Chapter - 4. The inaccessible, unconsulting and unjust king sinks law in the status and estimation, and perishes by himself.

Transcription

1 Chapter - 4 எண பதத த ன ஓர ற சய ய மன னவன தண பதத த ன த ன க ம The inaccessible, unconsulting and unjust king sinks law in the status and estimation, and perishes by himself. Thirukkural Therefore, he who is appointed by an order to a particular department shall communicate to him (i.e. the king) the real nature of that work and the income and expenditure (both) in detail and in the aggregate. Arthashastra

2 Chapter 4: Methodology, Survey, Validity, Reliability This Chapter is presented in four sections. Section I deals with Sampling method, Section II with the Survey methodology and limitations. Section III discusses the demographic profile of the respondents; and Section IV deals with validity and reliability aspects of the survey. Section I Sampling method Coverage The Study has been carried out in the City of Chennai for the area under the Chennai Corporation. Since the study focus was on accountability related matters, the basic sample criterion is citizenship. Hence any citizen of Chennai City could be covered by the study. Accordingly the samples were selected based on certain criteria specific to the study. Criteria The criteria for the sample selection were: The study has to cover all the areas coming under Chennai Corporation All categories of citizens need to be covered Only persons who will not be able to understand the issues would be excluded from the interview At least one male and one female will be interviewed in every ward As far as possible by making the sample criteria simple, various representative citizenry to be covered. 94

3 Stratified Random Sampling Based on the above proposition, the sampling plan was made developed on Stratified Random Sampling approach. The stratification primarily was geographical, secondary was gender and at the third level - literacy. However, stress was more on the first two criteria. Sample size The base for the sampling plan was 2001 Census. According to this Census, Chennai city had a population of 43,43,645 and considering an annual growth of 2% (based on overall decadal ( ) growth rate of 21.5% as per 2001 Census) population of the city over the previous year the 2009 population was estimated at 50,89,272. With tolerance of 5% and confidence level of 99%, the sample size for the study was arrived at 663. This sample of 663 was broken up first into the 10 zones and then to each of the wards based on the ratio of the Male and Female literate and illiterate population. The base for this ward wise ratio was the 2001 Census. Planned sample Accordingly the sample size was arrived at as shown in Table 4-1. Table 4-1: Ward/Zone Wise Sample WARD WARD NAME ZONE Sample size M L F L MI FI 1 Kodungaiyur (West) Kodungaiyur (East) Dr.Radhakrishnan Nagar 3 (North) Cherian Nagar (North) I Jeeva Nagar (North) Cherian Nagar (South) Jeeva Nagar (South) Korukupet

4 WARD WARD NAME ZONE Sample M F MI FI size L L 9 Mottai Thottam Kumaraswamy Nagar (South) Dr.Radhakrishnan Nagar (South) Kumaraswamy Nagar (North) Dr. Vijayaraghavalu 13 Nagar Tondiarpet Sanjeevarayanpet Grace Garden Ma Po Si Nagar Royapuram Singara Garden Narayanappa Garden Old Washermenpet Meenakshiammanpet II 23 Kondithope Seven Wells (North) Amman Koil Muthialpet Vallal Seethakadhi Nagar Katchaleeswarar Nagar Seven Wells (South) Sowcarpet Basin Bridge Vysarpadi (South) Vysarpadi (North) Perambur (North) Perambur (East) Elango Nagar Perambur (South) Thiru-Vi-Ka Nagar Wadia Nagar Dr.Sathiyavanimuthu III 40 Nagar Pulianthope Dr.Besant Nagar Peddunaickenpet Perumal Koil Garden Thattankulam Choolai Park Town Elephant Gate

5 WARD WARD NAME ZONE Sample M F MI FI size L L 49 Edapalayam Agaram (North) Chembium Siruvallur Nagamaniammaiyar Nagar (North) Agaram (South) Viduthalai Gurusamy 55 Nagar (South) Ayanavaram Naganmaniammayar Nagar (So uth) IV Panneerselvam Nagar Maraimalai Adigal Nagar (North) Maraimalai Adigal Nagar (South) Purasawalkam Kolathur Villivakkam (North) Villivakkam (South) Virugambakkam (North) Anna Nagar (West) Anna Nagar (Central) Anna Nagar (East) Shenoy Nagar Kilpauk (North) Gangadeeswarar Koil V Kilpauk (South) Aminjikarai (East) Aminjikarai (Central) Aminjikarai (West) Periyar Nagar (North) Periyar Nagar (South) Nungambakkam Adikesavapuram Nehru Nagar Chintadripet Komaleeswaranpet Balasubramaniam Nagar VI Thiruvotteeswaranpet Dr.Natesan Nagar Chepauk Zam Bazaar Umarupulavar Nagar

