Skip to main content

Coalition Congruence in India’s Federal System

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Coalition Politics and Federalism

Abstract

This paper will analyse coalition politics in India over the period of coalition and/or minority governments from 1989 to the present, from the points of view of institutionalization, congruence and decentralization. India’s federal, bicameral parliamentary democracy, which uses a single-member, simple-plurality (SMSP) or first-past-the-post electoral system, has seen since 1989, a series of coalition and/or minority governments, mainly minority coalitions until the present surplus majority coalition since 2014. A large number of Indian states—in a federal system that has become increasingly decentralized since the mid-1990s—have also experienced coalition politics. Three questions naturally arise: (1) have coalitions become institutionalized at the federal and state levels, as least as far as the core formateur parties are concerned, or do they keep varying with changes of partners? This is the institutionalization question. The paper will argue that some practices have become institutionlised at the federal level and to a lesser extent at the state level. (2) What is the degree of congruence between coalitions at the federal level and those in various states, given the major role played by single-state regional parties in India’s system? This is the congruence question. The paper will argue that congruence is very limited and partial given the role of regional parties but that two broad coalitions are emerging, one led by the BJP, the other by the Congress. (3) How has coalition politics interacted with Indian federalism’s degree of decentralization? This is the decentralization question. The paper will argue that coalition politics has contributed to the further decentralization of power due to the fact that the two major national parties need regional parties as coalition partners to be able to form governments at the federal level and to pass legislation in both houses of parliament.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Jammu and Kashmir is only required to hold state assembly elections every 6 years.

  2. 2.

    For all figures in this section except where specified otherwise the data are from:

    http://censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/India_at_glance/religion.aspx

    http://censusindia.gov.in/Census_Datza_2001/India_at_glance/scst.aspx

    http://censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/Census_Data_Online/Language/Statement5.htm

    accessed on July 5, 2011.

  3. 3.

    For the estimate of upper castes, including dominant castes, see Government of India (1980, Vol. I, Part I, p. 56).

  4. 4.

    See Ansari (2006, Appendix, pp. 404–413) and Rudolph and Rudolph (1987), 196, Table 16, both for constituency estimates.

  5. 5.

    Planning Commission, Government of India (2010).

  6. 6.

    The account of the Congress in this section draws on several standard works including Kothari (1970), Weiner (1967), Kochanek (1968), Sisson and Roy (1990), Manor (1988).

  7. 7.

    Brass (1997).

  8. 8.

    A measure of the fragmentation of the opposition space represented by the percentage share of the largest non-Congress (in today’s terms, non-ruling party) vote in the total opposition vote. The higher the IOU the less fragmented the opposition space.

  9. 9.

    Regional party is something of a misnomer as it implies a party strong in two or more states in a region. All the regional parties, however, are single state-based parties except the Janata Dal (United), strong in Bihar and Karnataka, and the CPI(M), strong in West Bengal, Tripura and Kerala, if one considers them regional parties. These sets of states do not constitute recognizable regions. The JD(U) and the CPI(M) are really national parties with a limited geographical spread, the former being a rump of the once much larger Janata Dal.

  10. 10.

    Yadav (1996).

  11. 11.

    For the BJP’s use of coalitions as a strategy to expand its base across states, see Sridharan (2005).

  12. 12.

    For details of the alliances, pre- and post-election in 1998, see Arora (2000).

  13. 13.

    For details of the argument and figures, see Sridharan (2004).

  14. 14.

    For detailed accounts of coalition dynamics see Sridharan (2002, 2004), Ruparelia (2015), Diwakar (2017). This section draws heavily upon, with modifications, Sridharan (2010).

  15. 15.

    For a detailed overview of state-level coalition politics in India, see Sridharan (1999, , 2002, , 2003). For a detailed state-wise analysis of the BJP’s coalition strategies since 1989, Sridharan (2005). For a detailed analysis of the Congress’ coalition strategies and their criticality in the 2004 elections, see Sridharan (2004).

References

  • Ansari, I. A. (2006). Political representation of Muslims in India, 1952-2004. New Delhi: Manak.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arora, B. (2000). Negotiating differences: Federal coalitions and national cohesion. In F. Frankel, Z. Hasan, R. Bhargava, & B. Arora (Eds.), Transforming India. Delhi: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brass, P. (1997). The politicisation of the peasantry in a North Indian State. In S. Kaviraj (Ed.), Politics in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diwakar, R. (2017). Party system in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golder, S. N. (2006). Pre-electoral coalition formation in parliamentary democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 36(2), 193–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Govt. of India. (2011). Census of India. Accessed July 5, 2011 from http://censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/India_at_glance/religion.aspx, http://censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/India_at_glance/scst.aspx, http://censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/Census_Data_Online/Language/Statement5.htm

  • Government of India. (1980). Report of the Backward Classes Commission (Mandal Commission Report)

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of India. (2010). Planning commission, Report of the expert group on methodology for estimation of poverty, planning commission

    Google Scholar 

  • Kochanek, S. (1968). The congress party of India. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kothari, R. (1970). Politics in India. New Delhi: Orient Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manor, J. (1988). Parties and the party system. In A. Kohli (Ed.), India’s democracy. Princeton University Press: Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudolph, L., & Rudolph, S. (1987). In pursuit of Lakshmi: The political economy of the Indian state. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruparelia, S. (2015). Divided we govern: Coalition politics in Modern India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sisson, R., & Roy, R. (1990). Diversity and dominance in Indian politics: Changing bases of congress support (Vol. 1). New Delhi: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sridharan, E. (2010). The party system. In N. J. Gopal & P. Mehta (Eds.), The Oxford companion to politics in India (pp. 119–129). New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sridharan, E. (2005). Coalition strategies and the BJP’s expansion, 1989-2004. Commonwealth and Comparative Politics, 43(2), 194–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sridharan, E. (2004). Electoral coalitions in the 2004 general elections: Theory and evidence. Economic and Political Weekly, 39(51), 5418–5425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sridharan, E. (2003). Coalitions and party strategies in India’s Parliamentary Federation. Publius, 33(4), 135–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sridharan, E. (2002). The fragmentation of the Indian Party System, 1952-1999: Seven competing explanations. In Z. Hasan (Ed.), Parties and party politics in India (pp. 475–503). New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sridharan, E. (1999). Principles, power and coalition politics in India: Lessons from theory, comparison and recent history. In D. Khanna & G. Kueck (Eds.), Principles, power and politics (pp. 270–290). Macmillan: New Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, M. (1967). Party building in a new nation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yadav, Y. (1996). Reconfiguration in Indian politics: State Assembly Elections 1993-1995. Economic and Political Weekly, 31(2-3), 95–104.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eswaran Sridharan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sridharan, E. (2018). Coalition Congruence in India’s Federal System. In: Albala, A., Reniu, J. (eds) Coalition Politics and Federalism. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75100-9_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics