Increasing demand for new States & failure of Balanced Regional Planning

Imbalanced regional development and improper allocations of resources within Indian States (both large and small) continue to impact on key social and economic indicators. Development projects largely remain influenced by political interests and not by actual need on ground. Revenue generating urban centres tend to receive more attention and continue to be islands of investments, if not excellence.

Image Source : http://www.niticentral.com/2013/08/01/the-list-grows-longer-112403.html

This inequity at State level coupled with issues of identity, culture and linguistic differences has often triggered vociferous demands for smaller administrative units. The demands tend to be largely proliferated by the political leadership, students and common citizens who take pride in their distinct regional identity. The claims are backed by disparity in sharing of infrastructure, water, power, roads and even government jobs. The process of carving new states is a tough one and is usually aided with frequent presence and support of police and paramilitary forces. Sentiments run high and are supported by self immolation bids that put undue pressure on the machinery. There is always a risk to buy in bias on boundary identification. It stems from political aspirations, economic gains and several vested interests.

 An article by Down to Earth states that demands are usually backed by issues related to disputes of sharing and utilisation of natural resources with mother states. It adds that linguistic and cultural reasons, which were the primary basis for creating new states in the country, have now become secondary in most of these cases.” 

However, from a regional planner’s perspective, there are a few items that gain utmost importance. Balanced regional development is a sentiment that has been echoed in Indian development planning since five year plans were attempted. The failure to do so has continued to show impacts in such inequitable distributions which gain a political magnitude. Further, lack of immediate answers also creates a lot of bitterness and competing sentiments in the people of same State. Thus, it is essentially the failure of planning machinery that triggers social, political and economic unrest in the first place. 

Decentralization and stake in participatory development have been promised on paper but still need to be translated to the lowest level. While a robust decentralised environment, could provide a more independent and participatory approach to development, failure to do so has ensured that pettiest decisions remain related to State clearances. While new investments remain a priority to provide for impressive growth rate by State governments, failure to prioritize new investments leads to development that does not relate to true aspirations of people. Even if it happens, it is not accountable to deliver mutually agreed performance levels. Investments continue without regular assessment and monitoring of the dividends that they are delivering at the smallest level. 

There are 53 urban agglomerations in India with a population of 1 million or more as of 2011 against 35 in 2001.Today about 43 percent of the urban population of India lives in these cities. As employment opportunities increase in urban centres, the migration of population in and out of these cities will continue creating pressure points that challenge the plans for balanced regional development. With smaller states, the political space will also get more crowded and less clear mandates with emerge at Centre. As elaborated in Down to Earth article,

“since 1984 not a single national party has formed government on its own. The 1980s and ’90s witnessed the electoral boom of regional political parties. Regional parties have been expanding both in number as well as in vote share. In the first Lok Sabha election in 1952, of the 55 parties that contested 18 were regional parties. The number went up to 36 in the 2004 election.

 In the 1984 general election the regional parties got 11.2 per cent of the votes; in 2009, their share went up to 28.4 per cent. In the past 20 years the share of regional parties in total votes has consistently increased. For the next elections in 2014, analysts estimate regional parties will contest in 150-180 seats where the two national parties may not be significant players.”

It will thus create a cocktail of political, social and economic aspirations that may be challenging to provide for.

The Singur issue has been dominating media headlines for quite some time. While the debate and negotiations featured, I was convinced that it will set a trend for a healthy developmental debate and set path for several developmental projects to come...

However, I am dissapointed. Tata's finally decided to move out dream Nano project out of Singur. While this has sent out negative vibes to many industries waiting to set foot in Bengal, it is also a set back for the civil society groups that have failed to work out a middle path that can beenfit all. What is bothering me is following:

Is there a way to consider interests of all varied groups in developmental projects?

If not, I doubt if India can develop and propagate a common developmental agenda for its diverse groups. This essentially means that divide between rich and poor will continue to grow further in the coming years. Civil society groups will continue targeting capitalists for profiteering and capitalists will loose ground to cater to social objectives of equality, employment and rural development.

I wonder if it really makes sense for any of the groups. But yes, it definitely makes sense for Mamta Banerjee who's political career has managed some sensational vibes ! Thanks to Singur !

Will Globalization deliver?

I have been inundated with the subject “globalization” and it seems to have been the talk of the town for quite some time. So I was not at all surprised when Friedman (one of my favorite American journalist) was in India to explore what outsourcing means to India in the changing context and how is it benefiting. The sneak peek of his findings was telecasted on Discovery (30th April, 8 pm IST). Friedman deserves an appreciation to be able to compare what effects it has on India culture, society and of course economy. (in a simple layman’s language without using the lengthy statistics, so that non economists like me who claim a pie of development planners don’t shy away due to lack of economics/social science background) He is also able to put forth the disparity in the benefits and highlight the plight of the poor who seem to have missed the cake.

When we put forth the above question, the opinion is polarized between those who want to push it through any means and those (at the receiving hand) who hold the prejudices about it. What we lack is a balanced mind that can weigh the pros and cons and devise a win-win strategy. But a strategy that considers social, economic or physical factors in isolation is definitely going to fail disastrously or face a public outrage. This is what happens to the current government’s proposition for increasing OBC quota in higher education. We may argue that the heterodoxy in the Indian society (amongst the educated/activist class) is increasing and the handful benefiting from the globalization will stretch out to protect their interests. So what happens to those (so called orthodox) who are not able to find out a voice for themselves? You may argue that they have been finding their voices being heard, thanks to the NGOs in the Indian context. But such a voice always lands the risk of opinion being influenced by the NGO interests. The last few years has seen a never ending war of words/debate on the same. What I am looking for is some balanced models that will benefit all!