India Empowers Local Communities through Bottom-Up Planning and Governance (1996–Present)

Launched in 1996, Kerala’s People’s Plan Campaign is a participatory development model in India that devolves power and resources from the state to local communities. Backed by the 1994 Kerala Panchayat Raj and Municipality Acts, it created a three-tier governance system where citizens plan local projects through open village assemblies. The model addresses slow economic growth, exclusion, and top-down governance. It has improved access to housing, healthcare, education, and environmental sustainability—especially for women, tribal communities, and people living in poverty, making development more inclusive and locally-driven.

The People’s Plan Campaign was introduced in 1996 to address Kerala’s slow economic growth, inefficient centralized planning, and growing demand for local accountability.¹ Kerala, a subnational state in southern India, had long been praised for its high literacy rates and strong health indicators, yet state-led programs often failed to address real needs. Rural infrastructure, particularly roads, remained inadequate, and marginalized groups frequently lacked access to essential services. Fishing communities along the coast facing threats from natural disasters, tribal (Adivasi) communities often vulnerable to eviction due to development projects, and women living in rural areas, especially those from marginalized groups such as Dalits, tribal populations, and fisherfolk, continued to experience significant exclusion.² The participatory development model was introduced by Kerala’s state government, which passed state-level laws and established institutional mechanisms to devolve power to elected local governments. This approach to policy shifts decision-making from state bureaucracies to local communities, allowing citizens to shape their own development priorities.

The Decision-Making Structure 

Kerala’s participatory development model is built on a three-tier system of local self-governance created under the state’s Panchayati Raj framework. At the village level, there are around 900 Gram Panchayats (village councils), which are responsible for planning and executing development activities at the village level. These are grouped under 152 Block Panchayats (intermediate-level bodies that coordinate and support a cluster of neighboring Gram Panchayats), which are further organized under 14 District Panchayats (the highest local governance body within each district).³ This structure enables decisions made at the grassroots level to be integrated and implemented across wider administrative areas.

The participatory process begins every year in October with open public meetings called Gram Sabhas (village assemblies made up of all adult residents of a ward). These are held in each ward (the smallest administrative unit within a Gram Panchayat, typically covering a neighborhood or a small area of the village).⁴ In these meetings, residents identify their most urgent needs—such as drinking water, road repairs, public toilets, or school improvements—and collectively decide which projects should be prioritized for funding and implementation.

After these priorities are identified, elected Panchayat representatives—including the Panchayat President, Vice-President,⁵ and ward members elected by the local community—work closely with technical staff (such as engineers, health officers, and school officials) as well as trained community volunteers to translate the discussions into actionable local development plans.⁶ These plans are then submitted to the Block and District Panchayats, where they are reviewed, coordinated, and integrated into broader regional planning.

These Gram Sabha meetings are central to Kerala’s participatory planning process and not merely symbolic. For instance, in 2018, over 20,000 ward-level meetings were conducted across the state, with more than 2.5 million people participating directly.⁷ This wide-scale participation ensures that development planning is rooted in community needs and that public funds are used transparently and effectively.

Environmental goals were built into the planning process from the start. Each Panchayat was required to assess local environmental concerns alongside economic needs. 

Kerala’s model pays special attention to groups often excluded from planning processes. Mahila Sabhas (women’s assemblies) and Bal Sabhas (children’s assemblies) were established to ensure that women and children had a platform to voice their needs. 

1. The Mahila Sabhas are held at the ward level conducted before the main Gram Sabha (village assembly). All women residents of the ward were encouraged to attend, ensuring widespread participation. Women could discuss issues like domestic violence, gender-based discrimination, menstrual hygiene, and access to microfinance or self-help groups. The resolutions passed in Mahila Sabhas were taken to the Gram Sabha and incorporated into Panchayat Development Reports. The local government allocated a specific portion of funds to fulfill Mahila Sabha priorities.

The Bal Sabhas provided a space for children under the age of 18 years to actively participate. typically organized in schools, public spaces, or in conjunction with ward-level discussions, with facilitators from local self-governments (may include teachers or social workers). The discussions and suggestions from Bal Sabhas were presented in the Gram Sabha for integration into the broader Panchayat Development Plan.

