Does affirmative action undermine meritocracy? “Meritocratic inclusion” of the marginalized in Nepal’s bureaucracy

Abstract

Motivation: Affirmative action policies have attracted significant academic and policy interest worldwide. One of the key criticisms of such policies is that they undermine meritocratic principles, but there is little evidence and analysis on how such policies are being implemented and shape meritocracy, particularly in low-and middle-income countries. Purpose: Drawing on a case study of an affirmative action policy designed for the inclusion of members from marginalized groups in Nepal's civil service, the article critically examines whether this erodes meritocracy and productivity. Methods and approach: The article draws on empirical insights and data collected through a critical policy analysis, complemented by surveys and interviews with civil servants benefitted from affirmative action and other civil servants, including policy analysts and public intellectuals. Findings: Our findings challenge a narrative that affirmative action in the form of reservations or quotas erodes meritocracy and reduces the quality of public services. Rather, we argue that an affirmative action policy can enrich meritocracy by addressing its inherent deficits, including its blindness to horizontal inequalities and forms of social exclusion, which tend to sustain the monopolization of bureaucracy by a dominant group in an already unequal society. Policy implications: Reconceptualizing an affirmative action policy applied in Nepal's civil service as a tool of "meritocratic inclusion," we argue that it rewards competence and promotes workforce diversity and social justice. Our evidence suggests that affirmative action, when it is carefully designed, can be an effective policy tool both to enhance representative bureaucracy and enrich meritocracy.

Bureaucratising Social Justice: The reproduction of social inequality through scholarship programs in Nepal

“…Ethnographic studies on bureaucracy in South Asia have cautioned readers that since benefits are distributed on the basis of membership in a particular marginalized group, these programs tend to have unintended impacts such as the creation of a “culture of marginality” (Shneiderman, 2013) and the “formation of new inequalities” (Hingham and Shah, 2013). On the other hand, affirmative action programs in Nepal are considered crucial components of combating social inequality and therefore necessary to the continued quest for social justice (Drucza, 2019; Sunam and Shrestha, 2021). Given these considerations, we draw two distinct insights from the anthropology of bureaucracy.…”

“…Finally, the scholarship officer, along with a committee, decided who would be given a scholarship and at what percentage level of the school's costs. Overall, Shikar Boarding School's scholarship program reflected a blended approach of "meritocratic inclusion" (Sunam and Shrestha, 2021) by considering both elements of merit and socioeconomic marginalization in the allocation of financial resources.…”