Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 150
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 151
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
LATEST NEWS UPDATES | States in India: Governance holds key, size is only secondary by Subodh Varma

States in India: Governance holds key, size is only secondary by Subodh Varma

Share this article Share this article
published Published on Nov 17, 2011   modified Modified on Nov 17, 2011

Are smaller states easier to govern and hence better for the people? The most recent reorganization took place in November 2000 when three mega states - Uttar Pradesh,Bihar and Madhya Pradesh - were sliced up to give birth to Uttarakhand, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh, respectively.

It is more than a decade since then. The new states are now well-established. But, how are they faring compared to the 'mother' states? Has the separation paved the way for a more efficient, people-oriented administration? These questions assume importance in the context of UP chief minister Mayawati's dramatic announcement that she would press for the state to be split into four.

Data collated by TOI on some key markers of economic and social well-being present a mixed picture. Economic growth has been a reasonable 6.8% per year for Bihar on average between 2000-01 and 2009-10, while Jharkhand has averaged a touch higher at about 7%. Considering the huge boom in mining over the past decade, Jharkhand should perhaps have done much better. Bihar's growth has been spurred mainly by agricultural production and some core industries like construction.

In the other two pairs of 'mother-daughter' states, the daughters are clearly winning hands down in the race for economic growth. Chhattisgarhhad an average 8.8% annual growth rate compared to about 5.6% in Madhya Pradesh. Uttarakhand was rocketing up at 10.8% yearly whileUttar Pradesh was far behind at 5.4%. Both the smaller states suffer from difficult, forested terrain. But both have utilized their natural resources to forge ahead - Uttarakhand has tapped its vast hydro potential to become a seller of power to the northern grid, while Chhattisgarh has opened up its mineral resources for exploitation in a big way.

In all these states, agriculture is the mainstay of the majority of the population and foodgrain the most widely cultivated crops. Total foodgrain production dipped by a massive 15% in Bihar and 19% in Jharkhand between 2001-02 and 2010-11. In both states, the decline is largely in paddy, afflicted by deficient rainfall. Lack of irrigation smites both large and small with equally devastating effects. In Jharkhand, the potentialities are revealed by the fact that in 2008-09 foodgrain production touched nearly 42 lakh tonnes - nearly double of what it was in 2001-02.

Two of the big 'mother' states, Bihar and MP, received substantial help from the central government in these years, while UP has been largely neglected. In 2009, grants and loans from the centre were as much as 25% of aggregate state expenditure in Bihar and 22% in MP. Their 'daughter' states were not recipients of this largesse. But in the UP-Uttarakhand duo, the reverse was true - the small hill state had 32% of its spending coming from the centre compared to just 14% in UP.

One measure of the government's political will to deliver the goods is its spending on social sectors like education and health. Chhattisgarh, and to some extent UP and Bihar, have seen a notable rise in this. Jharkhand and Uttarakhand saw declines, although at 45% of all spending the proportion still remains high. Clearly, it is not the size of the state that matters but the political will of the ruling dispensation that drives this.

But it would be simplistic to think that throwing money at complex problems is the only way out. Resources have to be backed by good management and delivery. Health and education indicators in these states amply prove this. Jharkhand saw an incredible doubling in the number of primary and upper primary schools leading to its effective literacy rate (for those above 7 years of age) rising from 54% in 2001 to 68% in 2011. Clearly, there was a pent-up need that was being fulfilled. But Bihar saw only a 13% rise in such schools, yet its literacy rate rose from a mere 47% to 64% in the same period. Again it is not size that matters - Bihar's population is 10.3 crore, three times Jharkhand's 3.3 crore.

The infant mortality rate in these states has declined across the board over the past decade with no distinction between big and small. Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand showed 26-point decreases, while MP and UP showed 20-point dips. Uttarakhand and Bihar both lagged behind with 10-point declines. On the complex social-cultural issue of declining sex ratio too, all states show further declines, indicating that the availability of sonography machines is giving wings to son-preference and daughter killing in a big way.

So, will the carving up of UP into four parts benefit the people of this most populous state of the country? The past provides no clear answers to this question; what is definite is that it all depends on what kind of governance takes place.

The Times of India, 18 November, 2011, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/States-in-India-Governance-holds-key-size-is-only-secondary/articleshow/10775778.cms


Related Articles

 

Write Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Video Archives

Archives

share on Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Feedback
Read Later

Contact Form

Please enter security code
      Close