1. Globalization, the State and
Policy Production in India
Vandana Asthana
Eastern Washington University
Cheney, WA

2. Outline of the Presentation
• Globalization, Policy process and the Indian
State
• The processes of Economic Liberalization –
Hard and Soft Policy reforms
• Water Policy Production in the Liberalization
process
• Sub-national dynamics and the Delhi Water
Reform Project
• Conclusions on understanding policy processes
in India

3. Linear and Horizontal Models of Policy
International Participants Other agencies
State
Policymaking
Policymaking
Participants outside government Levels of government

4. What is Policy?
• A complex configuration of actors across different sites
whose connections and interactions weave across and
within the artificial divide between 'citizens' and the
'state' where different actors within the state and civil
society may take up a range of subject positions and
represent a constellation of competing interests.
Policy Questions: Does the post economic reform era in
India mean a new kind of policy making in India?
What do the various pressures from “above” “below”
and “around” the state suggest about the nature of policy
production in India?

5. Globalization and the State
• Globalization as a process – As part of this
process decision making power is gradually
removed from nation states and shifted to
other actors, which can be located ‘above’,
‘below’ and ‘besides’ the states
• This repositioning has a dual effect
i. Integration and conformity to adopt
global standards and behavior
ii.Social and political forces have pulled in
the direction of asserting state power to
protect the interests of its people

6. Weak State Theorists Versus
Transformation of the State
• Literature indicates – the state is under
pressure
• State is challenged to legitimize itself in
the light of pressures from ‘above’ and
‘below’
• States in the North and South have started
adjusting to this shift.
• Indian State is no exception to this shift

7. Indian State – a historical
perspective
• In the post independence period the Indian
State remained highly centralized, largely
working on a ‘command and control’
administrative style in the areas of both
policy making and planning
• In response to liberalization the Indian
state has undergone many deviations from
traditionally conducted policy making

8. Origins of Economic liberalization
Demise of the Nehru Model in the 1980s
• Indira Gandhi
Rajiv Gandhi and the Change Team
Career bureaucrats and the laterals
• Rao government and the Balance of
Payment Crisis -1991
• Hard vs. Soft Reforms - Reformist intent of
the BJP 1998 -2004 Swadeshi Liberalism

9. CHANGE TEAM: IDEAS AND POWER MODEL
1980s - 2004
DIRECT
A.N. Alexander
BUREAUCRATS Venkatraman
PRIME MINISTERS
LATERALS
RAJIV GANDHI 1985 -1989
NARSIMHA RAO 1991 -1995
ATAL BIHARI VAJAPAYEE 1998 -
2004
MANMOHAN SINGH 2004 Manmohan Singh
Montek Singh Ahluwalia
IMF in Rakesh Mohan
1991
HARD (1991) AND SOFT REFORMS (1998)

10. BOP Crisis and Extensive
Liberalization
The appointment of Manmohan Singh as
Finance minister
• Support of business groups
• Middle class support
• A policy elite many of whom had been
previous employees of WB and IMF

11. The Second Generation of Reforms
• Focus on the social and welfare sector
• Policy entrepreneurs recommended a go slow
process
• For nearly a decade – privatization a key
component remained dormant
• The shift emphasized transferring social
sector issues to a semi private domain
• Water did not figure in the policy discourse

12. Policy Documents – 1990s -2004
• National Water Policy 1987, 2002
• Committee of Infrastructure Development Report 1994
• Reducing Poverty in India: Options for More effective
Public Services, 1998; India: Urban Infrastructure Services
Review 1996, 1997; Urban Water Supply and
Sanitation1998
• Ministry of Urban Development Report 2002
India Assessment Report 2002
• Report on PPP in Social Sector, November 2004

13. World Bank Documents
• Joint GOI/Bank Water Resource
Management Sector Review (June 1998)
• India A Country Study, 2002
• Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory
Facility Report 2003
• India’s Water Economy 2005
• Water Supply and Sanitation, Bridging the
Gap Between Infrastructure and Services
• Delhi Water Supply and Sewerage Project
Report 2002

14. Producing Policy World Bank Style
• Water Policy Initiative of the Bank and PPIAF -Spending
approximately 7.5 million $ to build a consensus on water reform in
India. Three key elements in this initiative
--- Policy dialogue – This consisted policy seminars for state level
decision makers and stakeholders to promote consensus through
workshops, seminars and presentations
--- Public Awareness: Information seminars for journalists and
members of the civil society to influence public opinion, journalist
workshops, advocacy efforts by think tanks: the initiative
Running Water: A Dialogue for Journalists to build an informed
press to improve coverage
----Knowledge product production and dissemination of knowledge
products in the in the form of a series of tariff and subsidies papers
and household surveys in selected cities. papers were distributed to
relevant policymakers, service providers, and other stakeholders in
India and the rest of the region.

15. • These reports were posted on the Ministry
of Urban Development websites for like-
minded states and local utilities to have
easy access to the information (PPIAF
Report October 2003).
• Training was also provided to members of
the bureaucracy at the bank headquarters
in Washington D.C.

