Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 73,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'catslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 73,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'catslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 74,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 74,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Code Context
            if (Configure::read('debug')) {

                trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);

            } else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 28874,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Democracy in India: A citizen&amp;#039;s perspective&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-IBNLive.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Snapshots from the report&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one&#039;s vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country&#039;s situation will worsen in future. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;IBNLive.com, 10 August, 2015, http://www.ibnlive.com/news/india/democracy-in-india-a-citizens-perspective-1035218.html&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4676927,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 28874,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Democracy in India: A citizen&amp;#039;s perspective&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Authoritarian rule,Lokniti,CSDS,Centre for the Study of Developing Societies,Elections,Citizens,Democracy&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-IBNLive.com

The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-IBNLive.com&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Snapshots from the report&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one&#039;s vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country&#039;s situation will worsen in future. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 28874,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Democracy in India: A citizen&amp;#039;s perspective&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-IBNLive.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Snapshots from the report&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one&#039;s vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country&#039;s situation will worsen in future. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;IBNLive.com, 10 August, 2015, http://www.ibnlive.com/news/india/democracy-in-india-a-citizens-perspective-1035218.html&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4676927,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 4 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 5 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 6 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 28874
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Democracy in India: A citizen&amp;#039;s perspective&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Authoritarian rule,Lokniti,CSDS,Centre for the Study of Developing Societies,Elections,Citizens,Democracy&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-IBNLive.com

The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-IBNLive.com&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Snapshots from the report&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one&#039;s vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country&#039;s situation will worsen in future. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Democracy in India: A citizen&#039;s perspective | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-IBNLive.com

The Report 'Democracy in India: A Citizen's Perspective' tries to assess people's understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Democracy in India: A citizen&#039;s perspective</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-IBNLive.com<br /><br />The Report 'Democracy in India: A Citizen's Perspective' tries to assess people's understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.<br /><br />Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. <br /><br /><strong>Snapshots from the report<br /></strong><br />* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. <br /><br />* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.<br /><br />* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one's vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. <br /><br />* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.<br /><br />* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country's situation will worsen in future. <br /><br />* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. <br /><br />* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. <br /><br />* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$maxBufferLength = (int) 8192
$file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php'
$line = (int) 853
$message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Code Context
            $response->getStatusCode(),

            ($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')

        ));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 28874,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Democracy in India: A citizen&amp;#039;s perspective&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-IBNLive.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Snapshots from the report&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one&#039;s vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country&#039;s situation will worsen in future. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;IBNLive.com, 10 August, 2015, http://www.ibnlive.com/news/india/democracy-in-india-a-citizens-perspective-1035218.html&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4676927,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 28874,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Democracy in India: A citizen&amp;#039;s perspective&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Authoritarian rule,Lokniti,CSDS,Centre for the Study of Developing Societies,Elections,Citizens,Democracy&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-IBNLive.com

The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-IBNLive.com&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Snapshots from the report&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one&#039;s vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country&#039;s situation will worsen in future. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 28874,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Democracy in India: A citizen&amp;#039;s perspective&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-IBNLive.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Snapshots from the report&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one&#039;s vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country&#039;s situation will worsen in future. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;IBNLive.com, 10 August, 2015, http://www.ibnlive.com/news/india/democracy-in-india-a-citizens-perspective-1035218.html&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4676927,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 4 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 5 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 6 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 28874
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Democracy in India: A citizen&amp;#039;s perspective&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Authoritarian rule,Lokniti,CSDS,Centre for the Study of Developing Societies,Elections,Citizens,Democracy&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-IBNLive.com

The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-IBNLive.com&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Snapshots from the report&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one&#039;s vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country&#039;s situation will worsen in future. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Democracy in India: A citizen&#039;s perspective | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-IBNLive.com