Implementation

The 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments (1992) by the government of India (national level) provided a legal push for decentralization, allowing Kerala to devolve power and funds to local governments. In response, the state government of Kerala enacted the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and Kerala Municipality Act (1994) laying the legal foundations for the implementation of the People’s Plan Campaign (PPC) in 1996. The campaign was led by the Kerala State Planning Board, with political support from the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government under Chief Minister E.K. Nayanar. This framework was strengthened by significant state-led amendments in 1999 that focused on restructuring Panchayats, enhancing transparency, and instituting accountability measures, such as Ombudsman, auditing mechanisms, and Appellate Tribunals. At the same time, the Kerala State Planning Board coordinated a statewide training initiative, preparing nearly 100,000 volunteer resource persons to support the planning and technical needs of local bodies.⁸

The implementation has evolved across five successive five-year plans, with the model rebranded as the Kerala Development Plan (KDP) during the Tenth Plan (2002–2007). Key developments include:

1. The Ninth Five-Year Plan (1997–2002) saw the initial launch and implementation of the People’s Plan Campaign, establishing the basic framework for participatory planning.
2. During the Tenth Five-Year Plan (2002–2007), the decentralization program was restructured and renamed the Kerala Development Plan (KDP).
3. The Eleventh Five-Year Plan (2007–2012) revamped the entire process by emphasizing the concept of “People’s Planning” and focusing on completing the institutionalization of decentralized government.
4. The Twelfth Five-Year Plan (2012–2017): Recognizing the need to modernize and enhance the efficiency of participatory planning, this plan integrated information technology into the planning process, marking the inauguration of the second phase of the “People’s Plan” campaign. The Kerala State Planning Board, through its Decentralised Planning Division, envisaged concrete steps to strengthen the planning process using information technology. This included the development of core IT infrastructure, e-governance initiatives, and the implementation of digital tools to facilitate plan formulation, monitoring, and evaluation at the local level. The integration aimed to improve transparency, accountability, and citizen engagement in the planning process. 
5. The Thirteenth Five-Year Plan (2017–2022) shifted focus to addressing “second generation social and economic issues” confronting the state, with the second phase of decentralized planning aiming to solve these problems through genuine people’s participation backed by strong administrative and political measures.⁹

Today, the model remains operational through annual participatory planning cycles, managed jointly by Local Self-Government Institutions (LSGIs) and the State Planning Board. Budgetary support for local plans is integrated into the state’s annual plan outlay, institutionalizing participatory governance as a permanent feature of Kerala’s development architecture.

Cost

The precise cost of Kerala’s People’s Plan Campaign is difficult to estimate due to the complexity and scale of the initiative. However, in its first full year of implementation (1997–98), Kerala devolved ₹1,025 crores (USD 118.02 million)¹⁰—about 36 percent of its ₹2,855 crore (USD 328.6 million) state development budget—to Local Self-Government Institutions, making it one of the most ambitious decentralization efforts in India.¹¹ These funds were divided across sectors like health, education, infrastructure, and agriculture, and supplemented by local revenue, community contributions, and loans. While the total long-term costs are hard to quantify, the campaign’s financial impact is reflected in measurable improvements in public health, rural infrastructure, and education outcomes across the state.

Assessment

One of the most impactful outcomes of Kerala’s People’s Plan Campaign has been the successful design and implementation of programs that directly address local needs through participatory planning. Kudumbashree, launched in 1997, became India’s largest women-led poverty alleviation program, enabling over 4.2 million women to engage in microfinance, entrepreneurship, and grassroots governance.¹² For example, in Nelliyampathy Gram Panchayat (Palakkad), over 200 women formed collectives under Kudumbashree to revive cardamom farming. They secured bank loans, leased 50 acres of unused land, and by 2022, generated an annual turnover of ₹1.2 crore (~USD 140,000), reinvesting a portion of their profits in healthcare and education. This initiative significantly boosted female workforce participation in the region, rising from 15.3 percent in 1998 to 31.6 percent in 2021, helping narrow the gender gap in rural Kerala.¹³

Similarly, the EMS Housing Scheme, launched in 2009, leveraged local government funds to build over 120,000 homes for families living in poverty. For instance, in Alappuzha, 1,200 landless families received ownership of 0.5 acre plots. The Panchayat pooled ₹12 crore (USD 1.4 million) from state grants and community labor to construct flood-resilient homes. Following the 2018 floods, 98 percent of these houses remained intact, compared to only 60 percent of houses built outside the scheme.¹⁴

Kerala’s model has also led to environmental improvements. For example, in Plachimada, rainwater harvesting by 1,200 households raised groundwater by 4 meters, while banning chemical farming revived the Chittur River, increasing fish stocks by 300 percent.¹⁵ Thiravuvananthapuram’s “Green Protocol” cut landfill waste by 85 percent, with compost sales funding 12 urban parks. Allapuzha’s zero-landfill model won United Nations recognition for decentralized waste treatment, where households are encouraged to compost or biogas their organic waste and local governments facilitate the processing of recyclables. Additionally, eco-tourism projects in places like Periyar Tiger Reserve involve local tribal and youth groups as stakeholders and guides, providing income while incentivizing conservation.¹⁶

This people-centric approach has also allowed significant improvements in health and education for the local communities in Kerala. In healthcare, Panchayats control hospitals and clinics, and health committees with doctors and citizens help run them. This has led to better results: life expectancy is 77 years (India’s average is ~70), infant deaths are 7 per 1,000 births (India: 28), and maternal deaths are 54 per 100,000 births (India: 178).¹⁷ During COVID-19 (2020) and Nipah Virus Outbreak (2018), local governments, health workers, and neighborhood groups coordinated quarantine, contact tracing, and community kitchens.