16. The Role of the Civil Society
• Critiqued the draft as a policy that did not
reflect the priorities of people and
concerns for social justice
• However, the final policy did not
incorporate the measures advocated by
the civil society and reflected the
centralized nature of policy production in
the central government with its
bureaucratic elite, economists, political
forces and external forces

17. Water Reform in the Liberalization
Process
• Water needs to be urgently managed within a historic
time frame
• Essential for development and growth, and good
governance
• Less access to urban people due to poorly designed
fiscal policies as a public good
• Private sector participation and economic instruments
will ensure universal and regular coverage

18. Impact on State Policy Production
• States asked to privatize in the social sector
including water
• States allowed negotiations for direct foreign
investment and 100% FDI in infrastructure
• Cuts on import taxes for infrastructure machinery
• Cuts in fiscal spending of the states

19. Sub-national Dynamics and the
Delhi Water Reform Project
• Water demand
outgrowing supply
• Irregular and Intermittent
Supply
• Inequitable distribution
• 50% Non revenue water
• Private operators meeting
water shortages

20. Government Vision
“Provision of universal 24/7 safe water supply and
sewerage services in an equitable, efficient and
sustainable manner by the customer oriented and
accountable service provider”
The government’s plan comprised of three steps: Unbundling
the Delhi Water Board:
• Augmentation
• Treatment
• Distribution

21. Augmentation of Water
TEHRI DAM
HARIDWAR
MORADNAGAR GANGA CANAL
SONIA VIHAR TREATMENT
PLANT, Delhi
Source: RFSTE

22. Consultants Reports
• Pricewaterhouse Cooper
• GkW
• Trilegal Company
• PARIVARTAN –THE NGO exposed the Bank’s
interference in the hiring of the consultants

23. NCT Delhi Policy Documents
• Economic Survey of Delhi, 2002-2003
• Economic Survey of Delhi, 2003 -2004
• The Delhi Urban Environment and
Infrastructure Improvement Project
DUEIIP – 2021, 2001
• Delhi Water Supply and Sewerage Reform
Project 2004

24. Delhi Government Timeline
• 1998: World bank’s entry in Delhi and restructuring of public utility and
creation Delhi Jal Board coincides with the governments clearance for the
Sonia Vihar project to augment and treat water for Delhi
• 2000: Project Preparation Project Preparation Facility Advance of $2.5
million by World Bank.
• 2001: World Bank Consultants Price Waterhouse Coopers draws up
proposals for privatization, including contracts for Sonia Vihar, water tariffs,
24x7scheme and water legislation
• June 21, 2002: Sonia Vihar Plant inaugurated by the Delhi Chief minister,
Contract awarded to Degremont - Terms of contract secret
• Agitation began in August 2002
• Mid 2004, DJB tries to run 24x7 scheme
• Late 2004: Timetable prepared for implementation. DWSS Report released
• November 30, 2004: Delhi government announces a seven to ten fold tariff
hike. Citizens front protests the hike
• Early 2005: Four MNCs shortlisted for distribution of water
• To begin implementation from 2005 and complete it by 2015

25. Water as a frame of Policy making: Discourses of
Power and Resistance Suez Ondeo
Pressures from above and below MNC
PwC
Experts
Govt. NCT World
India Delhi Bank
NGOs
Communities
Major Actors in the Delhi Water Project

26. Claims of the World Bank
• No privatization of water in Delhi
• Private sector participation to bring efficiency
and expertise
• Cost recovery essential for better service
delivery
• Private operators will be accountable
• Improved services to the poor

27. Claims of Suez - Ondeo
“Sustainable development lies at the very heart of
all our activities. Energy, water and waste
services: for more than 150 years, the
companies that make up the Group have
delivered services essential to life and to
people's economic and social development.”
(CEO Michael Gastricht 2005)

28. Claims of the Government in the Delhi
Water Supply and Sewerage Project 2004
• Project in line with national and international policies
on water
• World Bank’s role is to provide efficacy
• No privatization: Public Private partnership
• Project provides expertise and technology
• Cost recovery for better services
• Improves services to the poors
• Financial sustainability and operational efficiency

29. Claims of the Water Liberation Campaign
• Multinationals and the profit sharks versus the people of
India
• Water a human right and a commons
• Water Reform Policy will not bring in expertise and
technology
• Performance based incentives and penalties come with a
catch
• Cultural and Spiritual value of
water
• 24/7 a myth

30. Claims and Counterclaims
• It was within these claims and counterclaims
of actors, some with more power and some
with less that the water reform project was
promoted, contested and produced
• However, in a plural and diverse democracy
like India the activists and citizens were able
to put pressure on the government to stall the
project

31. Conclusions
1. Policy process in Delhi is an engagement in “deliberative
exclusionary processes” on one hand and “participatory
processes” on the other
2. Policy processes are political in nature masked in objective
and technical discourses
3. Transmission of knowledge through networks is an important
aspect of policy making – Narratives from globalized
connections, MNCs, Political positioning of the Govt. of India
and laterals. These core networks operate outside of the realm
of democratic politics
4. There were pressures from ‘above’ and pressures from ‘below’,
overlapping and competing rather than the state alone in which
water policy was produced, contested, implemented and
reformed

32. NETWORKS OF POWER
Suez
IMF World Bank
Government of India
NCT Delhi
Prime Minister
Planning Commission Chief Minister
Ministry of Urban Dev. & CEO DJB
Water Resources Ministries
Bureaucrats Chief Secretary &
Bureaucrats
Laterals Bureaucrats

33. Networks of Resistance
Water Liberation Campaign & CWD
Dissenting Voices
within the Govt.
Local Networks
Dam Displaced People RFSTE
Federation of Indian
Religious Groups Women
Farmer Groups NGOs in Delhi
People of Delhi
Transnational Linkages

35. Policy Production in an era of globalization
World Bank Pricewaterhouse
Government of India Cooper
Delhi Government
Suez
Industry-IBAW
Policymaking
Middle &
Junior Activists-WLC
Bureaucracy & CWD

36. Changed Role of the States
• New meaning in policy making
• States can apply for direct foreign investment
• States are not conditioned by the centralized
socialist developmental planning of the 1950s
• A more complex process in the post reform
era with experts from science, a policy elite,
global institutions like the Bank and private
sector as well as actors challenging pervasive
orthodoxies in an oppositional discourse
• Actors with varying degrees of power
manipulate policy to achieve a favorable
outcome