6 WARD WARD NAME ZONE Sample M F MI FI size L L 89 Thiruvallikeni Marina Krishnampet Bharathi Nagar Azad Nagar (North) Bharathidasan Nagar Azad Nagar (South) Vivekanandapuram Anjukam Ammaiyar Nagar Kosapet Pattalam Anbhazhagan Nagar Perumalpet Kannappar Nagar Dr.Ambedkar Nagar Chetpet VII 105 Egmore Pudupet Ko-Si-Mani Nagar Nakkeerar Nagar Thousand Lights Azhagiri Nagar Amir Mahal Royapettah Teynampet Sathiyamoorthi Nagar Alwarpet (North) Alwarpet (South) Vadapalani (West) Vadapalani (East) Kalaivanar Nagar Navalar Nedunchezian Nagar (East) Navalar Nedunchezian VIII 121 Nagar (West) Ashok Nagar M.G.R.Nagar Kamaraj Nagar (North) Kamaraj Nagar (South) Thiyagaraya Nagar Rajaji Nagar Virugambakkam (South) Saligramam Kodambakkam (North) IX

7 WARD WARD NAME ZONE Sample M F MI FI size L L 131 Kodambakkam (South) Saidapet (West) Kumaran Nagar (North) Kumaran Nagar (South) Saidapet (East) Kalaignar Karunanidhi Nagar V.O.C.Nagar G.D. Naidu Nagar (East) G.D. Naidu Nagar (South) Guindy (West) Guindy (East) Bhemmannapet Thiruvalluvar Nagar Madhavaperumal Puram Karaneeswarapuram Santhome Mylapore Avvai Nagar (North) X 149 Raja A nnamalaipuram Avvai Nagar (South) Adyar (West) Adyar (East) Velacherry Thriuvanmiyur (West) Thiruvanmiyur (East) Total In reality 720 persons were surveyed and 663 validated samples have been taken up for the study. 99

8 Survey Samples Table 4-2: Survey Pl an and Actual Stati stical Analysis ACTUAL (Observed) PLAN (Expected) CHI- Z ONE No of SQUARE- WARDS OML OFL OMI OFI EML E FL EMI EFI p- VALUE I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X Total O Observed Total Samples surveyed 663 Total Samples planned 663 E Expected M Male F Female L Literate I Illiterate Based on the survey plan given in Table 4-1, the survey was conducted in all the ten zones (155 wards) of Chennai. There were several practical issues while conducting the survey, one major issue being the unwillingness of the citizens to respond to the questionnaire. Efforts were taken to put the major points in Tamil and explain to them, as in many cases the reluctance was from illiterate women. An attempt was made to stick to the targeted numbers in each of the wards. The tabulation of the final set of respondents (in terms of numbers) is given in Table 4-2. Though there were slight deviations in the actual numbers surveyed, it was observed that the actual survey population was statistically representing the planned one. The p-value of Chi square test results, for every zone is above 0.05 indicating the acceptance of the samples of each of the zones at 95% level of confidence. 100

9 Section II: Survey Methodology As mentioned earlier, the sampling was done through stratified random sampling method and sample size of 663 was arrived at. The sample size for each ward was based on the break-up made for males and females literates and illiterates. Survey Map Fig.4-1 shows the map of the Zones/Wards covered by the Chennai Corporation. The survey was held within this area. Survey Instrume nt The Survey instrument (questionnaire) that was used for the survey is given in Annex-1 at the end of this thesis. Survey process About 150 respondents covering all the 10 zones were covered by the researcher. The balance respondents were covered by ten students of Vivekananda College. Based on the experience of the researcher, structured training was given to the students during June-July Operating procedures were established for ensuring good quality data, as every day the survey forms were scrutinized and in case of any discrepancies they were corrected in the next few days by contacting the respondents. However there were less than 25 such cases. Pilot test survey A pilot test survey was done with a preliminary questionnaire. A sample of 70 respondents was used. This was not a stratified random sample; this was a convenient sample. However, care was taken to see that the survey covered the male/female and 101

10 literate/illiterate combinations. Some of the major findings (with regard to survey methodology) were: The respondents would not give more than 15 to 20 minutes for the survey. The survey instrument was accordingly modified; The respondents preferred to choose from alternatives rather than answering open ended questions. Based on the responses from the pilot survey, the instruments were revised to contain more of structured options, rather than open ended questions; With regard to certain concepts like accountability, transparency, service delivery, etc. proper examples needed to be given. The surveyors were trained and were given a sheet containing major points in Tamil to give explanation to the respondents; Arrangement/sequencing of the questions had to be changed as the respondents would prefer certain warm up questions and then take up serious questions. Accordingly the instrument was modified. 102

11 Figure 4-1: The Zone/Ward Map Chennai Corporation 103

12 Section III: Demographic profile of the respondents The objectives of the study are oriented towards certain decision characteristics of the citizens of Chennai with regard to accountability related matters and some very select demographic profile of the respondents have been included due to the relevance of the same to the study. The summary of demographic profile of the respondents is given in Tables 4-10 and 4-11 at the end of this chapter. Summary Gender based: The Chennai Corporation area is divided into 10 zones (I to X) with 155 wards under them (Table 4-1). Table 4-3 shows the gender break-up of the respondents, zone wise. Table 4-3: Gender Profile of Surveyed Population Zone No Male Female Total Count Row N % Count Row N % Count Row N % I % % % II % % % III % % % IV % % % V % % % VI % % % VII % % % VIII % % % IX % % % X % % % Total % % % The overall gender profile of the surveyed population is at 53.7 per cent Male and 46.3 per cent Female. The sample selection across the zones is very similar and ranges between 50 per cent and 58 per cent for males and between 42 per cent and 50 per cent for females. There are five aspects of the profile: gender, age, income, occupation and qualification. These are examined here. #1: Gender: Out of the total respondents of 663 for the study, 356 were males and 307 females. These constituted respectively 53.7 per cent and 46.3 per cent of the population 104

