is in a better position to deal with the varied requirements and preferences of the people. Additionally, the efforts that are being made to give opportunities for persons who are marginalised and underprivileged are a remarkable aspect. Under a coalition government, these disadvantaged groups have a higher chance of succeeding because the smaller or regional parties that make up these movements and groupings may have an active participation in policymaking. This gives these communities a better chance of achieving their goals. Those who are politically marginalised would reap the benefits of this because their complaints would be taken seriously and addressed, which would result in an improvement in their access to political representation. Policy choices in coalitions such as these are the result of considering all of the many and varied categories, which inhibits the adoption of policies that marginalise and exclude certain segments of the population. In addition, the participation of a large number of partners in the coalition results in dialogue that takes into account the social and cultural diversity that exist among the community.

Compared to democracies in which there is only one main party, coalition governments are far more dependent on checks and balances in order to make decisions. The majority of the time, they are the result of conversations, agreements, and compromises that took place amongst the participants in the coalition. As a result of the fact that it encourages participants to be flexible and open to compromise, policymaking in a cooperative framework is more thoughtful and deliberative than it is in an adversarial one. Considering that it is seldom possible to pursue extreme policies indefinitely due to disagreements among members of the coalition, this might potentially result in policies that are less radical and more middle-of-the-road, which is something that would be desired. This procedure, despite the fact that it may be slow at times, is essential for preventing sudden policy interventions and fostering consistency in decision-making. As a result of the fact that having strong ideological ideas does not affect the way in which members of a coalition actually collaborate with one another, this is the situation. During the process of creating a coalition, it is important to make concessions on some ideals in order to arrive at solutions that are both realistic and able to garner support from all members of the coalition. This flexibility is essential for the longevity of the alliance since their political goals are different from one another. The 'common minimum programme,' which includes the working agenda and strategies that have been agreed upon by the partners, is the standard operating procedure for coalitions in this respect. Despite the fact that it is very doubtful that this program will assist each member party in accomplishing their objectives, it does provide a viable system of governing. The formation and development of any alliance is a constant process. As a direct result of this, coalition politics is in a constant state of flux, with member parties coming and exiting all the time in reaction to changing political winds and policy agendas. It is necessary to maintain continual coalition formation and negotiation in order to achieve a viable majority in a legislative system that is both complicated and varied. This, in turn, has a need for structural flexibility. As a result of the fact that coalition government parties are required to simultaneously adjust to shifting political and social climates, the coalition government is subject to instability in the event that the agreements that were struck between partners are not maintained.

Reasons for the Formation Of Coalition Governments

When a single political party is unable to gain a majority in the legislature, it is common practice to compel the formation of a coalition administration. The formation of coalitions between political parties is becoming more usual as a result of this, with the intention of creating a government that is capable of commanding the support of a majority in the legislature. When many stakeholders join together in coalitions such as this one, they are able to preserve their legal identities while also aligning themselves on the shared goals and objectives that form the basis of co-governance. This configuration makes it possible for a large number of stakeholders to take part in the formulation and implementation of policies, with the possibility that the input will not be subjected to a comprehensive revision, all the while preserving the policies' base and relevance. The fact that India is tolerant of a variety of political views is one of the factors that has helped to the emergence of coalition administrations in the nation. There is a significant amount of variety in India with regard to social, cultural, religious, and linguistic aspects. Assuming that there is such political variety is a reasonable assumption to make given that the political society is made up of a number of political parties that each represent a distinct set of interests. In light of this, political systems are often not extremely polarised, and in this case, we do not have a clear winner who will dominate the process or the outcome that can be realistically predicted.

In order to bridge these gaps, coalition governments, which are formed when groups that adhere to a variety of political beliefs come together to form a government that is able to operate, have emerged as a more realistic manner of doing so. The multi-caste structure of society in India serves as the foundation for the coalition system, which acts as an essential and appropriate political framework that is tailored to meet the requirements of the country. There was a lock on power held by the Congress party in the early years after independence, which contributed to the rise of coalition governments to positions of responsibility. From the very beginning of its existence, the Congress party has been the preeminent political power in India. As a result, it has often imposed its will on smaller, more regional parties. There have been a number of political formations that have arisen in reaction to the increased political consciousness in the area and the death of the Congress party. These formations have called for the autonomy of both the state and the municipal level. These regional parties saw coalition formations as a viable tool to exert influence and even to acquire participation in the political arena. As long as they were able to reflect the interests of their individual voters, these partnerships made it possible for these parties to fully participate in government matters without interference.

