Election result: Western Maharashtra- Localization is more important than centralization

-
Maharashtra Assembly 2019 results are eye-opening for every political party especially for parties in power.
The important difference between Congress-NCP and BJP-Shivsena alliance was that INC-NCP localized the election while BJP-Shivsena centralized the election, therefore, BJP-Sena yuti was unable to overcome the local opposition.
BJP-SHS alliance has witnessed a strong fight against their own rebellions. A similar thing is done by Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi. There is much discussion about the defeat of the INC-NCP alliance in some constituencies due to Vanchit Bahujan. The primary assumption for that is the people who vote for Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi, would prefer to vote for INC-NCP in the absence of the Vanchit Bahujan. But in 2014, BJP managed to attract the votes of the backward categories. Now it is not clear whether these voters would prefer INC-NCP over BJP-SHS in the absence of the Vanchit Bahujan. But yes it is true that alliance with Vanchit Bahujan would have more profitable for INC-NCP. 
In Western Maharashtra (Sangli, Satara, Kolhapur, Solapur, Pune districts), NCP has recaptured their original constituencies. 
In Western Maharashtra in six constituencies (Baramati, Palus-Kadegaon, Maval, Ambegaon, Tasgaon-Kavathe Mahankal, Madha), NCP-Congress has witnessed the impressive vote concentration (Table number one). But the mean values of the coefficient of the variation and concentration index is less for all parties (Table number two). Therefore in other constituencies where NCP-INC has managed to win the seats, BJP-SHS alliance faced the defeat due to a large number of the competitors (i.e. due to rebellion).
As far as Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi is concerned, the party has performed very badly compared to the Loksabha election in the Western Maharashtra Region. Even in SC constituencies, VBA has witnessed very low vote shares (Table number 4). In the constituencies where VBA has more than 10% vote share, NCP-INC managed to win the election. In the constituencies where VBA has 4-5% vote share, NCP-INC has witnessed the defeat with a very small margin. Therefore the role of the VBA is not clear.  
In reserved constituencies, the number of independent candidates is comparably high. It highlights the role of identity politics in the reserved constituencies. The concentration index is very low (Table number 5). Therefore it is important to understand the voting pattern in these constituencies.

The constituencies where BJP-SHS alliance lost the election due to rebellions.

1) Barshi (Solapur): Shivsena Candidate Adv. Dilip Gangadhar Sopal is defeated by the independent candidate (former BJP member) Rajendra Vitthal Raut by just 3076 votes.
2) Bhor (Pune): NCP-INC candidate Sangram Thopte won the election for third time. Shivsena candidate Kuldip Konde lost the election by just 8922 votes. The independent candidate Aatmaram Kalate (was in NCP, change the party and joined BJP but then contest the election independently) grab around 7000 votes.
3) Junnar (Pune): NCP candidate Atul Vallabh Benke (37% vote share) won the election by 8961 votes. Shivsena candidate Sharaddada Bhimaji Sonawane (32% vote share) lost the election because in this constituency, the Shivsainik (Former Shivsena Member) Ashatai Buchake managed to get around 24% votes. 
4) Karmala (Solapur); Independent candidate Sanjaymama Shinde won the election. Again the internal conflict in Shivsena at local level was the main reason. 
5) Khed-Alandi (Pune): Shivsena candidate faced the defeat due to BJP supported Independent candidate Atul Deshmukh. Dilip Mohite of NCP won the election.
6) Pandharpur (Solapur): Congress supported NCP candidate while BJP supported the independent candidate hence Shivsena candidate lost the election by NCP candidate

Other places BJP-Shivsena candidate even if won the election, they won by a very small margin. Ayaram Gayaram candidates also faced the defeat in the above constituencies.
Congress-NCP alliance worked together. In a few constituencies like Pune Cantonment, INC-NCP faced defeat by a very small margin where VBA got few votes. It would have better for INC-NCP and VBA to have an alliance in SC constituencies. 
In the whole Kolhapur district, Shivsena MP was openly supporting the Congress-NCP candidates. BJP did the mistake of centralizing the decision. And that went wrong. The Maharashtra State Assembly Election proved to be different than the Loksabha election. Not just voters but candidates also hate the nationalized and centralized kind of election when it comes to the state assembly as far as Maharashtra state is concerned. Therefore parties should focus more on the local things for sub-national elections. 

