Thread by @AkshayMangla

Delighted to hold my book, now out with @CUP_PoliSci! Making Bureaucracy Work examines how public agencies deliver primary #education in India.

What is my argument? How might it advance our thinking on #bureaucracy, #implementation & the politics of inclusive #development? 🧵1/

My book investigates variation in the delivery of primary schooling across rural India. Comparative scholarship has shed light on differences in social policies and public spending. I focus on policy implementation, a critical but understudied arena of education politics. 2/

Why implementation? Most countries have laws for universal primary schooling (#SDGs Goal 4). E.g. India has expanded education programs and spending. But implementation is a huge challenge. Meeting this challenge is critical for millions of households who rely on govt schools. 3/

What is implementation? To begin, it helps to see that public services aren't just provided by govts, but coproduced w/citizens (🙏#ElinorOstrom). E.g. the women below are coproducing school lunches. This also raises power relations and conflicts among state & societal actors. 4/

I define implementation as the series of tasks undertaken to achieve the state's policy goals over its territory. Following public admin scholars, I delineate tasks based on complexity. Very complex tasks (eg. teacher monitoring & support) present “wicked problems” for states. 5/

My argument is anchored on bureaucratic norms, the informal rules of the game that guide how public agencies operate and execute their mandates. As Max Weber, James Q Wilson and others have shown, norms are the glue and grease that hold bureaucratic institutions together. 6/

Yet, bureaucratic norms can vary. I build a typology of norms centered on ideas of legalism and deliberation. Legalistic agencies are oriented around rules and protecting hierarchy. Deliberative agencies encourage problem-solving and participation across admin boundaries. 7/

How do bureaucratic norms drive implementation? I theorize two mechanisms: 1) Bureaucratic action: how public officials understand policy rules. 2) Societal feedback: citizen expectations & collective action. Different norms accordingly lead to varied implementation outcomes. 8/

Where do bureaucratic norms come from? I ground the argument historically. Norms emerge in the political process of state-building. At key moments, governing elites face incentives and forge relationships (to compete or cooperate), which yield durable differences in norms. 9/

I build and test my theory in the least-likely setting of rural north India. I comparatively analyzed 4 states--Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh & Bihar--that have wide variation in education policy outcomes (e.g. infrastructure, student attendance and learning). 10/

A bit on research design. I accounted for key factors (geography, agro economy & colonial institutions) that impact pub services. To identify causal mechanisms, I took the sociopolitical context of states & locales seriously, e.g. party systems & caste and gender hierarchies. 11/

Based on 2.5 years of ethnographic field research, I traced the implementation process from state capitals to local districts, down to villages and schools. My fieldwork opened the black box of Indian bureaucracy, its multiple layers of authority and interfaces with society. 12/

What data did I collect? As the Appendix details: 853 #interviews + 103 focus groups of state & societal actors, participant observation of local admin & schools, and village #ethnography. Studying bureaucracy up close is difficult. Reflexivity and triangulation can help. 13/

What did I find? In Uttar Pradesh, implementation was uneven. Commitment to rules enabled bureaucrats to resist political pressures, improving infrastructure and enrollments. But citizens faced #AdminBurdens and struggled to monitor schools, leading to large gaps in services. 14/

In Himachal Pradesh, commitment to deliberation generated superior quality services and outcomes. Through collective problem-solving, bureaucrats adapted policies to meet local needs, raising community buy-in for govt schools. See also my article: online.ucpress.edu/as/article-abs… 15/

I leverage Uttarakhand's separation from UP to show how legalism persists. Bureaucrats tightened rules to preserve control, but this raised #AdminBurdens & dampened citizen voice. Despite collective monitoring by women (e.g. below), the state induced exit from govt schools. 16/

How can norms change? In Bihar and UP, I studied girls' education reforms. Although initiated from above, norm change requires commitment by street-level bureaucrats, who need to manage everyday conflicts. See also my paper on Institutional Activism:

https://twitter.com/AkshayMangla/status/1427344473860845579

17/

My book is about north India. But I probe my theory with comparative cases: Kerala (south India), China, Finland & France. E.g. the case of China teaches us how, in a non-democracy, deliberation across levels of bureaucracy can facilitate local adaptation of public services. 18/

Implications for scholarship: 1) I challenge portrayals of the Indian state as uniformly “clientelistic,” “corrupt” or “flailing.” Bureaucracy is not everywhere the same in India. When formal institutions appear weak, informal norms can still vary and impact social outcomes. 19/

2) Deliberative bureaucracy, I argue, helps promote inclusive development. Weberian states are deemed critical for econ growth. But for mass education, states must activate societal input and counter inequalities. I see these interactive patterns as “regimes of coproduction.” 20/

3) I highlight the agency of street-level bureaucrats, who interpret policy in varied ways. They can reinforce #AdminBurdens or support marginalized citizens, influencing how society experiences the state. This brings public admin & policy feedback research into conversation. 21/

In sum, I hope to enrich our conception of bureaucracy as a collective institution bound by norms. My argument also has policy implications. E.g. I explore ways of enlarging deliberative spaces, to improve education delivery and make institutions more responsive to citizens. 22/

I have many to thank - My thesis committee @MIT: Richard Locke, Suzanne Berger, @ed_steinfeld & @PatrickHeller1 for sage advice and support. Book workshop participants @WatsonInstitute: @ProfVarshney, @PatrickHeller1, Lily Tsai, @tuliafa, Devesh Kapur & Andrew Schrank. 🙏23/

I am grateful to @ProfVarshney, Devesh Kapur, @LantPritchett, @pbmehta and @YaminiAiyar for much guidance and inspiration. I thank my dear friend, the late @KeshavDesiraju (IAS), who demonstrated what commitment to public service truly means. 🙏 24/

I thank my outstanding editors, @SaraDoskow and @RBlaifeder, and the entire @CUP_PoliSci team, for all their help & patience. Shyama Warner for diligent proofreading. And Terry Moe for believing in my book and including it in the Comparative Politics of Education series. 25/

I stand on the shoulders of others. I pay homage 🙏 to Alice Amsden and Judith Tendler - fearless scholars who challenged orthodoxies and made us rethink the state's role in development. Their writings inspired me. And I was privileged to learn from them as a grad student. 26/

Many institutions helped me along the way. I thank: @OxfordSBS @SkollCentre @MITPoliSci @oxsocsci @greentempleton @HarvardHBS @HarvardWCFIA @MittalInstitute @CASIPenn @HarvardBSC @Pratham_India @CPR_India @SouthAsiaBrown @WatsonInstitute @AIISIndia @riseprogramme 27/

Thanks to the professional associations and venues that gave me space to present my research: @SASPA_ASPA @ASPA_SICA @SASE_Meeting @APSAtweets @APSAEdPolitics @ApsaPolicy @InterpretivePSA @comppolsection @ipsa_aisp @policy_psa @egosnet @AOMPNP @AIISIndia @CarnegieIndia 28/

We have so much to learn still about bureaucracy and the politics of inclusive development. Primary education is intrinsically important. It is also an instructive arena for studying these issues.

To learn more about my research, please visit: akshaymangla.com. 29/(END)🙏