Events & Issues
New Delhi, 23 November 2016
States On Social
Indices
TOWARDS COMPETITIVE
FEDERALISM
By Dr S Saraswathi
(Former Director,
ICSSR, New Delhi)
NITI Aayog has announced a plan of ranking States on social
indices on the basis of their performance in social sectors. Initially, the
sectors included are health, water, and education – the three most crucial
areas that determine the level of social development of an area or people. This
is in accordance with the Government’s commitment to social sector already
manifested in including health and education among the nine pillars set to
transform India.
While water is a basic necessity, health and education are
mutually dependant sectors – one helping the development of the other. Indices
are being finalised to measure the achievements of States on parameters
pertaining to these sectors.
The purpose seems to be to link the disbursal of Central
funds with State’s performance on these indices. The question whether the
better performers should be rewarded with more funds or low rank holders should
be helped with more aid is likely to emerge in view of varied causes accounting
for a State’s achievements and failures comprising both human, administrative,
and environmental factors.
The utility of social indicators to assess the quality of
life, monitor the social system and to identify required changes and guide
policy interventions is recognised by scholars as well as administrators. It
led almost to an academic movement in the 1970s and resulted in improvements in
methods of measurement and reporting in course of time. Social indices are
created to reflect the conditions of life at grassroots – a responsible task in
planning.
It is clarified that ranking of States will not be done on
the basis of the current position of the States, but on the basis of their
performance in one year after the introduction of the scheme. It is good news
for those at the bottom and an incentive to intensify their efforts. The
erstwhile BIMARU States (Bihar, Madhya
Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh) can improve their rank provided they
register a good record in the year ahead.
It is also reported that ranking will be done by a third
party like the World Bank (WB) obviously to maintain neutrality. One can hope
that this will eliminate petty party politics and fight over ranking between
States.
Two equally significant effects on the nation’s march
towards progress and development may result from this exercise – one to drive
all States to focus on the three most important social sectors mentioned, and
the other to promote a healthy competition among States to improve their
performance.
The former is necessary as social development and economic
progress are two sides of the same coin. These are inseparables. The latter
will promote competitive federalism, which is complementary to cooperative
federalism by which Indian federalism is generally described in textbooks.
The NDA Government has all along been stressing the
significance of cooperative federalism for integrated growth of the nation. For
faster progress and to ensure that no one lags behind, there is need to
consciously infuse a spirit of competition between States which is presently
attempted.
Competitive federalism is already at work in economic
policies since liberalisation. States vie with one another to hold investors’
meet; Chief Ministers go abroad to promote trade relations; State governments
enter into agreements with foreign countries for social-economic projects. Regional meetings are also held to promote
common economic interests. In these endeavours, some are going fast and some
lag behind – a situation that ranking may help to change.
Mint Asia and the Institute of Competitiveness has released
The State Competitiveness Report which
measures and ranks 28 major States on parameters that are vital for Indian
economy. The report categorises States on economic basis. Similar ranking on
social indices is now launched by the Government with a view to bridging social
disparities between States without which economic progress will halt.
There may be several genuine problems in making comparisons
between States. Even in the case of Scheduled Castes and Tribes considered on
the whole to have low indices, their disadvantage varies substantially depending
on the State where they live. Data from the Socio-Economic Survey conducted by
the Census and the UNICEF’s Rapid Survey on Children, for instance, have found that SC and ST children in Tamil
Nadu and Kerala are less likely to be underweight than OBC and forward caste
children in Jharkhand, Odhisha or Bihar. National averages hide State-level
disparities.
Such inequities are common in the level of education also in
terms of literacy, number of schools and colleges, years of schooling, rate of
drop-outs, teacher-pupil ratio, basic facilities in institutions etc.
Ranking of States will doubtless introduce a semblance of
competitive federalism over the established notion of cooperative federalism of
India.
Bill Gates is reported to have remarked that the positive competition between
States in India
is one of the most positive dynamics that the country has.
Competitive federalism, a concept associated with the
writings of Albert Briton (1990s), applies market-type competition to
government arena. In this, the Centre competes with the States/provinces and
vice-versa and the States compete with one another while all of them are
contributing to a nation’s development. The competition is widening day by day
due to increasing awareness of people and institutions and the need to win
races and be equipped to face fresh challenges.
To succeed in competitions in trade, investments, and
commerce, level playing is required that is, a certain amount of parity in
social development meaning health and education. It will help all-round and
inclusive development of the nation.
Fierce competition between States is considered a healthy
atmosphere for realising our aim of “Make
in India”.
At the same time, NITI Aayog is set to provide for constitution of Regional
Councils to promote cooperation between States for joint progress.
Without the present stress on ranking, State-wise
presentation of data is a known practice. It is adopted by the Census, the
National Sample Survey Organisation, the Planning Commission, the National
Rural Health Mission, the National Crime Research Bureau, and all Government departments.
The Social Progress Index published on the basis of writings
of Amartya Sen et al., measures the extent to which countries provide for
social and environmental needs of their citizens by 54 indicators in three
areas. These include Basic Human Needs covering nutrition and basic medical
care, water and sanitation, shelter, and personal safety; Foundations of
Well-being indicated by access to basic knowledge, information and
communication, health and wellness, and environmental quality; and Opportunity measured by personal rights, personal freedom
and choice, tolerance and exclusion, and access to advanced education.
The index defines social progress as the capacity of a
society to meet the basic human needs of its citizens, establish building
blocks that allow citizens and communities to enhance and sustain the quality
of their lives and create the conditions for all individuals to reach their
full potential.
Competitive federalism is supported by the Centre’s fiscal
policy of transferring funds to State governments and giving them freedom to
fix their priorities in spending within national objectives.
In the context of this freedom of States to make their
plans, ranking on social indices in a way becomes necessary to promote the
responsibility and accountability of the governments at the Centre and the States.
---INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|