Table number 1: Top constituencies
Constituency Mean Standard Deviation Coefficient of Variation Party Concentration index
Baramati 21367.27 58474.25 2.74 NCP 0.71
Palus-Kadegaon 20651.7 53395.01 2.59 INC 0.70
Maval 31028 60802.73 1.96 NCP 0.54
Ambegaon 27147.43 48776.36 1.80 NCP 0.54
Tasgaon-Kavathe Mahankal 33545.33 53057.3 1.58 NCP 0.51
Madha 20646.18 46022.02 2.23 NCP 0.50
Table number 2: Mean values
Party Mean concentration index Mean Coefficient of the variation More than 50% Total Seats
BJP 0.43 2.11 10 17
SHS 0.43 2.15 2 5
NCP 0.41 1.97 10 21
INC 0.42 1.96 5 10
Others 0.37 1.94 2 5
Table number 3: Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi
Region District Constituency Category of constituency  Candidate Party EVM Votes Postal Votes Total Votes % of Votes
Western Maharashtra (Pune) Kolhapur Chandgad Vinayak alias Appi Virgonda Patil Vanchit Bahujan Aaghadi 43839 134 43973 19.94
Western Maharashtra (Pune) Solapur Solapur City North ANAND BABURAO CHANDANSHIVE Vanchit Bahujan Aaghadi 23386 75 23461 15.47
Table number 4: Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi in SC constituencies 
Region District Constituency Category of constituency  Candidate Party EVM Votes Postal Votes Total Votes
Western Maharashtra (Pune) Pune Pune Cantonment  SC Laxman Arde Vanchit Bahujan Aaghadi 10009 17 10026
Western Maharashtra (Pune) Pune Pimpri  SC Pravin Allias Balasaheb Gaikwad Vanchit Bahujan Aaghadi 13681 0 13681
Western Maharashtra (Pune) Sangli Miraj SC Nanaso Sadashiv Waghmare Vanchit Bahujan Aaghadi 8865 37 8902
Western Maharashtra (Pune) Kolhapur Hatkanangle  SC S. P. Kamble Vanchit Bahujan Aaghadi 11207 66 11273
Western Maharashtra (Pune) Solapur Mohol  SC Gautam Kisan Vadave Vanchit Bahujan Aaghadi 6396 33 6429
Western Maharashtra (Pune) Solapur Malshiran  SC Raj Yashwant Kumar Vanchit Bahujan Aaghadi 5516 22 5538
Western Maharashtra (Pune) Satara Phaltan SC Arvind Baburao Aadhav Vanchit Bahujan Aaghadi 5406 54 5460
Table number 5: SC constituencies
Constituency Mean Standard Deviation Coefficient of Variation Party Concentration index
Phaltan 17967 39887.72 2.22 NCP 0.46
Malshiran 23915.89 44422.74 1.86 BJP 0.45
Miraj 22485.5 37209.8 1.65 BJP 0.42
Pimpri 9347.105 24290.85 2.60 NCP 0.39
Mohol 13453.87 27830.81 2.07 NCP 0.33
Pune Cantonment 4364.621 12747.22 2.92 BJP 0.32
Hatkanangle 13735.41 24073.29 1.75 INC 0.23


टिप्पण्या

टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा

या ब्लॉगवरील लोकप्रिय पोस्ट

Critical Employment Issues Overlooked in the Recent Economic Survey: Job Quality, Women's Employment, and AI's Regulatory Implications

-
इमेज
T he recent Economic Survey addresses various aspects of the Indian economy, but there are three key employment concerns that warrant further discussion: the level and quality of employment, women's employment, and the impact of AI on labor laws and regulations. First, the reference period chosen for comparing employment improvements is the 2017-18 PLFS round, a time following demonetization, which significantly impacted the labor market. Using this period as a baseline might present an incomplete picture of employment trends. Comparing current statistics with the early 2000s, a period often referred to as the golden decade of the Indian economy, indicates that there is still progress to be made in terms of unemployment, labor force participation rate, and worker-to-population ratio. Source: Author uses NSSO’s Employment-Unemployment and PLFS surveys. Furthermore, while the survey discusses the expansion of the gig economy, driven by digital platforms, increased internet access, ...
अधिक वाचा

Big state paradox in decentralization

-
इमेज
The economic performance of large states in India compared to China's provinces reveals a paradox in development and governance efficiency. While China's centralized governance system promotes economic growth in its larger regions, India's larger states encounter various obstacles that hinder their progress. Conversely, under India's decentralization, smaller states have experienced significant economic growth. However, the slower progress of India's larger states restricts the nation's overall economic growth. This suggests a need to understand the dynamics of two different governance systems: the performance of smaller states under a centralized system and that of larger states under a decentralized system. From the mobility graph, it is evident that large states in India are trailing behind China's largest province, while the smaller states in India are performing well. In fact, in the initial period, the smaller states of India have a higher average per ...
अधिक वाचा

Geographic Dispersion of votes and income dynamics behind Congress-BJP seats

-
इमेज
The recent state assembly elections in India provides a deep insight into the evolving political landscape particularly about First Past The Post (FPTP) electoral system. Under the FPTP system, the candidate with the most votes in a constituency wins the election which can fail to translate popular votes into proportional representation, resulting in votes that don't always carry the weight they should. This discrepancy arises due to the winner-takes-all approach, where the candidate with the most votes in a particular constituency win, irrespective of whether they secure an absolute majority or not. As a consequence, a candidate can win a seat by only having a plurality of votes (more than any other single candidate but not necessarily a majority of all votes cast), while the votes cast for other candidates essentially go unrepresented. This leads to a scenario where a significant portion of the population might not see their voices reflected in the government they get, creating w...
अधिक वाचा