INTER STATE DISPARITIES IN GROWTH PATTERN ACROSS INDIA.

 Economic history of different countries has shown that as time moves forward the relative importance of certain regions or  provinces may decline and that of others will increase. The working paper on relative Economic performance of Indian States  prepared by Sanjeev  Sanyal and Aakanksha Arora also pointed out such changes in the growth pattern of Indian  States  between 1960-61 and 2023-24. After the introduction of economic reforms and liberalisation in 1991, it has been observed that at the time of  independence the three Presidency towns namely Bombay in Maharashtra, Calcutta in West Bengal and Madras in Tamil Nadu were centers of large industrial clusters. However by 1960s their relative dominance witnessed some changes. In 1960-61 among the states Delhi was the wealthiest followed by Maharashtra and West Bengal. .In 1960-61 Uttar Pradesh ranked 1st with 14.4%share of India's GDP  followed by Maharashtra 12.5%,West Bengal 10.5%Tamil Nadu 8.7%  and Bihar occupied 5th position with 7.8% share of India's GDP. On the otherhand top 5 States measured in terms of relative percapita income in 1960-61 showed Delhi on the top with 218.3,followed by Maharashtra 133.7 ,West Bengal 127.5 Punjab 119.6 and Gujarat 118.3 percent of national average. Following Green Revolution both Punjab and Haryana experienced boom in agriculture and witnessed increase in relative percapita income. In Haryana  from  106.9% 1n 1960-61 to 138.5% in 1970-71 and remained similar levels until 1990-91.On the contrary Punjab's relative percapita income rose from 119.6% of national average in 1960-61  to 169 % in 1970-71, but further declined to 146.1% by 1980-81 and remained stable at the same level. However Haryana's share in India's GDP continued to increase and remained at 3.6 % in 2023-24.Currently Bihar and Odisha have the lowest percapita income of only about 70-71% of national average. Surprisingly Uttar Pradesh relative share of national GDP also decreased from 14.4% in 1960-61 to 12.6 % in 1990 - 91 and 9.5% in 2023-24,

 After the introduction of economic reforms and liberalisation measures there has been marked changes in the development experience of different states .A major breakthrough in development was the emergence of Southern States especially Karnataka and Telengana as the economic power house. States like Karnataka Andhra Pradesh, Telengana a Tamil Nadu and Kerala together currently account  for about 30% of  India's GDP .Moreover the relative per capita income of all Southern states are higher than national average with 181,171,and 152,5% % higher in Karnataka Tamil Nadu and Kerala respectively.Kerala's share had increased from 3.4% in 1960-61 to peak of 4.1% in 2000- 01  but marginally drifted  to 3.8 % in 2023-24. As a matter of fact even though the Southern States  together account for 30.6 % of  India's GDP in 2023-24 Kerala is the only state whose growth has drifted down to 3.8 % among Southern States in 2023-  24.Andhra Pradesh (including Telengana ) share in national GDP increased from 7.7 % in 1960-61 to 9.7 in 2023-24. But  after bifurcation  Andhra Pradesh  share declined to 4.7 and Telengana remained  at a higher  level of 4.9% in 2023-24.  and consistently shown better economic performance since 2010-11.Interestingly .Both Gujarat and Maharashtra had percapita incomes above the national average. However in 1960-61 Gujarat lagged behind Maharashtra with a percapita income 118.3% compared to Maharashtra's 133.7,but further changed with latest data indicating that percapita income of Gujarat is estimated to be 160.7% percent of national average compared to  only 150.7% for  Maharashtra.  West Bengal, Bihar,  Odisha and Rajasthan experienced consistent decline in percapita income. Sikkim's percapita income below the national average in 1980-81 which surged to national average in 2000-01 and jumped to 300% in 2023-24. Assam which had percapita income slightly above national average (103% in1960-61 ) meantime experienced a decline in relative percapita income and reached 61.2% 2010-11 and 73.7% in 2023-24. Madhya Pradesh along with  Chattisgarg together combined  experienced GDP growth 6.3 % in 1960-61 also reported 6.1 % of GDP in 2023-24 as against Chattisgarg  alone accounting for 1.5 in 2000-01 and 1.7 % national GDP in 2023-24.Undivided Bihar's share declined from 7.8 in 1960-61 to 4.3 in 2023-24.   Jammu & Kashmir's share had increased from 0.7 in 1960-61 to 1.0 in 1980-81 and stabilised at 0.8 in 2010-11, 2020-21 and 2023-24, whereas Puducherry's share of GDP remained 0.2 in 2000-01 to 2023-24.  