The Report 'Democracy in India: A Citizen's Perspective' tries to assess people's understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Democracy in India: A citizen&#039;s perspective</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-IBNLive.com<br /><br />The Report 'Democracy in India: A Citizen's Perspective' tries to assess people's understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.<br /><br />Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. <br /><br /><strong>Snapshots from the report<br /></strong><br />* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. <br /><br />* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.<br /><br />* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one's vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. <br /><br />* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.<br /><br />* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country's situation will worsen in future. <br /><br />* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. <br /><br />* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. <br /><br />* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$reasonPhrase = 'OK'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Code Context
                    $value

                ), $first);

                $first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6802e9bf60ce9-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 28874,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Democracy in India: A citizen&amp;#039;s perspective&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-IBNLive.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Snapshots from the report&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one&#039;s vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country&#039;s situation will worsen in future. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;IBNLive.com, 10 August, 2015, http://www.ibnlive.com/news/india/democracy-in-india-a-citizens-perspective-1035218.html&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4676927,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 28874,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Democracy in India: A citizen&amp;#039;s perspective&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Authoritarian rule,Lokniti,CSDS,Centre for the Study of Developing Societies,Elections,Citizens,Democracy&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-IBNLive.com

The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-IBNLive.com&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Snapshots from the report&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one&#039;s vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country&#039;s situation will worsen in future. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 28874,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Democracy in India: A citizen&amp;#039;s perspective&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-IBNLive.com&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Snapshots from the report&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one&#039;s vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country&#039;s situation will worsen in future. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;IBNLive.com, 10 August, 2015, http://www.ibnlive.com/news/india/democracy-in-india-a-citizens-perspective-1035218.html&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4676927,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 4 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 5 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 6 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 28874
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Democracy in India: A citizen&amp;#039;s perspective&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Authoritarian rule,Lokniti,CSDS,Centre for the Study of Developing Societies,Elections,Citizens,Democracy&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-IBNLive.com

The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-IBNLive.com&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The Report &#039;Democracy in India: A Citizen&#039;s Perspective&#039; tries to assess people&#039;s understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Snapshots from the report&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one&#039;s vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country&#039;s situation will worsen in future. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Democracy in India: A citizen&#039;s perspective | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-IBNLive.com

The Report 'Democracy in India: A Citizen's Perspective' tries to assess people's understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Democracy in India: A citizen&#039;s perspective</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-IBNLive.com<br /><br />The Report 'Democracy in India: A Citizen's Perspective' tries to assess people's understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.<br /><br />Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. <br /><br /><strong>Snapshots from the report<br /></strong><br />* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. <br /><br />* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.<br /><br />* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one's vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. <br /><br />* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.<br /><br />* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country's situation will worsen in future. <br /><br />* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. <br /><br />* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. <br /><br />* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$cookies = []
$values = [
	(int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
]
$name = 'Content-Type'
$first = true
$value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

<head>

    <link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>

$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp'
$dataForView = [
	'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		'id' => (int) 28874,
		'title' => 'Democracy in India: A citizen's perspective',
		'subheading' => '',
		'description' => '<div align="justify">
-IBNLive.com<br />
<br />
The Report 'Democracy in India: A Citizen's Perspective' tries to assess people's understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.<br />
<br />
Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. <br />
<br />
<strong>Snapshots from the report<br />
</strong><br />
* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. <br />
<br />
* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.<br />
<br />
* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one's vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. <br />
<br />
* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.<br />
<br />
* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country's situation will worsen in future. <br />
<br />
* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. <br />
<br />
* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. <br />
<br />
* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.
</div>',
		'credit_writer' => 'IBNLive.com, 10 August, 2015, http://www.ibnlive.com/news/india/democracy-in-india-a-citizens-perspective-1035218.html',
		'article_img' => '',
		'article_img_thumb' => '',
		'status' => (int) 1,
		'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
		'lang' => 'EN',
		'category_id' => (int) 16,
		'tag_keyword' => '',
		'seo_url' => 'democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927',
		'meta_title' => null,
		'meta_keywords' => null,
		'meta_description' => null,
		'noindex' => (int) 0,
		'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		'most_visit_section_id' => null,
		'article_big_img' => null,
		'liveid' => (int) 4676927,
		'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'edate' => '',
		'tags' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		'[new]' => false,
		'[accessible]' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[hasErrors]' => false,
		'[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[repository]' => 'Articles'
	
