Data Story
Why Kerala Needs to Reorganize Its Districts
Kerala's district map has not changed since 1984, though its population and administrative workload have. This data story uses Malappuram as a worked example to ask whether district size shapes service delivery, and where the evidence stops short of an answer.
By Dr. Noushad T13 Oct 2026
Read this story as text
The story’s words without its charts.
In India, a district plays a crucial role as the fundamental administrative unit where public services are provided, state policies are carried out, and individuals engage directly with the government. The District Collector has a broad range of responsibilities, including land acquisition, disaster management, electoral duties, and law and order as District Magistrate. With their own district heads, the police, health, education, and industries agencies all replicate this organizational system. Each of these offices serves more people with essentially the same set of posts as a district's population increases and its borders remain unchanged.
A district is the main administrative unit below the state, headed by a District Collector (District Magistrate). A taluk is a revenue sub-division of a district. Span of control is the number of people, offices or subordinate units for which a single supervising authority is responsible.
Why District Size Matters
In public administration, the size of a unit is viewed as a span of control. A Collector who controls two million people and a dozen block offices has a different job from one who oversees a million people and half as many offices, even if the positions and regulations are the same. Size also affects access. A larger district typically requires a lengthier trip to the district headquarters for anyone in need of a certificate, a hearing, or a hospital referral.
The tier below the district provides the greatest causal evidence for unit size in India. Veda Narasimhan and Jeffrey Weaver abuse a population regulation that determines whether a hamlet in Uttar Pradesh receives its own gram panchayat, affecting over 100,000 villages. People living in smaller local governments had easier access to public amenities in both the short and long term. According to the authors' findings, residents of smaller panchayats were 16 to 18% more likely to have toilets and closed drainage, and their incomes from the rural employment guaranty plan were 16% higher.
Brazil provides the best documented example of newly created units boosting delivery. Ricardo Dahis and Christiane Szerman investigate municipalities that have split into two. Following the split, local public employment and payroll both increased by approximately 23%, school attendance among younger cohorts increased by 2 to 5 percentage points, and economic activity benefits were primarily concentrated in outlying districts far from the old town hall. A similar tendency is reported in a study of district splits in Indonesia and India: villages that end up closer to the new district capital receive more public goods.
However, the evidence presents a mixed picture. Jothsna Rajan and Deepak Malghan find that newly created districts in India perform better than their parent districts in terms of night-time light intensity, a widely used proxy for economic activity. But the advantage fades after a few years. Similarly, Mehr Kalra and Shivakumar Jolad, who traced the growth in India's district count from 310 in 1951 to an estimated 785 by February 2024, argue that political considerations often influence district formation. They also point out that there is limited convincing evidence to suggest that smaller districts are necessarily governed more effectively. Taken together, these studies suggest that the relationship between district size and governance outcomes is more complex than the assumption that smaller districts are inherently better. Although administrative proximity and smaller jurisdictions may improve service delivery, the extent of these benefits depends on factors such as staffing, institutional capacity, and the boundaries chosen for the newly created districts.
Kerala's District Map Has Remained Unchanged Since 1984
Kerala had a population of 33.41 million according to the 2011 Census, distributed across 14 districts, albeit unevenly. Kasaragod, established in 1984, remains the state's most recently created district. Based on the 2011 population figures, each Kerala district has an average population of approximately 2.39 million. In comparison, Kalra and Jolad estimate the national average at around 1.78 million per district, using 2024 population estimates.
The disparity becomes more evident when Kerala is compared with individual states. Nine states with smaller populations than Kerala have more districts, highlighting the state’s relatively low district count. As a result, Kerala has approximately one district for every 24 lakh (2.4 million) people. In comparison, Assam, with a population of 31.2 million, has 35 districts, while Arunachal Pradesh, despite having only 1.38 million people, has 28 districts.
States with Smaller Populations Than Kerala but More Districts
Number of districts, population, and approximate population per district for Kerala and nine smaller states. Switch the measure with the buttons; hover or tap a bar for exact values.
Source: District counts were retrieved from the Integrated Government Online Directory (IGOD) on 10 October 2026. Population figures are based on the Census of India 2011. Caveats: Population per district is the authors' calculation from the rounded populations shown and is approximate. Haryana's Cabinet approved Hansi as a 23rd district in December 2025 (PTI, via The Week).
Other states have expanded their district networks through repeated administrative reorganisations. Telangana increased its district count from 10 to 33 after its formation in 2014. Andhra Pradesh expanded from 13 districts to 26 in 2022, followed by a further increase to 28 in January 2026. Chhattisgarh also increased its district count from 16 to 33. In 2023, Rajasthan created 17 new districts, raising its total to 50. However, in December 2024, the state government abolished nine of these districts, reducing the total to 41. These changes depicts how district boundaries and numbers can be revised by state governments in response to administrative priorities and policy decisions.
21 States and Union Territories Created New Districts After 2000, While Kerala Created None
Number of new districts formed since 2000, by state or union territory. Kerala and Himachal Pradesh, which have not formed a district in this period, are shown for comparison. Hover or tap for detail.
Source: Authors' compilation from various sources. Year: 2000 to 2026. Caveats: Counts record districts formed, not net change, and were compiled without a single official register. Rajasthan's figure does not reflect the nine districts dissolved in December 2024.
In August 2026, Chief Minister V. D. Satheesan stated that a delimitation commission would examine a proposal to create a new district centred on Muvattupuzha, carved out of Ernakulam district. The Revenue Minister also announced that a Delimitation and District Reorganisation Commission would be constituted after Onam. Meanwhile, separate demands have emerged for a Neyyattinkara district in southern Kerala and a Tirur district in the north. With proposals originating from different regions, the broader question is what criteria should guide the reorganisation of Kerala’s district boundaries as a whole.
