The state of states: Quest for equitable society

The Public Affairs Index (PAI) 2020, the annual assessment of sub-national governance released by the Public Affairs Centre last recently, provides interesting evidence-based insights on the state of the states. While the best-ranked states - Kerala (large states), Goa (small states), and Chandigarh (Union Territories) - made the headlines, the more important processes of economic and social transition underway in the country and its implications for future development praxis that the PAI points to, were mostly missed.

This is ironic because what the states do and how, or what they fail to do and why, are concerns that can scarcely be exaggerated. The PAI 2020 in essence, reflects these concerns through a scientific data analytics framework. It examines the central development challenges at the subnational level - growth, equity and sustainability - especially questions of what is happening in the disadvantaged geographies despite the best endeavours of the Central and state governments. A case in point would be the aspirational districts, to use the Niti Aayog’s euphemism, that are at the risk of being left behind in the development process.

The PAI 2020, therefore, serves an important purpose: it draws attention to the reality that is India, or an approximation of it, and therefore not to be set aside lightly. If the governments are able to draw actionable insights from it that enable them to improve governance in the years ahead, it would be better still. A good starting point is to go back to basics:

First, real obstacles stand in the path of a fuller understanding of the persistent inter-generational deprivation and loss of opportunity challenges, that appear to reproduce themselves, in parts of some states. To begin with, the influence of a ‘one size fits all’ approach on our development outlook has been pervasive; and the overwhelming majority of interventions, including the Centrally-sponsored schemes, designed and implemented uncritically and mechanically, unwittingly perhaps, subverting the doctrine of objective pluralism.

Second, the objective conditions for development across the states are not uniformly conducive to competitive federalism that the Niti Aayog aspires to. Consider these facts: On the human development index (HDI), India ranks 129 among 189 countries (UN HDI Report, 2019). Since the HDI is also a measure of multi-dimensional poverty, it is important to address the emerging factors - technology, climate change, and gender - of inequality. India faces a long road to a more equitable HDI across states, certainly longer than the road to a $5 Trillion economy.

There is a need to understand better why economic growth has not had the same poverty-reducing impact in some states relative to other similarly placed states. A sense of urgency must circumscribe the response to these persistent inequalities if the government’s emphasis on ‘Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas’ is to translate to reality.

The evidence from PAI 2020 on the wide disparities in human development across the states, suggests that inequality is significantly more pronounced in India, than might first be supposed. If there is just one principle that we might draw from the PAI report, it must be to recognise the loss in percentage HDI due to inequality, especially high from both education and health.

Third, there is a process of convergence occurring, even if slow, between the high performing states and the traditionally low performing states on several aspects of growth and equity. This is cause for cautious optimism. Indeed, if this trend were to continue, it can be argued that demographics favour the hitherto slow growing states because they have relatively younger populations.

It is therefore likely that the future growth drivers will come from some of these populous and resource endowed, but currently less developed states. It is also noteworthy that the progress made by some of these states on specific indicators has outpaced the high performing states. For instance, in the large states’ category, Bihar has emerged as the state with the most improvement on some of the equity indicators despite being at the bottom of the PAI 2020 rankings on the equity pillar.

Reducing malnutrition

The state has shown improvement in reducing malnutrition besides being a top performer in the number of children enrolled in organised learning under the ICDS programme. Contrast this with Kerala, dropping to the bottom of the delta rankings on equity, pointing to the fact that the state has shown the least improvement on some equity indicators in the time period studied. The stagnation in progress is attributable to specific indicators such as reduction in malnutrition, participation in organised learning, increase in the cases of crimes against SCs and STs, and cases of rapes.

Finally, there is a pattern of a perceptible slowing down in progress on certain indicators in the traditional high growth states, and this should be a cause for concern. The worst performer in terms of the delta value in the growth pillar is Tamil Nadu which occupies the last position on the growth pillar in Delta rankings.

Similarly, Kerala and Karnataka - states that feature at the top of the PAI 2020 growth rankings - are eighth and tenth, respectively, in terms of Delta performance. This suggests that the states may be experiencing stagnation in growth which must be corrected.

From a political practice perspective, the evidence is clear: India represents a federal polity. In its development endeavour, sub-national governance is assuming a distinctly more significant role than before; and more specifically on human development, one that is proximate and arguably, more important than national governance.

The states constitute the foundational architecture for human development and must be trusted and supported. Yes, political economy collisions will occur from time to time, in a union of states of the kind India represents, sometimes resulting in an uneasy equilibrium, but one that under the circumstances must serve as the basis for cooperative federalism. In the quest for a just and equitable society, viewing the states as subalterns is not the best way of achieving this.

(The writer is Director, Public Affairs Centre, Bengaluru)