	},
	'articleid' => (int) 28874,
	'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Democracy in India: A citizen&#039;s perspective',
	'metaKeywords' => 'Authoritarian rule,Lokniti,CSDS,Centre for the Study of Developing Societies,Elections,Citizens,Democracy',
	'metaDesc' => '
-IBNLive.com

The Report 'Democracy in India: A Citizen's Perspective' tries to assess people's understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India...',
	'disp' => '<div align="justify">-IBNLive.com<br /><br />The Report 'Democracy in India: A Citizen's Perspective' tries to assess people's understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.<br /><br />Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. <br /><br /><strong>Snapshots from the report<br /></strong><br />* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. <br /><br />* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.<br /><br />* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one's vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. <br /><br />* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.<br /><br />* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country's situation will worsen in future. <br /><br />* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. <br /><br />* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. <br /><br />* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.</div>',
	'lang' => 'English',
	'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/',
	'site_title' => 'im4change',
	'adminprix' => 'admin'
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	'id' => (int) 28874,
	'title' => 'Democracy in India: A citizen&#039;s perspective',
	'subheading' => '',
	'description' => '<div align="justify">
-IBNLive.com<br />
<br />
The Report 'Democracy in India: A Citizen's Perspective' tries to assess people's understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.<br />
<br />
Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. <br />
<br />
<strong>Snapshots from the report<br />
</strong><br />
* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. <br />
<br />
* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.<br />
<br />
* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one's vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. <br />
<br />
* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.<br />
<br />
* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country's situation will worsen in future. <br />
<br />
* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. <br />
<br />
* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. <br />
<br />
* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.
</div>',
	'credit_writer' => 'IBNLive.com, 10 August, 2015, http://www.ibnlive.com/news/india/democracy-in-india-a-citizens-perspective-1035218.html',
	'article_img' => '',
	'article_img_thumb' => '',
	'status' => (int) 1,
	'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
	'lang' => 'EN',
	'category_id' => (int) 16,
	'tag_keyword' => '',
	'seo_url' => 'democracy-in-india-a-citizen039s-perspective-4676927',
	'meta_title' => null,
	'meta_keywords' => null,
	'meta_description' => null,
	'noindex' => (int) 0,
	'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	'most_visit_section_id' => null,
	'article_big_img' => null,
	'liveid' => (int) 4676927,
	'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'edate' => '',
	'tags' => [
		(int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 4 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 5 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 6 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	'[new]' => false,
	'[accessible]' => [
		'*' => true,
		'id' => false
	],
	'[dirty]' => [],
	'[original]' => [],
	'[virtual]' => [],
	'[hasErrors]' => false,
	'[errors]' => [],
	'[invalid]' => [],
	'[repository]' => 'Articles'

}
$articleid = (int) 28874
$metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Democracy in India: A citizen&#039;s perspective'
$metaKeywords = 'Authoritarian rule,Lokniti,CSDS,Centre for the Study of Developing Societies,Elections,Citizens,Democracy'
$metaDesc = '
-IBNLive.com

The Report 'Democracy in India: A Citizen's Perspective' tries to assess people's understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India...'
$disp = '<div align="justify">-IBNLive.com<br /><br />The Report 'Democracy in India: A Citizen's Perspective' tries to assess people's understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below.<br /><br />Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. <br /><br /><strong>Snapshots from the report<br /></strong><br />* There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. <br /><br />* Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents.<br /><br />* Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one's vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. <br /><br />* Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity.<br /><br />* Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country's situation will worsen in future. <br /><br />* Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. <br /><br />* Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. <br /><br />* Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.</div>'
$lang = 'English'
$SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/'
$site_title = 'im4change'
$adminprix = 'admin'