Why Kerala Need a District Reorganization
Although population levels are high across many of Kerala’s districts, Malappuram stands out as a particularly striking example. Formed in 1969, the district had a population of 4.11 million in the 2011 Census, spread across 3,550 km²—approximately 2.4 times the area of Delhi (1,483 km²). Estimates cited in the current debate place its population at between 4.5 million and 5 million, although no official figure is available.
Malappuram’s Population Compared with Eight Smaller Indian States.
Each of these states has its own legislature, council of ministers and secretariat. Tick the box to show the unofficial current estimate for Malappuram.
Source: Census of India 2011; current Malappuram estimate as cited by political leaders (The News Minute, 2026; ETV Bharat, 2026). Year: 2011, except the estimate.
Beyond geographical features and land area, Malappuram’s population can also be compared with other districts within Kerala. In 2011, Pathanamthitta (1.20 million), Idukki (1.11 million) and Kottayam (1.97 million) had a combined population of 4.28 million, nearly matching Malappuram’s 4.11 million. However, these three districts have separate District Collectors, District Medical Officers and district police chiefs, while Malappuram has only one of each.
Malappuram's 2011 population nearly equalled that of three central Kerala districts combined.
Population at the 2011 Census. Hover or tap a segment for the exact figure.
Source: Census of India 2011. Year: 2011.
At the national level, India has roughly 785 districts and 543 Lok Sabha constituencies, amounting to approximately three districts for every two constituencies. Malappuram, however, has two Lok Sabha constituencies (Malappuram, 6 out of 7 Legislative Segments of Ponnani and 3 out of 7 Legislative Segments of Wayanad) within a single district. A Sub-Collector in Tirur has suggested that a manageable district should ideally comprise around seven Assembly constituencies and one Lok Sabha constituency.
Evidence: Service Load Per Person Rises with District Population
If districts are the primary units for allocating government posts, facilities, and vehicles, the most populous districts would be expected to have the lowest level of coverage per person. The map below examines this pattern across all 14 districts using four indicators: people per government doctor, people per government hospital bed, students per Plus One batch (the first year of higher secondary education), and the number of KSRTC ordinary buses per lakh population.
Higher Population, Heavier Administrative Load.
Red marks a heavier load per unit than the Kerala reference value; green marks a lighter one. Choose a measure, then hover or tap a district.
Source: Population: Census of India 2011. Doctors and beds: Health at a Glance 2024 and CAG Report on Public Health 2024, as published in PRI (2026). Buses: Asianet News (June 2026); per-lakh rates are the authors' calculation using 2011 population. Caveats: Doctors and beds cover government facilities only. Buses cover KSRTC ordinary services only, not private buses. District boundaries are approximate and for display only.
Conclusion
Kerala's districts differ sharply in size. In 2011, Wayanad had 0.82 million people and Malappuram 4.11 million, though population alone should not decide how districts are redrawn. Public service capacity per person also tends to be thinnest in the most populous districts. Among the comparable states examined here, Kerala has the fewest districts for its population, and its district boundaries have not been revised in four decades.
View the district data
Sources and notes
- Narasimhan, V. and Weaver, J. (2024). "Polity Size and Local Government Performance: Evidence from India." American Economic Review 114(11): 3385–3426. doi.org/10.1257/aer.20221712. Percentages from the authors' summary: Narasimhan, V. and Weaver, J. (2024). "Reducing the size of administrative units improved local governments in India." VoxDev, 15 February. voxdev.org.
- Dahis, R. and Szerman, C. (2024). "Decentralizing Development: Evidence from Government Splits." IZA Discussion Paper No. 16761. Bonn: IZA Institute of Labor Economics. docs.iza.org/dp16761.pdf. Working paper; not yet peer-reviewed.
- Bazzi, S., Campante, F., Do, Q.-A., Goyal, R., Gudgeon, M. and Muralidharan, K. (2023). "State Capacity and Unequal Public Good Provision: Evidence from District Splitting in India and Indonesia." Paper presented at the ASSA Annual Meeting, session "Distance, State Capacity, and Development", 8 January. American Economic Association. aeaweb.org. Unpublished; cited from the conference abstract.
- Rajan, J. and Malghan, D. (2022). "Administrative Proliferation and Developmental Outcomes: Data from India." IIMB Working Paper No. 658. Bengaluru: Indian Institute of Management Bangalore. repository.iimb.ac.in. Summary: "Demographic and development outcomes of administrative proliferation." Ideas for India, 8 August 2022. ideasforindia.in.
- Sidharthan, C. S. (2026). "Kerala: Renewed calls for new districts after 40 years." ETV Bharat, 5 March. etvbharat.com.
- TNM Staff (2026). "As Kerala mulls Muvattupuzha district, IUML renews demand to split Malappuram." The News Minute, 25 August. thenewsminute.com.
- News On AIR (2024). "Rajasthan govt announces to dissolve 9 out of 17 districts created by previous govt." All India Radio, 28 December. newsonair.gov.in.
- ETV Bharat (2025). "Andhra Pradesh Cabinet Approves Formation Of Two New Districts." 30 December. etvbharat.com.
- Afsal K (2026). "Exploring Regional Disparity in Kerala's Health System." Policy and Research Initiative, 12 October, drawing on Directorate of Health Services, Kerala, Health at a Glance 2024, and Comptroller and Auditor General of India, Report on Public Health, Kerala (2024). priresearch.in.
Data note. District counts by state, new districts since 2000, state populations, Malappuram's administrative history and Plus One batch sizes come from a data note compiled by PRI for this story. Where a figure in that note conflicted with a published primary source, the published source has been used and the difference is stated in the chart notes.
