Skip to main content

Gujarat govt performance on development "below average": ADR voter survey

Counterview Desk
Conducted as part of its all-India survey, the high profile NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) has found that, in Gujarat, Better Employment Opportunities (42.68%), Drinking Water (37.12%), and Better Hospitals/Primary Healthcare Centres (30.23%) are the top three voters’ priorities. The survey also found that caste and religious considerations are key factors for 36% of voters in choosing candidates with criminal records.
About 61% of the voters surveyed were from rural areas, while 39% were from urban areas, an ADR report says, adding, 66% were males and 34% were females, 73% were from General category, 16% ST, 6% SC, and 5% OBC. The survey covered approximately 13,000 respondents across all 26 parliamentary constituencies of Gujarat.

Excerpts from the report:

The three main objectives of this survey were to identify the following: (i) voters’ priorities on specific governance issues, (ii) voters’ ratings of the government's performance on those issues, and (iii) factors influencing voting behaviour. This survey was conducted between October 2018 and December 2018, prior to the General Elections to the Lok Sabha 2019.
Focusing on Gujarat, this report provides an analysis of 10 most important governance issues as rated by the voters of Gujarat. These voters’ priorities are further examined in relation to the performance of the Government on those issues as perceived by the respondents.
The key objective of this perception assessment is to provide an improved understanding of the important expectations of voters from the Government and how they assess its performance. In addition, it seeks to fill a vital gap in contemporary times, namely, evidence-based research and action on governance.
For far too long we have depended entirely on ideology or the opinions of various experts. Though that is important, we also need to reflect on the priorities of the voters. These priorities and assessments will change over time, and hence there is a need to repeat this survey periodically.
Key findings
Better Employment Opportunities (42.68%), Drinking Water (37.12%), and Better Hospitals/Primary Healthcare Centres (30.23%) are the top three voters’ priorities in overall Gujarat. The performance of the government on all top three voters’ priorities of Better Employment Opportunities (2.33 on a scale of 5), Drinking Water (2.60), and Better Hospitals/Primary Healthcare Centres (2.62) was rated as Below Average.
In rural Gujarat, top most voters’ priorities were Availability of Water for Agriculture (46%), Agricultural Loan Availability (45%), and Agricultural Subsidy for Seeds/Fertilisers (44%). The performance of the government on rural voters’ priorities of Availability of Water for Agriculture (2.43 on a scale of 5), Agricultural Loan Availability (2.37), and Agricultural Subsidy for Seeds/Fertilisers (2.15) was rated as Below Average.
In addition, the government has performed poorly on Better Employment Opportunities (2.35) and Higher Price Realization for Farm Products (2.39) in rural Gujarat.
For the urban voters in Gujarat, the top most priorities were Traffic Congestion (49%), Noise Pollution (47%), and Better Employment Opportunities (45%). The performance of the government on urban voters’ priorities of Traffic Congestion (2.23 on a scale of 5), Noise Pollution (2.20), and Better Employment Opportunities (2.31) was rated as Below Average.
In addition, the government has performed poorly in Better Hospitals/Primary Health Centres (2.27) and Drinking Water (2.31) in urban Gujarat.
Voting behaviour
The survey tried to analyse the following aspects with respect to voting behaviour – (i) factors influencing voting behaviour, (ii) opinion regarding criminal candidates contesting in elections, and (iii) voter awareness regarding the role of crime and money.
To identify the factors that influence voting behaviour following queries were posed – “What are the reasons you vote for a candidate?” and “In an election, whose opinion mattered the most while deciding which candidate to vote for?”.
In order to comprehend voters’ opinion regarding criminal candidates contesting in elections, the two questions that were posed were – “Should someone with a criminal case be in Parliament or State Assembly?” and “Why do people vote for those with criminal records?”.
To assess voter awareness regarding the role of crime and money, the following questions were asked – “Do you know that distribution of cash/money/gifts etc. are illegal?”, “Are you aware of instances of distribution of cash/money/gifts/liquor in your constituency during the last election?”, and “Do you know that you can get information on criminal records of the candidates?”.
Highest percentage of voters said PM candidate was the most significant reason (Important: 42% and Very Important: 39%) in voting for a particular candidate in an election. This was followed by the Candidate’s Party (Important: 53% and Very Important: 25%) and the Candidate himself/herself (Important: 54% and Very Important: 14%).
For 20% voters, distribution of cash, liquor, gifts etc. was an important (14%) and very important (6%) factor in voting a particular candidate in an election.
While deciding which candidate to vote for in an election, 83% of Gujarat voters stated that their own opinion mattered the most, followed by voters for whom opinion of their Family Members (7%) and Spouse (5%) mattered the most.
A large number of voters (64%) knew that distribution of cash, gifts etc. are illegal. About 35% voters said that they were aware of instances where such inducements were offered to the voters in return for their votes. 98% voters felt that candidates with criminal background should not be in Parliament or State Assembly.Only 42% voters knew that they could get information on criminal records of the candidates.
In relation to voting candidates with criminal antecedents, 38% voters felt that people vote for such candidates because candidate otherwise does good work. 37% voters said people vote for such criminal candidates because he/she had spent generously in elections.
Caste and religious considerations are also key factors for 36% of voters in choosing candidates with criminal records. Other important factors in voting for criminal candidates were that voters’ felt cases against such candidates are not of serious nature (36%), voters’ were unaware about the criminal records of the candidate (36%) and because candidate is powerful (34%).
Conclusion
The Gujarat Survey Report 2018 points to the fact that voters’ priorities in Gujarat have been neglected by the government in power. This is quite clear from the fact that the government has performed poorly and underwhelmingly on almost all top 10 governance issues as rated by the voters of Gujarat.
The analysis of the trend of voters’ priorities and the government’s performance in Gujarat poses a few critical questions to the government and the legislators:
  • Are decisions related to public policies in different spheres like infrastructure, social and economic development etc. made in favour of certain sections of the society at the expense of overall social welfare?
  • Is there a need for the Government to reallocate/plan budget expenditure as per the voters’ priorities?
  • How can political parties be made more accountable in delivering on the promises made i the manifesto?
  • What policy changes need to be made to provide employment, better health care and drinking water to the deprived sections of the society?
The fact that the electorate has no role once the politician has been elected, allows the priority of the elected candidates to be determined by the political parties. It is then hoped that the electorate takes care to elect a better politician to represent them.
Political representation is about making constituents’ preferences present in politics and governance. Behind these ratings is the daily reality that people living in our country face. The ratings try to capture this and help inform our Government what that number means and how the Government is perceived by the voters of this country.

