GOVERNING a city is arguably more complex than rural governance – more objectives to balance, more instruments to wield, all in the context of a constantly mutating dynamic environment. By contrast, the rural seems simpler and more static. This is even more so in a country like India, which is going through an intense phase of transformation, as occupations move away from agrarian rhythms and clusters of villages transform into towns.
Yet, as we present in this piece, urban governance in India is significantly less capacitated in its ability to make a difference in the lives of citizens. We illustrate this by focusing on two key axes of difference with respect to rural governance – proximity and precarity.Publisher Page>