13 respectively. This is very near the 2001 census break up of 51.1 per cent and 48.9 per cent respectively. The p value for the above is in a Chi-square test conducted to find out the male:female ratio, was similar to that of the census 2001 ratio, and the hypothesis was accepted. Hence, the sample taken for the survey is considered statistically representing the population proportion. Table 4-4: Gender Profile of Respondents Classification Count N Break-up N % Male % Female % Total % Source: Survey #2: Age: The respondents have been chosen from the age group 19 and above. The basis was that the respondents should be adults capable of casting their vote in the elections. Based on the age the respondents were divided into five groups. The representation of these five groups was: 19 to 24 years (17.5 per cent), 25 to 35 years (33.6 per cent), 36 to 45 years (26.8 per cent), 46 to 55 years (17.0 per cent) and above 55 years (5.0 per cent). Since no particular analysis was based on the age profile of the respondents (by design) no particular categorization has been made. Table 4-5 : Age Profile of Respondents Classification Count N Break-up N % 19 to 25 years % 26 to 35 years % 36 to 45 years % 46 to 55 years % About 55 years % Total % 105

14 # 3: Income: 31 per cent of the respondents did not have any income. This includes persons who are unemployed, retired persons without any pension, students, housewives, etc. Only 8.3 per cent of the respondents earned less than Rs.5,000 per month. The persons who earned between Rs.5,000 and Rs.10,000 per month, and Rs.10,000 to Rs.15,000 per month represented 17.6 per cent and 19.9 per cent respectively of the respondents. Rs.15,000 to Rs.25,000 income earners were at 13.6 per cent and those who earned above Rs.25,000 per month represented 9.2 per cent of the respondents. Table 4-6: Income Profile of Respondents Classification Count N Break-up % No Income % Less than Rs.5, % Rs.5,000 to 10, % Rs.10,000 to 15, % Rs.15,000 to 25, % Above Rs.25, % Total % #4: Occupation: The employment profile of the sample shows that 7.7 per cent were from the public and government sectors, 46.3 per cent from the private sector, 14.5 per cent were self- employed, while the balance 31.5 per cent are represented by the unemployed. The unemployed percentage correlates well with the non-earning category (discussed under the income). However a detailed analysis of the data showed that the actual percentage of the jobless is only 0.5 per cent of the respondents. The others under the unemployed category were: students, retirees, housewives, etc. 106

15 Table 4-7: Occupation profile of Respondents Classification Count N Break-up % Public Sector % Private Sector % Self Employed % Unemployed % Total % #5: Qualification: Education profile of the respondents shows that 17.5 per cent of the persons were uneducated. This category included a few persons who had not been to school at all; those who could not continue even their primary education per cent had been to school and have completed their primary or secondary education and could not continue further per cent represented graduates, while 18.7 per cent was represented by post-graduates and above and included those who were professionally qualified like doctors and those with doctoral degrees. Table 4-8 : Education profile of Respondents Classification Count N Break-up % Uneducated % School % Graduate % PG & Above % Total % Limitations The limitations in the survey could arise due to the following factors: Lack of understanding of the concept of governance and accountability by the respondents; 107

16 The background of the respondents varied from illiterate to PhD holders and persons without any regular income to those who earn over Rs.25,000 a month. This wide variation could have resulted in differences in interpretation; In general, there is very little awareness about various initiatives of the corporation and what it does, across the citizens; and hence conveying the objectives of the survey itself was found difficult Though many cooperated, it was very difficult to find persons who were willing to share their ideas and spare adequate time to respond to the survey questionnaire. Section IV: Validity and Reliability In order to validate the findings of this research, as a part of structured methodology discussed in this chapter, validity of the research instrument and its reliability were also tested. VALIDITY: A test or scale is said to be valid if it measures what it purports to measure. Validity can also be thought of as utility. A test does not possess all-purpose validity. A test which is highly valid for one purpose or type of subject, may not be valid in yet another situation. Since invalid test cannot serve any useful purpose, a researcher must present some evidence, which provides confidence that a test measures precise characteristics for which it was designed. RELIABILITY: A test or scale is said to be reliable if it consistently yields the same results when repeated measurements of a property are taken (of the same entities under same conditions) i.e. the reliable tests are stable in whatever they measure and yield comparable scores upon repeated administrations. Methodology: The validity and reliability of the survey and the survey instrument was tested by conducting retest procedures. A sample of 50 respondents selected at five (5) of the ten (10) zones was made on a random basis. Out of these respondents 25 were reinterviewed by the same (original) interviewer and 25 by a different interviewer. Also in order to address the content validity, the services of experts were sought to rate the questionnaire in a scale of 1 to

17 Validity and reliability tests In order to establish scientifically the reliability and validity of the research instrument and the strength of the survey results, an evaluation was conducted to the extent possible. The following validity and reliability tests were made: Validity o Translation validity Face Content Construct o Criterion related validity Concurrent Convergent Reliability o Inter-rater o Test-retest The details of the tests, the results and the interpretations thereon are given in Table

