The Political Construction of Caste in South India
description
Transcript of The Political Construction of Caste in South India
![Page 1: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
![Page 2: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
The Political Construction of Caste in South India
Vijayendra RaoDevelopment Research Group, The World Bank
And
Radu BanLondon School of Economics
and Development Research Group, The World Bank
![Page 3: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
The Trope
• Abbé Dubois 1806• James Mill 1820• HH Risley 1915• Max Weber• Karl Marx• “Homo Heirarchicus” – Louis Dumont
(1966) tr. 1980
![Page 4: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Trope in Economics
• Most papers that look at caste discrimination, e.g.:
• Akerlof (1976)• Frietas (2006)• Rao and Walton (2004)• Hoff and Pandey (2004)• Etc. etc. ……
![Page 5: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Trope in Policy
• Deepak Lal – Hindu Equilibrium• Mancur Olson – Rise and Decline of
Nations• Harrison and Huntington – Culture Matters
![Page 6: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
CRITICS
Rudolph and Rudolph (1969)Veena Das (1981)Susan Bayly (1999)Nicholas Dirks (2002)
![Page 7: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Natural Experiment
• Bayly, Dirks – Political/Administrative History
• Land Reform History (Dharma Kumar, 1962)
• Jati – Language/Kinship• Geography
![Page 8: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Natural Experiment
• Reorganization of Indian States – 1956Old States: - Hyderabad – Mughal Governor (18th
Century), with much longer prior history (12th century
- Madras Presidency – 18th century, but again much longer prior history
![Page 9: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
![Page 10: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Natural Experiment
• New States• Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu,
Kerala• “Mistakes” along the Border• Language Matching – Block• Language Matching- Village
![Page 11: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Natural Experiment
• Control for Administrative History• Control for Language Kinship Structures
![Page 12: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Data Collection (Nov. 2002)
• Village Level – Focus Group Discussion/PRA
• Test: Population is almost perfectly correlated (0.83) correlated with census population despite imperfections in overlap.
• Household Level – 20 households per village
![Page 13: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Table 7: Difference in difference in fraction landlesswithin state difference between states difference D in D
1951 0.1717 0.1757 0.0090(0.1438) (0.1337) (0.0304)
55 63
2002 0.1292 0.1975 0.0703(0.1119) (0.1460) (0.0340)**
55 63D in D in D 0.0642
(0.0342)*Note:1)Cell size indicated at bottom of each cell2) The D in D estimations include border f ixed effects, standard errors clustered by 2nd village in pair3) The D in D in D estimation includes village pair f ixed effects, standard errors clustered by village pair4) * 10% signif icance, ** 5% signif icance5) The one sided test, D in D in D < 0 can be rejected at 5% signif icance
![Page 14: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
CASTE OVERLAP
Two measures:1) Overall Overlap: Ratio of population of overlapping caste names in both
villages to total population in both villages2) Top 5 Overlap: Ratio of population in overlapping caste names in five
most populous castes in both villages
![Page 15: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Table 8. Ethnic diversity measures : difference in difference based on best matched villageswithin state between states
a. Absolute differences in village level variablesNr castes 3.1818 6.0350 2.8531
(3.0573) (4.4995) (0.7467) ***Fractionalization (ELF) 0.1554 0.2280 0.0726
(0.1564) (0.2325) (0.0334) **Polarization (RQ) 0.1563 0.1906 0.0344
(0.1442) (0.1605) (0.0246)Fraction b/w caste inequality (GE 1) 0.1555 0.2332 0.0777
(0.1681) (0.1633) (0.0349) **Fraction b/w caste inequality (GE 2) 0.1617 0.2371 0.0754
(0.1795) (0.1488) (0.0315) **
b. Caste name matching metricCaste overlap (all castes) 0.6157 0.1945 -0.4212
(0.2991) (0.2204) (0.0439) ***Caste overlap (top 5 castes) 0.5015 0.1598 -0.3417
(0.3269) (0.2303) (0.0459) ***N 143 143 286Note:1) The D in D estimations include border f ixed effects2) D in D standard error clustered by 2nd village in the pair in parenthesis3) * 10% signif icance, ** 5% signif icance, *** 1% signif icance
D in D
![Page 16: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Caste “Broadening”
• Social Movements – “Dalit”, “Harijan”, “Adi-Karnataka”, “Lingayat”
• Affirmative Action – “Schedule Caste”, “OBC”
• Modernization – “Malayalee”, “Tenant”, “Muslim”
![Page 17: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Table 10: Correlates of individual broad caste name(1) (2) (3)
SC/ST 0.074 -0.038 0.073(0.050) (0.026) (0.048)
BC/OBC -0.022 0.162*** -0.018(0.034) (0.048) (0.034)
Fraction upper caste land -0.238*** -0.239*** -0.234***(0.053) (0.051) (0.053)
female 0.013 0.012 0.012(0.010) (0.010) (0.010)
politician -0.034 -0.023 -0.036(0.032) (0.030) (0.032)
Age 0.001* 0.001* 0.001*(0.001) (0.001) (0.001)
Education 0.004* 0.003 0.004**(0.002) (0.002) (0.002)
Respondent landed -0.034* -0.025 -0.039(0.017) (0.016) (0.024)
Household size 0.007** 0.005** 0.007**(0.003) (0.003) (0.003)
AP -0.024 0.232*** -0.118**(0.053) (0.080) (0.054)
KA 0.126** 0.378*** 0.088*(0.049) (0.073) (0.052)
TN 0.043 0.053 0.071(0.038) (0.052) (0.045)
AP * SC/ST -0.118(0.084)
KA * SC/ST 0.010(0.084)
TN * SC/ST 0.441***(0.100)
AP * BC/OBC -0.385***(0.080)
KA * BC/OBC -0.466***(0.073)
TN * BC/OBC -0.151***(0.056)
AP * Respondent landed 0.122***(0.043)
KA * Respondent landed 0.053(0.045)
TN * Respondent landed -0.097*(0.055)
adjR-squared 0.077 0.186 0.085N 2950 2950 2950
![Page 18: The Political Construction of Caste in South India](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062218/56815df9550346895dcc3207/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)