In India, the structure of the nation's electoral system is another aspect that contributes to the development of coalition governments in the country. The first-past-the-post voting system, which is based on proportional representation, makes it possible for political parties that may not have a significant following in the country to compete for office and earn representation in the legislature. This is made possible by the introduction of autonomous parliamentarians. The ability of political parties to perform their job as governing organisations is made possible by coalitions that are established by representatives of minority groups who are vying for office and serving in administrative and legislative positions. Taking this into consideration, coalitions are a mechanism that serves the purpose of taking into account not only the bigger political parties but also the smaller political groupings that are more focused on the local level. Coalitions in India have benefited from a highly embodied political culture in which political players seek personal, regional, and communal gains.

This culture helps political actors achieve their goals. Political discourse has become so polarised as a result of this movement towards individualism that coalitions are absolutely necessary in order to achieve the necessary majority in order to form a government. There is a possibility that coalition governments may be unstable and unable to execute plans owing to the fact that different member parties may have conflicting objectives. This is one of the possible negatives of coalition governments. This is due to the fact that coalitions may consist of the participation of a variety of political parties. Coalition governments are a legitimate representation of democracy; this is particularly true in India's democracy, which has endured despite the failure of this count. Despite the numerous difficulties that stand in the way of its success and mainstream stability, coalition governments provide a genuine image of democracy.

The Influence of Regional Parties in Coalition Governments

As a result of coalition politics in India, the most visible impact is the rising power of regional players. Due to the fact that they are concentrated on the state and the local level, these parties operate on the periphery, where they are mainly concerned with serving regional interests rather than national ones. They will turn to populist strategies in order to achieve and maintain state-level power, which is something that they need. This is the reason why this is the case. Coalitions, in and of themselves, have the effect of distorting the governance profile; yet, they also have the effect of increasing inclusiveness by including all political parties, even minority parties, in government. There is a possibility that significant national problems will not be addressed when governmental allies adopt policies that are beneficial to their own states at the cost of various other states.

As a result of the proliferation of regional parties, the decision-makers on the national level are now located in the regions. This manoeuvre has both positive and negative aspects to it. The voices of regional authorities and the people they represent are strengthened, which is a step towards a more participatory form of governance. This is one of the good aspects of the situation. Concurrently, it may make it more difficult for the policies of a single nation to be created, and it may also diminish the power of the central government. As a result of their awareness that regional parties are capable of providing superior political discourse, they run the danger of destabilising coalitions. Additionally, due of the strong local mandates that they are tasked with, prime ministers are unable to properly coordinate the activities of coalition partners, which results in variances in policy. Legislative and policy stability are both at jeopardy, and the idea of the government adopting a cohesive national approach is made much more difficult to comprehend. In point of fact, the regional parties that were members of the coalition government often exchanged positions of power. This is due to the fact that these organisations would have had a considerably more difficult time attaining influence outside of the alliance. It has been argued by some that this demonstrates that "coalition systems are undemocratic" since minor parties do not have the authority to rule. Due to the adverse circumstances, there is a possibility that volatility may occur, which might perhaps put the performance of the main national parties in jeopardy. Regional players, on the other hand, have contributed to the institutionalisation of democracy within the political framework of India by increasing the percentage of the population that is represented in the Indian parliament. Today, they are given the chance to voice their ideas, and those opinions will be taken into consideration, at the very least on a regional basis.

Challenges to Prime Ministerial Leadership and Governance

The influence of coalition governments on the leadership of the prime minister or the elected executive branch is the third significant aspect to consider. When a coalition government is in place, the prime minister is aware that there are restrictions placed on their power, which makes it harder for them to act independently. This is primarily due to the fact that all members of the coalition, even the most insignificant ones, are accountable for ensuring the stability of the government; if they are dissatisfied with anything, they have the option to withdraw their support. When faced with such a political environment, the prime minister is weakened because he or she is required to placate members of the various parties that make up the coalition and to make compromises in order to keep the coalition's equilibrium intact. Another point of dispute is the role that the prime minister plays in the formation and leadership of the cabinet of a coalition administration. The prime minister has greater discretion to appoint a cabinet of trustworthy advisers based on their own assessments of their talents and reliability when there is a single party that has the majority of the seats in the legislature.

In a coalition administration, having a predetermined cabinet is often the result of negotiations between members of the coalition. This, of course, makes it possible for sympathetic individuals to be nominated to offices regardless of their level of expertise or their aptitude to serve in ministerial-level positions. It is possible that the decision-making process will be slowed down and that the prime minister's capacity to execute policies that are both effective and clear would be decreased as a result of the inherent conflicts of interest that are present in multi-member coalitions.

Not only do policies include the process of governance, but they also involve the process of putting policies into effect. It is impossible for the prime minister of a coalition government to implement important measures without first securing the consent of each of the parties that comprise the coalition. On the other hand, rules that are too cautious or lack imagination are sometimes the consequence of an obsession with obtaining everyone's approval before going ahead with the process. As a consequence of this never-ending dance to win over coalition members, the authority of the prime minister is being diminished, which in turn compromises both domestic and foreign goals. As a consequence of this, critical decision-making processes can be postponed or reduced in an attempt to promote coalition stability, which might end in political impasse. In spite of this, it is not accurate to assert that coalition politics does not have any benefits in the realm of governance. By doing so, it encourages the free flow of knowledge, which in turn contributes to the creation of more equal perspectives and agreements within our society. There is no doubt that this may be a significant waste of time; but, it could prove to be beneficial in the long run if it provided a greater opportunity for a variety of stakeholders to frame the problem for the decision-making process. In the same way that virtually all of the advantages described above can only be completely achieved with strong leadership traits in place to counteract any negative elements, all of these benefits can only be fully realised. It is for this reason that it is very necessary for a prime minister who is heading a coalition to exhibit great negotiation abilities in order to keep the coalition together and to administer the country in an effective manner.

Structural Shifts and the Impact on Indian Federalism

In order to elect coalition governments, it is important to make adjustments to the structures of power within India's federal system, namely the central state and the political power structures. Under this setup, the federal government exercised a significant amount of jurisdiction over the various Indian states. This authority was particularly significant. This, however, has been rather clear ever since the politics of coalitions were altered. As a consequence, the federal system has become more cooperative. This transformation is being brought about by a number of factors, one of which is the growth of regional parties. These parties support decentralisation and offer to speak for local people in return for their support of compact arrangements.

Coalitions have resulted in a number of structural modifications, one of which is the establishment of extra-constitutional bodies, such as steering committees or coordinators. These groups often play an important role as intermediates between the partners and in the process of defining policy, even though they are not part of the conventional process by which the government formulates policies. Despite the fact that these organisations could improve coalition collaboration, they do so at the cost of the long-standing parliamentary democracy as well as the authority of the prime minister and cabinet. It is possible that as a consequence of this, governance procedures will become distinct from democratic processes and will instead be the outcome of talks that take place in private. In addition to this, another significant consequence of coalition politics is the reorganisation of India's federal structure.

A strengthening of regional parties within the framework of the national governing system has led to an improvement in the connection between the centre and the state institutions. By making it politically costly for the federal government to offend regional allies, coalition politics has led to a continuous decline in the misuse of Article 356, which authorises presidential power in states. This has resulted in a decrease in the extent to which Article 356 has been abused. This transformation has resulted in the flourishing of a more real kind of cooperative federalism, in which discussion has taken the place of pressure that is imposed from the centre. It is possible that when a new framework takes form, it would better represent the different political terrain of India as well as the desires of various Indian states to become part of the federal system of governance.

However, in connection to these transformations, there are both opportunities for democratisation and risks that should be taken into consideration. It is possible that coalition politics will make it more difficult for the federal government to actively push and execute effective national policies. This is because coalition politics has the potential to entangle both national and state action. It is possible that the fragmentation of policies is the consequence of a lack of coordination between the objectives of the national government and the interests of the area.

In situations when a Panas strategy is required, such as when dealing with issues pertaining to national security, economic reform, or foreign policy, this might potentially provide a significant challenge. Several individuals are of the opinion that in order to improve the coalition-governed organisations in India, it is required to make modifications to the operational criteria' definitions. A few of examples of such efforts include avoiding the month of December and establishing an election system that is more efficient. Additional examples include decreasing the number of ministries in order to prevent the cabinet from expanding. It is possible that coordinated policy ideas with a stronger and much more integrated approach might be provided by a shared common minimum program that political partners agree upon. Lastly, in a democratic nation such as India, the multiple impacts of minority groups and their combinations are that, despite the difficulties of coalition politics and the fact that different groups form based on their differences from the majority, it is possible to have a government that is more representative of the people if the majority is managed in an appropriate manner.