18 Table: 4-9: Summary of validity and Reliability Tests Parameter Definition Test Variables Test result Inference Remarks 1. VALIDITY 1.1 Translation Validity Face Validity Whether on the face it seems like good translation of the construct Content Validity The operationalization against the content domain is examined Construct Validity The extent to which the test may be able to measure a theoretical construct or trait. 1.2 Criterion-related Validity Predictive Validity Ability to predict something it should theoretically be able to predict There is no particular test in this regard. This has been done based on the feedback of a panel of SIX experts This is measured along with reliability, discussed in point 2 below. There are three constructs in this research: 1. ATA components are related to each other (3 components). 2. EVLN components validation (4 components). 3. Preparedness of the citizens (2 factors). The variables were divided into five groups: A-T-A elements, Voice/Exit, Preparedness of citizens, Performance of the Corporation and general feedback of the citizens. The three components are highly correlated. The 4 components records all the possible options of citizens. The citizens knowledge and willingness to participate fairly bring out the real situation. Table-4.12 gives the result of the Tabulation. Hence it is inferred that there is the presence of the face validity of the instrument and the survey, as they are able to address all the aspects of the constructs taken up for the research. Content validity can be taken to be achieved to the extent of 80.3%, based on the average score given by the experts. High degree of achievement of construct validity established. The scoring for the core aspects of ATA components and Voice- Exit components have been consistently high and uniform. Inter-correlation of important sections, and Cronbach s alpha have all been high. Refer tables in Chapters 5 and 6. Not considered Not considered Not considered Not considered There is no constructs that are of predictable nature, though some 110

19 Parameter Definition Test Variables Test result Inference Remarks relationships can be predictable, based on accountability and performance correlations Concurrent Validity Ability to distinguish between groups that it should theoretically able to distinguish between Convergent Validity Discriminant Validity Degree to which operationalization is similar to (converges on) other operations that it theoretically should be similar to. The degree to which the operationalization is not similar to (diverges from) other opeationalizations that it theoretically should be not similar to. 2. RELIABILITY 2.1 Inter-rater Reliability The degree to which different raters give consistent estimates of the same phenomenon. The negative responses to ATA component have been highly correlated. Correlation between ATA components and performance. The three main Accountability, Transparency, Actionability variables- No responses. The three main Accountability, Transparency, Actionability variables Yes responses. Since the positive responses (yes) are highly correlated to each other (see below) the negatives (no) are also highly correlated. Positives are highly correlated. Refer Table 6.4; Accountability- Transparency; and Transparency Actionability correlated significantly at 0.01 level and Action-ability and Accountability at 0.05 level. Concurrent validity established. Convergent validity established. Refer chapter 6 for detailed discussions. Not considered Not considered Not considered Not considered The test is not trying to specifically discriminate any respondent groups Kappa coefficients for yes/no questions and Kendall s coefficient for rating and ranking questions. Yes/No variables 100; Ranking and Rating variables 72; A. Original raters repeated: Yes/No variables: Success %: 94% Kappa: Extent of matching: V Good Ranking/rating variables: Inter-rater Reliability established 25 cases done by different set of persons. Refer to Annex 2 and Annex

20 Parameter Definition Test Variables Test result Inference Remarks Kendall: Extent of matching: V Good B. New raters replacing the old: Yes/No variables: Success %: 94% Kappa: Extent of matching: V Good Ranking/rating variables: Kendall: Extent of matching: V Good 2.2 Test-retest Reliability Used to assess the consistency of a measure from one time to another. Kappa coefficients for yes/no questions and Kendall s coefficient for rating and ranking questions. Yes/No variables 100; Ranking and Rating variables 72; Yes/No variables: Success %: 93% Kappa: Extent of matching: V Good Ranking/rating variables: Kendall: Extent of matching: V Good Test-retest Reliability established 50 persons were retested. Refer Annex Parallel Form Reliability Used to assess the consistency of the results of two tests constructed in the same way from the same content domain. Not considered Not considered Not considered Not considered Not applicable 112

21 Demographic Variables Table 4-10: Summary of Demographic Variables (Count) Zone No I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X Total Count Count Count Count Count Count Count Count Count Count Count GENDER Male Female Subtotal AGE 19 to 24 years to 35 years to 45 years to 55 years About 55 years Subtotal MONTHLY INCOME No Income Less than Rs.5,000 Rs.5,000 to ,000 Rs.10,000 to ,000 Rs.15,000 to ,000 Above Rs.25, Subtotal OCCUPATION Public Sector Private Sector Self Employed Unemployed Subtotal QUALIFICATION Uneducated School Graduate PG&Above Subtotal

22 Demographic Variables Table 4-11: Summary of Demographic Variables (Percent) Zone No I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X Total % % % % % % % % % % % GENDER Male 54.0% 52.6% 54.3% 51.3% 55.4% 57.7% 50.0% 52.1% 57.1% 52.7% 53.7% Female 46.0% 47.4% 45.7% 48.7% 44.6% 42.3% 50.0% 47.9% 42.9% 47.3% 46.3% Subtotal 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% AGE 19 to 24 years 19.0% 19.3% 30.0% 18.4% 20.5% 17.3% 9.3% 8.5% 14.3% 16.2% 17.5% 25 to 35 years 39.7% 36.8% 20.0% 32.9% 19.3% 30.8% 55.6% 52.1% 20.6% 35.1% 33.6% 36 to 45 years 25.4% 24.6% 27.1% 15.8% 27.7% 30.8% 18.5% 35.2% 25.4% 36.5% 26.8% 46 to 55 years 11.1% 19.3% 18.6% 19.7% 27.7% 17.3% 11.1% 2.8% 30.2% 10.8% 17.0% About 55 years 4.8% 0.0% 4.3% 13.2% 4.8% 3.8% 5.6% 1.4% 9.5% 1.4% 5.0% Subtotal 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% MONTHLY INCOME No Income 25.4% 26.3% 54.3% 36.8% 30.1% 28.8% 24.1% 18.3% 28.6% 36.5% 31.4% Less than 14.3% 8.8% 7.1% 10.5% 7.2% 1.9% 5.6% 9.9% 11.1% 5.4% 8.3% Rs.5,000 Rs.5,000 to 30.2% 28.1% 14.3% 9.2% 16.9% 15.4% 33.3% 14.1% 17.5% 5.4% 17.6% 10,000 Rs.10,000 to 23.8% 22.8% 14.3% 19.7% 12.0% 17.3% 24.1% 31.0% 17.5% 18.9% 19.9% 15,000 Rs.15,000 to 6.3% 8.8% 7.1% 14.5% 20.5% 15.4% 9.3% 11.3% 15.9% 23.0% 13.6% 25,000 Above Rs.25, % 5.3% 2.9% 9.2% 13.3% 21.2% 3.7% 15.5% 9.5% 10.8% 9.2% Subtotal 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% OCCUPATION Public Sector 9.5% 0.0% 4.3% 11.8% 7.2% 15.4% 16.7% 9.9% 4.8% 0.0% 7.7% Private Sector 58.7% 52.6% 27.1% 36.8% 44.6% 46.2% 53.7% 56.3% 42.9% 48.6% 46.3% Self Employed 11.1% 19.3% 17.1% 18.4% 12.0% 9.6% 3.7% 14.1% 22.2% 14.9% 14.5% Unemployed 20.6% 28.1% 51.4% 32.9% 36.1% 28.8% 25.9% 19.7% 30.2% 36.5% 31.5% Subtotal 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% QUALIFICATION Uneducated 25.4% 22.8% 20.0% 18.4% 13.3% 23.1% 14.8% 11.3% 14.3% 14.9% 17.5% School 27.0% 33.3% 28.6% 23.7% 18.1% 21.2% 20.4% 19.7% 22.2% 24.3% 23.7% Graduate 36.5% 40.4% 42.9% 23.7% 42.2% 36.5% 50.0% 50.7% 34.9% 44.6% 40.1% PG&Above 11.1% 3.5% 8.6% 34.2% 26.5% 19.2% 14.8% 18.3% 28.6% 16.2% 18.7% Subtotal 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 114

23 Table: 4-12: Validity Content Validity Feedback of Experts Name: S.Sathyamoorthy S.Radhakrishnan Raj Cherubal S.Pitchai S.S.Moogle K.Skandan Designation: Former Deputy Controller & Audit General of India Economist & Academician; Trustee Coordinator Retd. Additional Sec Finance ; Chief Accounts Officer Joint Secretary Organization: Ex-Govt of India and presently Advisor & Consultant Institute of Economic Education Janaagraha (Citizen organization on Urban Issues) Govt of Tamil Nadu Bangalore City Corporation Govt of India Involvement in urban Sector: Auditor in the Public Sector & organized the preparation of National Municipal Accounting Manual Minimal but not zero; conducts public studies through the Institute Full time involvement in (urban) public policy issues Was handling Finance of Chennai Corporation; involved in urban finance of the state of Tamil Nadu Day to day involvement in Urban reforms and Finance in Bangalore City Corporation Was in Finance Commission; was involved deeply in Urban Sector Objective/Construct Question Reference Your Assessment in a Scale of: 1 to 10 (1 Highly Irrelevant - 10 Highly Relevant) Average 1. Accountability, Transparency a 26 a and Action-ability are correlated Reasons and support for the above: 19, 20,21, 22 b, 22c, 26 b, 26 c, 26 d, 27, Reaction of the people 25 (voice/exit) to various services by the Support and validation Corporation through Preparedness of the citizens Knowledge: 7 a, 11, 12, 24 through knowledge and willingness to Participation: 29 a, 23 a participate Reasons and support: 16, 7c, 23 b, 29 b, 29 c, Performance of the Corporation 13 a, 14 a Reasons and support: 13b, 14 b, 14 c, 5. General feedback from the citizens 17, 31, Average

24 Chapter - 5 ணனலம ஆக கம த உம வ னநலம வண ட ய எல ல ம த ம The efficacy of support will yield (only) wealth; but the efficacy of action will yield all that is desired. Thirukkural 651 He should establish (each) department with many heads and without permanency (of tenure of office). Arthashastra

25 Chapter 5: Analysis of Survey Findings This Chapter is presented in five sections. Section I deals with the framework for analysis. Section II discusses on the general perspectives on the analysis taken up for the study, Section III on the ATA Model (Accountability, Transparency, Action-ability), Section IV on the EVLN Model (Exit, Voice, Loyalty, Neglect), and Section V on the accountability preparedness of the citizens. The analysis is based on the demand perspectives of accountability related issues taken up in this research. Section I: Framework for Analysis The framework for analysis provides the basis for the planned research and also the methodology for analysis of various issues that come up during the research. Fig.5.1 summarises various components of the framework. Figure 5-1: Framework for Analysis The framework given shows four main aspects: Research components: the research components consist of three themes taken up for the research: ATA aspects, the EVLN aspects and the Preparedness aspects. The analysis of this study basically surrounds these three elements; 117

26 Performance: For the purpose of this research two aspects of the performance i.e. working of the Corporation and service delivery are linked to the research components. This means that for various aspects discussed, the performance of the Corporation is taken in to consideration. This is to make the research field oriented and rigorous; The links: Two links between performance and the research criteria have been provided. o Comparison link is to enable the comparison of performance and service delivery aspects to various research variables and hence acts from an inputs perspective; o Research Findings link is expected to provide inputs for improving the accountability related aspects so that there is an impact on the performance of the Corporation. With this framework, the entire survey is analysed in the following sections and in the next chapter. Section II: General Perspective of the Analysis This demand side accountability study focuses on three major aspects: Aspect #1: Accountability per se based on ATA Model Aspect #2: Options for citizens based on EVLN Model Aspect #3: Preparedness for accountability based on knowledge base of citizens Aspect #1: Accountability aspects: These focus on aspects related to accountability and transparency prevalent in the urban sector. Hence the study is based on the urban population. The study looks at the demand side of the accountability in the urban sector. This would indicate that the study is based on the opinions and impressions of the citizens (who actually demand services from the third tier of governance) on the Corporation of Chennai. Hence the study looks at some of the key elements of the said three aspects through citizens perceptions and opinions about: Performance/working Service delivery 118

27 Accountability Transparency Action-ability The ATA Model: Accountability-Transparency-Action-ability model developed during this research is used as the base for analysis. The above listed items (variables) are collectively called as accountability for the purpose of the study; and sometimes referred to as accountability related issues. Each of the above aspects is supported by relevant data and analysis, subject to the limitations of the survey. All the analyses in this regard are done through the ATA Model discussed earlier in this study. Aspect #2: Options for the citizens: Another major area of this research is about the options available for the citizens in case the services provided by the Corporation are not up to the mark; and the citizens approach towards the same. These options, as per the review of literature made in this study, are generally referred to as EVLN or Exit-Voice-Loyalty- Neglect options. This is used as the framework for analysis of options available for the citizens. Aspect #3: Preparedness for Accountability: This is a major contribution arising out of the study and was recognized during the course of this research. Two aspects have emerged as important in this regard: one, the knowledge of the citizens about the Corporation and its functions (external aspect) and two, the preparedness to participate in the programmes of the Corporation (internal aspect). Have the citizens really understood the issues relating to urban accountability, and have they recognized their own role in this regard? is the basic question with which this research looks at some analysis. The results of the survey are analysed from these three aspects. All the above aspects are hypothesized (later in this study) for the purpose of statistically establishing the issues and relationships between the variables taken up for the study. These provide an update on the current situation prevailing in the urban sector of the economy. Such an understanding also could help in generalizing the behavior (of the population) based on the sample taken up for the research. 119

28 Section III: Analysis around the ATA Model Aspect #1: Accountability Aspects through ATA Model The accountability study examines 5 ingredients (referred to as accountability related aspects ). These five ingredients can be logically grouped in to two parts: performance and service delivery, accountability/transparency/action-ability. Before getting into the details of accountability, two questions on the performance of the Corporation (the way it works), need to be addressed: Do the citizens feel that the Corporation is working fine? and Do the citizens feel that there is proper service delivery by the Corporation? These two leading questions are examined through the survey and their pattern to various aspects of accountability is examined in order to link the relationship between performance and accountability. Q1: Performance: Do the citizens feel that the Corporation is working fine? Table 5-1: Working of the Corporation Is the Corporation of Chennai working fine? Frequency Percent Valid No Yes Total Source: Survey output As given in the Table-5-1, 61.8 per cent of the respondents say that the Corporation of Chennai is not working fine. This clearly indicates that the citizens are not happy with the performance of the Corporation. 120

29 Table 5-2: Reasons for Corporation: Not working fine and Working fine Corporation Not Working fine- Reasons Frequency Percent I. Services issues a. Drainage/sewerage not maintained b. Road maintenance not done II. c. Garbage cleaning not done Sub-total I Infrastructure issues a. Inadequate infra b. Street light not okay III. Management issues Sub-total II a. Corruption b. Bad behaviour of employees c. Bad work culture d. Rules not followed e. No Management/Admin f. Other Reasons Sub-total III Total Total saying Corporation is Not working fine 410 Percentage giving reasons why? 95.6% Corporation Working fine Reasons Frequency Percent I. Services issues a. Proper Drainage maintenance b. Proper Road Maintenance c. Proper Garbage cleaning d. Good Maintenance Sub-total I II. Management issues a. Good Management/Admin b. Other Positive reasons Sub-total II Total Total saying Corporation is working fine 253 Percentage giving reasons why? 82.2% Total opined % Total respondents 663 Source: Compiled from the Survey 121

