<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<record
    xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
    xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd"
    xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">

  <leader>02978nam a22001457a 4500</leader>
  <datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">534008</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">534008</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <controlfield tag="008">260803b           ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d</controlfield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a"> Panda, Gyana Ranjan  Goswami, Priyank and  Patra, Suresh Kumar </subfield>
    <subfield code="9">62267</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a"> Evaluation of social sector expenditures and application of the theory of change to enhance good governance in Jammu and Kashmir</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="260" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Indian Journal of Public Administration  </subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">72(2), Jun, 2026: p.373-392</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Jammu and Kashmir (J&amp;K), now a Union Territory (UT) post-August 2019, presents a unique laboratory for studying the relationship between conflict, governance and social sector public expenditure. This article makes a tripartite contribution to the relevant literature: first, it empirically analyses trends in social sector expenditure as a percentage of Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP) from 1995 to 2022 using an autoregressive distributed lag bounds testing approach, stratified across three politically defined phases: the Peak Militancy Period (1990&#x2013;2002), the Mass Protest Years (2002&#x2013;2018) and the Post-Reorganisation Phase (2019 onwards). Second, it provides a comprehensive inter-regional comparison between the J&amp;K divisions, supplemented by a systematic inter-district analysis using the socio-economic development index and health infrastructure index, revealing that while expenditure allocations have historically favoured the Kashmir division, developmental outcomes are paradoxically superior in the Jammu division, a finding attributable to differential institutional capacities in conflict-affected versus relatively peaceful geographies. Third, the article critically evaluates five competing evaluation frameworks&#x2014;cost&#x2013;benefit analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, cost&#x2013;utility analysis, cost&#x2013;consequence analysis and multi-criteria decision analysis&#x2014;and provides reasoned justification for selecting the theory of change (ToC) model as the most appropriate analytical approach for J&amp;K&#x2019;s multi-sector, district-level governance challenge operationalised through the district good governance index (DGGI). The study finds that social sector expenditure has persistently remained below 3 per cent of GSDP across all phases, with a structural bias towards economic sector expenditure, and argues that the ToC model embedded within the DGGI framework offers a replicable, conflict-sensitive evaluation architecture for governance reform in post-conflict societies.- Reproduced 

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00195561261450550?_gl=1*12ypbx*_up*MQ..*_ga*MTEwMzgxODQyOS4xNzg1NzM4Nzg
5*_ga_60R758KFDG*czE3ODU3Mzg3ODkkbzEkZzAkdDE3ODU3Mzg3ODkkajYwJGwxJGg4ODM0NDQ5NDk.
</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Social sector expenditure, Public expenditure review, Theory of changes, District good governance index, Inter regional comparison, ARDL Model, Jammu and Kashmir, Conflict sensitive governance.  </subfield>
    <subfield code="9">62268</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Indian Journal of Public Administration  </subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="942" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">AR</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="0">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="1">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="2">ddc</subfield>
    <subfield code="4">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="7">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="9">409192</subfield>
    <subfield code="a">IIPA</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">IIPA</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">2026-08-03</subfield>
    <subfield code="h">72(2), Jun, 2026: p.373-392</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">AR139448</subfield>
    <subfield code="r">2026-08-03</subfield>
    <subfield code="y">AR</subfield>
  </datafield>
</record>