Implications of the above study indicate that both Southern and Western regions of the country performed well in terms of both State's GDP and percapita income. For instance Telengana, Karnataka Tamil Nadu  showed exemplary  performance,   Goa's relative percapita income doubled over the period.  Gujarat and Maharashtra showed consistently high growth  rate over the study period with gradually Gujarat overtaking Maharashtra as well. Among the northern states both Delhi and Haryana did well. It is disturbing to note the decline of growth in major states like West Bengal  Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. Uttar Pradesh relative share in national GDP decreased from 14.4 in 1960-61 to just 9.5 in2023-2 4.It is really a Paradox despite Bengal  being  the land richly endowed  with largest pool of great intellectuals philosophers, economists and Nobel laureates and natural resources and infrastructure is lagging behind in the share of  GDP growth.  West Bengal's earlier track record as share of national GDP was 10.5 in 1960-61 which consistently got reduced to mere 5.6 % in 2023-24.Bihar's  share in  GDP sharply declined from 7.8 in 1960-61 to just 4.3 in 2023-24.  Consequentlly India witnessed massive migration of workers from states like Bengal, Bihar, Assam and Uttar Pradesh who are  flocking to other states especially in southern region including Kerala  in search of their livelihood. Kerala accounted for 3.4% national GDP in 1960-61 which increased to 3.8 in 1970-71, 4.1 in 2000-01 " but  marginally declined to 3.8 in subsequent years including 2023-24. Even though inward remittances from Keralites employed abroad are not included in the GDP estimates more transparent pro deveopment activities and constructive cooperation from major stakeholders including the opposition can only improve further Kerala's development record and GDP growth. Moreover appropriate policy measures to bring fair distribution in the devolution of Finance Commission's award to  better  performing states in social indicators,  including Kerala can only provide better fiscal space to the financially constrained states. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NOBEL PRIZE FOR RESEARCH ON INEQUALITY, SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND PROSPERITY

 The  2024 Nobel memorial Prize in Economic Sciences were won by the trio Turkish American Daron Acemoglu,Simon Johnson and James Robinson both  British Americans  for their valuable research on wealth Inequality between nations and relationships between societal Inequality and Prosperity. Research into Inequality of  wealth,  across countries by examining various political and economic systems introduced by European colonisers , The trio have demonstrated the relationship between societal institutions and prosperity. While Acemoglu and Simon Johnson are professors at Massachusetts  Institute of Technology, whereas  Robinson is serving at Chicago University. The Jury highlighted that  through  their research work they have illuminated how economic and political institutions play a decisive role in determining that while some countries prospers others do not.As they researched on global inequality in wealth and reasons for some countries ...
Read more

FROM DISCONTENTS TO PROGRESSIVE CAPITALISM: IS IT WORKABLE IN INDIA ?

Nobel Laureate Joseph  E Stiglitz a public policy activist and development economist associated with research and policy making in World Bank and other countries including USA, China and Singapore made a scathing attack against ongoing globalisation and activities of global institutions  in his  brilliant work "Globalisation and its Discontents " in 2001 .After two decades he has brought another path breaking study entitled " People ,Power and Profits:Progressive Capitalism for an age of discontent" suggesting various measures to overcome inequality of income and wealth, unemployment, malnutrition,poverty, climate change etc as bye products of discontents of globalisation.In this context it is relevant to mention about the role of economic system which refers to the sum total arrangements for  production and distribution of goods and services in an economy. While in a primitive feudal society customs and practices shape the pattern of resource allocation and distrib...
Read more

IMPACT OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) PROBLEMS AND PERSPECTIVES

 .ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE  When American computer scientist John Mc Carthy initially endorsed the term "Artificial Intelligence and further followed by another four scientists including Alan Turming none took it seriously that technologies like  pattern recognition, machine learning, neural networks, big data, self Al etc are all set to shape the future of humanity in terms of security, polity,economy, society and governance. Artificial alogretchc Intelligence (AI) is a branch of study that utilises machines to substitute human intelligence by performing tasks like learning, reasoning  and making decisions. AI provides a set of technologies which enables computers to perform variety of advanced functions including the ability to see,understand and translate spoken and written language, analyse  data, make recommendations and more...whch can revolutionise life across the globe. According to the existing primary classification AI can be classified into four - reac...
Read more