30 Out of the total respondents (663), about 90 per cent of them have given their opinion about why they feel that the Corporation is working fine or not. Table 5-2 provides the complete details in this regard 99. Out of the 410 person who stated that the Corporation is not working fine, 95.6 per cent persons have provided reasons for why they say so. About 52.0 per cent of the reasons relate to various service delivery aspects, 10.5 per cent deal with infrastructure aspects and 37.5 per cent deal with management and human resource related aspects; Out of the 253 persons who were in favour of the Corporation, only 82.2 per cent (208) justified supporting their view per cent of them opined that the services provided are good and 22.6 per cent attributed their support to management related reasons. There were no points on the infrastructure aspects. Q2: Do the citizens feel that there is proper service delivery by the Corporation? The issue discussed was about the overall opinion or the feeling the citizens have about the working of the Corporation. Another query was on the service delivery aspect. The objective was to understand about the services delivered by the Corporation and the citizens opinion and evaluation of the same. Table 5-3: Service Delivery by the Corporation Do you think there is proper delivery of various services by Corporation? Frequency Percent Valid No Yes Total Source: Survey output The respondents were further stringent in their opinion about the service delivery as 63.7 per cent opined that there is no proper service delivery by the Corporation. This is 1.9 per cent less than those opined that the Corporation is working fine. Here, the term service delivery refers to various services provided by the Corporation from removal of garbage in the street to services delivered in the Corporation hospitals or schools. 99 The reasons attributed by the respondents were not prompted; the respondents were not asked to choose from a set of reasons. The reasons they attributed for their opinion were taken and grouped as shown in the Table

31 Table 5-4: Citizen s evaluation of the services delivered by the Corporation Services Totally Unsatisfied Undecided Satisfied Totally Total Mean Delivered Unsatisfied Satisfied Score Rank (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) 1. Garbage Removal 28% 23% 6% 41% 2% 100% Road maintenance 21% 30% 9% 36% 4% 100% Cleaning of drains 27% 30% 8% 33% 3% 100% Issue of birth/death 14% 13% 39% 31% 3% certificate 100% Corporation Schools 20% 22% 26% 30% 2% 100% Corporation Hospitals 21% 24% 25% 28% 1% 100% Overall Unsat 22% 24% 19% 33% 2% <--> 100% Undec Cronbach's Alpha Source: Compiled from Survey Output The summary of the evaluation of some of the key services delivered by the Corporation is shown in Table 5-4. The analysis of the same shows that: All the respondents (100 per cent) have rated the six important services provided by the Corporation; According to the overall scores (summation of scores for all the six services), it is found that 46 per cent of the scores related to totally unsatisfied (22 per cent) and unsatisfied (24 per cent), and is higher than satisfied (33 per cent) and fully satisfied (2 per cent) totaling to 35 per cent. The 19 per cent of undecided classification has been taken as neutral. This clearly indicates that the services provided by the Corporation do not seem to satisfy a major portion of the citizens; The satisfied portion of 35 per cent is just less than the 36.3 per cent of the persons who have said that they feel that the Corporation is delivering proper services (Table 5.8); With the help of mean ranking these six services were evaluated, the result being: o Rank #1: Issue of birth and death certificates o Rank #2: Corporation Schools o Rank #3: Road maintenance 123

32 o Rank #4: Garbage removal o Rank #5: Corporation Hospital o Rank #6: Cleaning of drains Hence cleaning of the drains seems to be the major issue for the citizens. The recent introduction of on-line issue of birth and death certificate could have resulted in the best rating for the same; Considering the five point Likert s scale from Totally Unsatisfied (1) to Fully Satisfied (5), the overall average score of classifies the net result of the analysis as between 2 and 3 i.e. between Unsatisfactory and Undecided. Out of the six services, only two have scores above the average indicating an overall level of dissatisfaction; Cronbach s alpha of is high and shows uni-dimensionality of the service factor and high reliability of the service factor. Table 5-5: Reasons for lack of proper Service Delivery? Reasons Rank #1 Rank #2 Rank #3 Rank #4 Rank #5 Total Score Rank 1.Lack of leadership % 23% 24% 16% 14% 100% Quality of people 3.Political influence % 25% 23% 20% 12% 100% % 20% 21% 21% 16% 100% Corruption 5.Lack of systems and procedures Kendall's W = Source: Compiled from Survey Output % 21% 16% 27% 9% 100% % 11% 17% 16% 49% 100% Average Score The respondents, who said the Corporation was not providing desired level of service delivery (persons who said No refer Table 5-3), were asked for the reasons for their opinion. They were also asked to rank the reasons in the order of seriousness according to them. The results of the responses are given in Table