include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51

Democracy in India: A citizen's perspective

-IBNLive.com The Report 'Democracy in India: A Citizen's Perspective' tries to assess people's understanding and perception towards democracy. It is a part of a comparative study (State of Democracy in South Asia) of five South Asian countries that include, besides India - Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. The first round of the SDSA was conducted in 2005 and a report based on it was published by Oxford University Press in 2008. After SDSA I, many political events have taken place that have changed the course of democracy as well as the lives of citizens. With this in view, Lokniti, CSDS initiated the second round of SDSA, in collaboration with colleagues from partner countries in 2011. SDSA II not only helps to understand how the changes that have taken place at the macro level have impacted the socio-economic and political conditions of the citizens at the macro level in the five countries, but also offers an opportunity to understand complex relationships between them. This report is India specific and was conducted in 2013 among 6043 respondents in 22 states of India. Its key findings are given below. Professors Sanjay Kumar, Suhas Palshikar and Sandeep Shastri where the Principal Investigators of the Project and Ms Jyoti Mishra and Kinjal Sampt helped in the writing of the report. Snapshots from the report * There has been a decline in democratic orientation and preference for authoritarian rule has gone up. Between 2005 and 2013, the proportion of those who support democracy has come down by 3 percent and the proportion of those who support authoritarian rule has gone up by 5 percentage points. * Proportion of democrats is not the only statistic that has taken a hit; satisfaction with democracy as a system of governance has also shown a downward trend. When compared to the 2005 SDSA survey, satisfaction with democracy has decreased by 9 percent. There has also been a disproportionate rise in the number of respondents who say they are dissatisfied with the way democracy works in the country - from 15 percent in 2005 this number has shot up to 37 percent of respondents. * Political efficacy, that is, belief in the system of governance, is considered foundational to the working of democracy. That each vote has an impact in politics is a postulate upon which the democracy theory rests. Orientation towards democracy decreases by 13 percent and indifference towards the nature of regime increases by 12 percent when one does not think that one's vote does not have an impact. Support or preference for authoritarian regime remains unaffected by whether the respondents believe their vote makes a difference in the way things are run in this country. * Overall, participation in non-electoral activities is higher than participation in electoral activities. Amongst all the political activities survey, voting was the most widely practiced activity. * Those who think that the economic condition of their family and the country will be better in the future, adhere in higher proportions to the idea that sometimes authority is better than democracy compared to those who think their situation or country's situation will worsen in future. * Trust in institutions has risen very marginally in the present survey (2013) as compared to the survey in 2005. The aggregate score suggests a rise of 2 points from 62 to 64 on a scale of 100. The worrying aspect is that elected institutions have fared worse than they did in 2005, while non elected institutions have fared better than they did in 2005. The elected executives like the national government and the local government have witnessed a drop in the trust levels by 6 and 5 percentage points respectively; however, the trust in state government has remained constant. As compared to other public institutions, political parties secured the least level of trust, as only 36 per cent of the respondents hold trust in them. However there is a marginal increase of about 2 percentage points in the level of trust when compared to the first round of the survey in 2005. * Institutions that are not elected by the people and do not have to seek their renewed mandate seem to be more trusted by the respondents. Trust in these non-elected institutions varies from institution to institution. For instance the police and the bureaucracy are institutions to which people are more likely to be exposed as compared to institutions such as courts and army, receive lower levels of trust. Nonetheless, the trust in all these institutions have increased as compared to the SDSA round I study. The army receives the highest level of trust amongst all the institutions, and it has deepened further by 5 percentage points in comparison to the previous survey. Similarly, popular support for army rule instead of democracy has also increased. When people were asked whether they want army rule, 30 percent asserted that army should govern the country; interestingly, agreement for army rule has gone up by 11 percentage points when compared to 2005 survey. * Twenty three percent of the respondents see education and employment as the most important issues that need to be addressed by government. Access to water and road are problems stated by 20 percent and 16 percent of the respondents respectively.