The improved law and order situation has led to substantial small-scale private investments
Dr Shaibal Gupta
Member Secretary, Asian Development Research Institute
A failed state run by a venal political elite, a civil society fractured by caste, a dysfunctional bureaucracy that does not police the streets or ensure that teachers attend school and an economic sinkhole bypassed by the economic boom that has transformed the country: that was the general image of Bihar until four years ago.
But new statistics published by the Central Statistics Department of the Union Government presents a completely new picture. Bihar is being seen as a miracle. The state’s economy is growing by 11.44 per cent with its gross domestic product (GDP) in 2008-09, according to the statistics made available by the state’s Directorate of Economics and Statistics, and reproduced on the website of the Central Statistical Organisation (CSO). That’s not all. The state’s GDP at constant (1999-2000) prices also increased by 22 per cent in 2006-07 and by 8 per cent in 2007-08, according to the same source. The statistics show that the state’s output from 2004-05 to 2008-09 grew at a double-digit annual rate, outperforming India as a whole. Is this growth for real? Has the Nitish Kumar government actually done wonders for the state?
Bihar should not be measured in terms of growth trajectory alone. It should be evaluated in terms of qualitative and quantitative functioning of the state structure now. Bihar historically had a non-functioning state. Being part of a zamindari system, the quantum of revenue collection was limited during the British era. In turn, there was limited per capita expenditure in health, education, administration, police, etc. This per capita expenditure, which determines the quality of governance, was not only lowest in the pre-Independence period but remained unchanged even in the post-Independence period. Over and over above, being a zamindari system, there was absence of updating of land records.
In the process, survey and settlement operations were not done on a regular basis in this part of the country. The absence of updating of records was not prevalent in other parts of India, where mainly Ryotwari or Mahalwari system were prevalent.
In the post-Independence period, while Nehru was involved in building national state structure, there were commensurate efforts at provincial level like Kamaraj in Tamil Nadu, Partap Singh Kairon in Punjab and Y.B. Chavan in Maharashtra and Biju Patnaik in Orissa. Unfortunately there was no commensurate effort in Bihar.
Dr Shaibal Gupta
Member Secretary, Asian Development Research Institute
A failed state run by a venal political elite, a civil society fractured by caste, a dysfunctional bureaucracy that does not police the streets or ensure that teachers attend school and an economic sinkhole bypassed by the economic boom that has transformed the country: that was the general image of Bihar until four years ago.
But new statistics published by the Central Statistics Department of the Union Government presents a completely new picture. Bihar is being seen as a miracle. The state’s economy is growing by 11.44 per cent with its gross domestic product (GDP) in 2008-09, according to the statistics made available by the state’s Directorate of Economics and Statistics, and reproduced on the website of the Central Statistical Organisation (CSO). That’s not all. The state’s GDP at constant (1999-2000) prices also increased by 22 per cent in 2006-07 and by 8 per cent in 2007-08, according to the same source. The statistics show that the state’s output from 2004-05 to 2008-09 grew at a double-digit annual rate, outperforming India as a whole. Is this growth for real? Has the Nitish Kumar government actually done wonders for the state?
Bihar should not be measured in terms of growth trajectory alone. It should be evaluated in terms of qualitative and quantitative functioning of the state structure now. Bihar historically had a non-functioning state. Being part of a zamindari system, the quantum of revenue collection was limited during the British era. In turn, there was limited per capita expenditure in health, education, administration, police, etc. This per capita expenditure, which determines the quality of governance, was not only lowest in the pre-Independence period but remained unchanged even in the post-Independence period. Over and over above, being a zamindari system, there was absence of updating of land records.
In the process, survey and settlement operations were not done on a regular basis in this part of the country. The absence of updating of records was not prevalent in other parts of India, where mainly Ryotwari or Mahalwari system were prevalent.
In the post-Independence period, while Nehru was involved in building national state structure, there were commensurate efforts at provincial level like Kamaraj in Tamil Nadu, Partap Singh Kairon in Punjab and Y.B. Chavan in Maharashtra and Biju Patnaik in Orissa. Unfortunately there was no commensurate effort in Bihar.
Read these article :-
No comments:
Post a Comment