33 Out of the 422 persons who said No in Table 5-3 (indicating that the Corporation was not providing proper service delivery) 419 (99.3 per cent) ranked various reasons; The mean scores have been taken for the purpose of ranking; The rankings are as follows: o Rank #1: Corruption o Rank #2: Lack of leadership o Rank #3: Quality of people o Rank #4: Political influence o Rank #5: Lack of systems and procedures Corruption seems to be the major issue for the lack of proper service delivery by the Corporation. Human resource aspects like lack of leadership and inadequate quality of people are ranked next. However there is quite a gap in the score between the political influence ranked fourth and the lack of systems and procedures ranked last; The average score for all the five taken together is and would find a place between the 4 th and 5 th ranks, indicating that the overall ranking is quite low; A very low Kendall s W (0.101), indicates a very low concordance or association in the way the respondents ranked. Examination of the A-T-A Model Accountability Having discussed the working of the Corporation, and also having done an evaluation of its service delivery, the study looks at the opinion of the citizens on whether the Corporation is acting in an accountable manner? This question is the core of the research. What is the opinion of the citizens, why do they say so and according to them, who is actually accountable in the Corporation? are the issues that are examined. Table 5-6: How Accountable is Chennai Corporation Do you think Chennai Corporation is acting in an accountable manner towards citizens? Frequency Percent Valid No Yes Total Source: Survey output 125

34 According to the survey, 53.1 per cent of the citizens feel that the Corporation is not acting in an accountable manner towards the citizens. Only 46.9 per cent feel that the Corporation is behaving in an accountable manner. This opinion on the accountability of the Corporation is different from the citizens opinion on: (a) whether the Corporation is working fine (No per cent - Table 5-1) and (b) whether there is proper services delivery (No 63.7 per cent - Table 5-3). This indicates that many of the respondents were not happy with the services provided by the Corporation feel that the Corporation is not acting in an accountable manner. According to you, is the Corporation of Chennai working fine? Do you think there is proper delivery of various services by Corporation? Table 5-7: Relationship between Accountability - Working and Service delivery Do you think chennai corporation is acting in an accountable manner towards citizens? No Yes Total Count Column N % Row N % Count Column N % Row N % Count Column N % Row N % No % 71.7% % 28.3% % 100.0% Source: Compiled from Survey Output Yes % 22.9% % 77.1% % 100.0% Total % 53.1% % 46.9% % 100.0% No % 68.0% % 32.0% % 100.0% Yes % 27.0% % 73.0% % 100.0% Total % 53.1% % 46.9% % 100.0% Table 5-7 clearly brings out the relationship between the variables. The analysis shows that: Of the 410 respondents who were not satisfied with the working of the Corporation (by responding No ), 28.3 per cent have said that the Corporation is working in an accountable manner; Of the 422 respondent who said the services delivery of the Corporation was not up to the mark (by responding No ), 32 per cent have said that the Corporation is working in an accountable manner; Of the 253 respondents who were satisfied with the working of the Corporation (by saying Yes ), 16.5 per cent of them have opined that the Corporation was not working in an accountable manner; 126

35 Of the 241 respondents who were happy with the service delivery of the people (by saying Yes ), 18.5 per cent have felt that the Corporation is not acting in an accountable manner; Hence the respondents have been quite independent in their opinion. The significance of the relationship was found out through statistical analysis, as shown in Table 5-8. Table 5-8: Analysis of the relationships: Accountability - Working and Service Delivery A. Correlation Tests Working of the Corporation Service delivery Accountability Working of the Phi Coefficient **.475 ** Corporation Sig. (2-tailed) N Service delivery Phi Coefficient.542 ** ** Sig. (2-tailed) N Accountability Phi Coefficient.475 **.396 ** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) N **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). B. Chi-Square Tests Do you think chennai corporation is acting in an accountable manner According to you, is the Corporation of Chennai working fine? Do you think there is proper delivery of various services by Corporation? towards citizens? Chi-square Df 1 Sig..000 * Chi-square Df 1 Sig..000 * *. The Chi-square statistic is significant at the 0.05 level. Source: Compiled from Survey Output The statistical analyses of the relationships show that both the correlation through the high Phi coefficient (significant at 0.01 level) and the relationship between the variables through Chi-square values (significant at 0.05 level), establish the relationship stating that accountability is strongly related to both working of the Corporation and its service delivery. The null hypothesis that there is no correlation between the variable (ATA) is rejected with p-value. 127

36 Having established the relationship between the three variables of working, service delivery and accountability, the study looked at the perception of respondents as to whom they hold to account in the Corporation. Accountability is always linked to one or a set of persons who is/are expected to deliver the services and be answerable to the citizens. The respondents ranked the personnel of the Corporation with regard to whom they hold as accountable. The results are shown in Table 5-9. Table 5-9: Who is accountable in the Corporation? Designation Rank Rank Rank Rank Total #1 #2 #3 # Mayor 26% 31% 30% 13% 100% Commissioner 31% 35% 21% 13% 100% Elected representative 36% 19% 29% 15% 100% Employees of Corporation 7% 14% 20% 58% 100% Mean Score Rank Kendall's W = Source: Compiled from Survey output Most of the respondents (654 out of the 663 respondents) i.e per cent have identified and ranked the accountable persons. The analysis of the ranking shows that: The Commissioner is ranked first, indicating that the operational head is considered most important; The elected representatives are ranked the next, as the person is nearest to the citizens; Mayor ranks only the third, possibly due to his role just as a policy maker; The respondents have ranked the employees of the Corporation the last. Key points arising out of the analysis are: The stress on the accountability seems to be on the operational aspects - doing operations properly with support from and monitoring by the operational chief i.e. the Commissioner; This could have been due to the feeling that, if from higher levels the operational persons are held responsible for their work and made accountable, they would perform better. 128