In education, volunteers led the Total Literacy Campaign, a mass volunteer-driven program that predated the People’s Plan (early 1990s) but set the stage for the participatory education efforts. Tens of thousands of educated youth and women volunteered as literacy instructors in their communities, which led to Kerala achieving near-universal literacy. By the 2001 census Kerala already had about 91 percent literacy, and by 2011 it reached 94.6 percent literacy (97 percent for males and 92 percent for females), the highest in India. ¹⁸ In 2016, Kerala declared 100 percent primary education completion for its school-age population, after local bodies identified out-of-school children and enrolled them in the state-run Athulyam continuing education project. The Akshaya Project, first piloted in Malappuram district, is another example of innovation—it set up community IT centers and trained one person in every household in basic computer skills, with support from Panchayats and local volunteers, making Kerala one of the most digitally literate states.¹⁹ Overall, Kerala’s experience shows that when local communities actively take part in planning and running services, it leads to real improvements in health, education, and quality of life.  

Although Kerala’s People’s Plan Campaign (PPC) is widely celebrated, critics highlight several significant limitations and challenges. One major issue is uneven performance across Panchayats, with well-resourced and politically influential communities often benefiting more, while lower-income Panchayats struggle with limited administrative capacity and local elite dominance.²⁰ For example, Panchayats in affluent areas like Ernakulam have consistently delivered higher-quality infrastructure projects compared to under-resourced areas like Wayanad or Attappadi, where weaker local governance capacity and ongoing marginalization persist. Critics also point to persistent bureaucratic delays and bottlenecks in fund distribution, which undermine timely project implementation and erode citizen confidence.²¹ Additionally, the model’s heavy dependence on state plan funds (35–40 percent of the budget) limits financial sustainability, leaving local governments with inadequate own-source revenue generation. Economically, the PPC has been criticized for insufficiently addressing Kerala’s structural employment challenges, as evidenced by continuing high unemployment rates, particularly among educated youth and women, forcing many to seek jobs outside the state.²² Finally, despite the participatory rhetoric, there have been documented instances of superficial citizen participation, where Gram Sabha meetings are poorly attended or dominated by local elites, raising concerns about true inclusivity and equity within the model.²³

Additional Information

In Kasargod district, for instance, Panchayats installed solar microgrids to reduce diesel use in remote tribal areas. In Kochi, local councils partnered with youth groups and NGOs to plant over 100,000 mangrove saplings alongside coastal zones, protecting the shoreline from erosion.²⁴ Funds for these projects came from the 35-40 percent of Kerala’s state plan budget earmarked for local governments. In many cases, communities contributed around 25 percent through local finances as well. In Alappuzha, residents provided building materials and labor to construct flood-resistant homes, reducing overall cost and creating a sense of shared ownership.²⁵

In Wayanad, Mahibala Sabhas led to the opening of new childcare centers in tribal hamlets. In Thrissur, Bal sabhas pushed local leaders to upgrade school toilets and drinking water facilities. The state also introduced special plans for coastal communities and tribal areas. In Attappadi, 10 percent of the Panchayats budget was reserved for housing nutrition, and health services for tribal families, resulting in a 40 percent drop in infant deaths over five years.²⁶

Capacity-Building and Training Programme:

The training initiative was structured in multiple phases:

1. Initial Orientation (1996–1997): Resource persons received foundational knowledge on decentralization, participatory methodologies, and grassroots democracy.
2. Specialized Skill Development (1997–1999): Advanced training was provided in specific sectors like agriculture, healthcare, infrastructure, women’s empowerment, and environmental management.
3. Ongoing Support and Refresher Training (2000 and onwards): Regular follow-up workshops ensured skills remained updated, adapting training materials based on feedback and field experiences.

Who took part?

1. Volunteer Resource Persons (Nearly 100,000 trained).
2. Panchayat members at all three levels.
3. Officials from the health, education, agriculture, and public works departments were trained to present data and proposals to the Gram Sabhas.
4. NGOs involved in rural development and welfare programs participated to bring their domain expertise into planning processes.

Photo of people gathered around a circle drawn on the ground © Sajanpedia.

Tags

• Children & Youth
• Climate & Environment
• Education
• Gender
• Health
• India
• Middle-Income Country
• Political & Civic Participation
• Spatial Inequality