Comments

TRENDING

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

CFA flags ‘welfare retreat’ in Union Budget 2026–27, alleges corporate bias

By Jag Jivan  The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has sharply criticised the Union Budget 2026–27 , calling it a “budget sans kartavya” that weakens public welfare while favouring private corporations, even as inequality, climate risks and social distress deepen across the country.

From water scarcity to sustainable livelihoods: The turnaround of Salaiya Maaf

By Bharat Dogra   We were sitting at a central place in Salaiya Maaf village, located in Mahoba district of Uttar Pradesh, for a group discussion when an elderly woman said in an emotional voice, “It is so good that you people came. Land on which nothing grew can now produce good crops.”

'Big blow to crores of farmers’: Opposition mounts against US–India trade deal

By A Representative   Farmers’ organisations and political groups have sharply criticised the emerging contours of the US–India trade agreement, warning that it could severely undermine Indian agriculture, depress farm incomes and open the doors to genetically modified (GM) food imports in violation of domestic regulatory safeguards.

When free trade meets unequal fields: The India–US agriculture question

By Vikas Meshram   The proposed trade agreement between India and the United States has triggered intense debate across the country. This agreement is not merely an attempt to expand bilateral trade; it is directly linked to Indian agriculture, the rural economy, democratic processes, and global geopolitics. Free trade agreements (FTAs) may appear attractive on the surface, but the political economy and social consequences behind them are often unequal and controversial. Once again, a fundamental question has surfaced: who will benefit from this agreement, and who will pay its price?

Why Russian oil has emerged as the flashpoint in India–US trade talks

By N.S. Venkataraman*  In recent years, India has entered into trade agreements with several countries, the latest being agreements with the European Union and the United States. While the India–EU trade agreement has been widely viewed in India as mutually beneficial and balanced, the trade agreement with the United States has generated comparatively greater debate and scrutiny.

Trade pacts with EU, US raise alarms over farmers, MSMEs and policy space

By A Representative   A broad coalition of farmers’ organisations, trade unions, traders, public health advocates and environmental groups has raised serious concerns over India’s recently concluded trade agreements with the European Union and the United States, warning that the deals could have far-reaching implications for livelihoods, policy autonomy and the country’s long-term development trajectory. In a public statement issued, the Forum for Trade Justice described the two agreements as marking a “tectonic shift” in India’s trade policy and cautioned that the projected gains in exports may come at a significant social and economic cost.

From Puri to the State: How Odisha turned the dream of drinkable tap water into policy

By Hans Harelimana Hirwa, Mansee Bal Bhargava   Drinking water directly from the tap is generally associated with developed countries where it is considered safe and potable. Only about 50 countries around the world offer drinkable tap water, with the majority located in Europe and North America, and a few in Asia and Oceania. Iceland, Switzerland, Finland, Germany, and Singapore have the highest-quality tap water, followed by Canada, New Zealand, Japan, the USA, Australia, the UK, Costa Rica, and Chile.

Michael Parenti: Scholar known for critiques of capitalism and U.S. foreign policy

By Harsh Thakor*  Michael Parenti, an American political scientist, historian, and author known for his Marxist and anti-imperialist perspectives, died on January 24 at the age of 92. Over several decades, Parenti wrote and lectured extensively on issues of capitalism, imperialism, democracy, media, and U.S. foreign policy. His work consistently challenged dominant political and economic narratives, particularly those associated with Western liberal democracies and global capitalism.