Poster #14 - Bureaucratic Discretion and Migrant Welfare: A Comparative Study of Kerala and Maharashtra

• In Event: Saturday Poster Luncheon

Abstract

Introduction/Background:

India has over 450 million internal migrants, of whom 41 million migrate for employment and work at intra-district, intra-state, and inter-state levels (Census, GoI, 2011) (Tumbe & Jha, 2024). This group contributes significantly to urban labor markets, especially to the informal economy. Despite this contribution, access to labor-related social protection remains highly uneven, particularly at the inter-state level. These variations are shaped not only by competing policy strategies but also by the initiatives of frontline implementers—street-level bureaucrats (SLBs)—who possess substantial discretion in putting policies into action and interpreting their meanings. Their decisions are influenced by institutional design, political context, and cognitive biases. Kerala and Maharashtra, India's most prominent migrant-receiving states, offer contrasting institutional environments, making them ideal for examining how discretionary behavior shapes labor welfare outcomes.

Purpose/Research Question:

This study questions: How do the discretionary practices of street-level bureaucrats in the Department of Labor affect inter-state migrant workers' access to labor-related social protection in Kerala and Maharashtra? It seeks to understand how institutional and political contexts condition bureaucratic behavior in service delivery.

 

Methods:

The study employs a mixed-methods, cross-sectional design focused on SLBs operating within the Departments of Labor in both states. It will involve semi-structured interviews with 30 SLBs (15 in each state) that offer key labor welfare services—such as registration, accident compensation, housing, and job placement—to inter-state migrants. Apart from the qualitative data, administrative records will be analyzed to compare enrollment and benefit take-up across districts. Also, surveys with 200 inter-state migrant workers (100 in each state) will capture their interactions with labor officials and barriers to labor service access.

 

Results/Findings (Expected):

Even though data collection is awaiting, the study anticipates Kerala's more institutionalized and coordinated labor welfare approach—marked by regularized processes and inclusive structures—to result in reduced bureaucratic discretion and more uniform service provision. Conversely, Maharashtra's politically charged and decentralized context, particularly in high nativist districts, is anticipated to enable greater variability in SLB practice, with consequences for differential treatment of migrant workers. The research will analyze these trends to assess the contribution made by administrative discretion in perpetuating inequality of access.

 

Conclusion/Implications:

This research will offer meaningful insight into the processes through which bureaucratic discretion acts as a mediating factor for implementing labor welfare policies among inter-state migrants in India. The study identifies the necessity of institutional protection and procedural transparency to curb discretion-based inequalities by comparing two opposing state settings. These findings are of policy significance to federal systems that seek to improve equitable access to welfare for mobile and excluded groups. The follow-up work is intensive data analysis and policy reform proposals founded on field-level realities.

Author

• Neha Mallick, Columbia University
  Presenting Author