"There's nothing that a single person can do, the social and economic decay around is simply too overwhelming and the small efforts of individuals will make no difference whatsoever". This is a widely held view, and over decades it has acquired the force of conviction. When nearly every government service requires a bribe, when embezzlement is the defining characteristic of fiscal administration, one doesn't have to look far to have this opinion reinforced. A great despair lies both in the observation and in the conditioned response to it.

But is it true? Are we embarked on a vain course in pursuing the public interest? Is the best that can be accomplished still only a drop of optimism in a bottomless ocean of decay?

At India Together we work everyday with individuals and organizations engaging government at all levels, and with civil servants themselves. Some seek transparency and accountability, others wish to infuse greater citizen input into decision-making, and still others simply want to participate as informed citizens. It is easy to believe that those who try to improve the system are naïve, and their perseverance is merely a reflection of this. After all, it is difficult to see in broad terms how India has changed much from the efforts of isolated individuals; the social and economic decay continues, and seemingly unabated. But those who strive themselves do not see their quest as fruitless; to them the small changes they have wrought are real. Clearly, these are individuals who haven't succumbed to a sense of powerlessness; instead they believe that by their participation in governance, they can bring reform to the system and advance civil society.

Are they vindicated? We certainly see them to be effective, and not the least as champions of the impossible. There is, in much of this, a key pre-requisite; those who begin with the determination that individuals should matter, and persist beyond the early hurdles, find their convictions validated. Faith in reform is self-fulfilling. Informed participation is the substance of civil society; when this is combined with the trust that there are individuals within government who are not corrupt and are willing to work with citizens for change, the changes we seek follow naturally. By stepping away from the cynicism of low expectations, every citizen can avoid the inevitably shallow outcomes that follow from it.

While positive convictions are a necessary foundation, these alone will not do; the process is as important as passion. Citizens must identify local issues and institutions where engagement and vigilance is sustainable and will lead to better governance. Tackling the nearer and smaller problems is not merely tactful, but is good strategy as well. Information about processes and decisions within local government institutions can with some effort be made available in a manner that facilitates meaningful dissemination, transparent discussions, and constructive decisions. To begin participating at the local level, thus, is likely to be more rewarding to citizens.

Participation in local governance is often not considered as important as debating the national interest. But the spin-off effects in terms of civil society are often much greater, as local governance improves from citizen involvement. The issue isn't merely getting prioritized budget allocations for public works, or just wages and medical perks for a city's sweepers or improving the performance of public schools. Those are valid goals, but more importantly, they offer the hope of a society where local governments gain and hold the confidence of the people.

Charismatic leadership and grand designs are good things, but socio-economic and governance reforms are really waiting for the diligence of the average citizen.