CONCLUSION

Modifications to the political power and central state structure of India's federal system are necessary for coalition governments to be elected. There was a great deal of authority held by the federal government over the individual Indian states under this arrangement. But this has been obvious ever since coalition politics changed. The result is a more cooperative federal system. This change may be attributed, in part, to the rise of regional parties. These groups advocate for further decentralisation and promise to speak on their behalf in exchange for their support of compact arrangements. Among these structural changes brought about by coalitions are the emergence of extra-constitutional entities such as steering committees or coordinators. Outside of the traditional government policy-making process, these organisations often play an important role as intermediaries between the partners and in determining policy. While these groups may enhance coalition cooperation, they come at the expense of long-standing parliamentary democracy and the prime minister's and cabinet's authority. As a result, governance procedures may become separated from democratic processes and instead be the product of secret negotiations.

References

1. Adeney, Katharine (2005), ‘Hindu Nationalists and Federal Structures in an Era of Regionalism’, in Katharine Adeney and Lawrence Sáez (eds), Coalition Politics and Hindu Nationalism . London: Routledge, pp. 97–115.

2. (2006), ‘Constitutional Centring: Nation Formation and Consociational Federalism in India and Pakistan’, Commonwealth & Comparative Politics , vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 8–33.

3. (2007a), ‘Comment: Th e “Necessity” of Asymmetrical Federalism?’, Ethnopolitics , vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 117–20.

4. (2007b), Federalism and Ethnic Confl ict Regulation in India and Pakistan. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

5. Adeney, Katharine and Lawrence Sáez (eds) (2005), Coalition Politics and Hindu Nationalism . London: Routledge.

6. Ahluwalia, Montek Singh (2000), ‘Economic Performance in States in Postreform Period’, Economic and Political Weekly , vol. 35, no. 19, pp. 1637–48.

7. Ahmad, Aijaz (2000), ‘Kashmir Conundrum: India, Pakistan, the United States, and the Question of Autonomy’, Frontline , vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 109–12.

8. Akoijam, A. Bimol (2001), ‘How History Repeats Itself ’, Economic and Political Weekly , vol. 36, no. 30, pp. 2807–12.

9. Akoijam, A. Bimol and Th . Tarunkumar (2005), ‘Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958: Disguised War and Its Subversions’, Eastern Quarterly , vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 5–19.

10. Alagh, Yoginder K. (2009), ‘Decentralization and Devolution in the Eleventh Plan’, Indian Journal of Public Audit and Accountability , vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 7–15.

11. Alam, Javeed (2002), ‘Th e Nation and the State in India: A Diffi cult Bond’, in Zoya Hasan, E. Sridharan, and R. Sudarshan (eds), India’s Living Constitution: Ideas, Practices and Controversies . New Delhi: Permanent Black, pp. 83–104.

12. Alok, V.N. (2006), ‘Local Government Organization and Finance in Rural India’, in Anwar Shah (ed.), Local Governance in Developing Countries . Public Sector Governance and Accountability Series. Washinton, DC: Th e World Bank, pp. 205–31.

13. Alok, V.N. and P.K. Chaubey (2010), Panchayats in India: Measuring Devolution by States . New Delhi: Macmillan.

14. Anderson, George (2008), Federalism: An Introduction . Ontario: Oxford University Press.

15. Ansari, Iqbal A. (2006), ‘Jammu and Kashmir: Framework for a Final Settlement’, Economic and Political Weekly , vol. 41, no. 34, pp. 3642–5.

16. Ao, T. Uniel Kichu (2001), ‘Asymmetric Federalism and Special Status: Th e Case of Nagaland’, Unpublished MPhil Dissertation, Centre for Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

17. Arora, Balveer (1995), ‘Adapting Federalism to India: Multilevel and Asymmetrical Innovations’, in Balveer Arora and Douglas V. Verney (eds), Multiple Identities in a Single State: Indian Federalism in Comparative Perspective . New Delhi: Konark, pp. 71–104.

18. Arora, Balveer (2002), ‘Th e Political Parties and the Party System: Th e Emergence of New Coalitions’, in Zoya Hasan (ed.), Parties and Party Politics in India . New Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp. 504–33.

19. Arora, Balveer (2003a), ‘Federalisation of India’s Party System’, in Ajay K. Mehra, D.D. Khanna, and Gert W. Kueck (eds), Political Parties and Party Systems . New Delhi: Sage Publications, pp. 3–99

20. Arora, Balveer and K.K. Kailash (2007), ‘Policy Making in India’s Federal Coalitions: Th e Group of Ministers Device’, in Hoshiar Singh, P.C. Mathur, and Pankaj Singh (eds), Coalition Governments and Good Governance . Jaipur: Aalekh, pp. 167–225.