Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Semester
Sujeet Kumar
Roll No. 25
[REGIONAL
IMBALANCE]
Content
Tenth and Eleventh Five year Plan and Regional Imbalance……………………. (16)
Bibliography
2
Concept of Regional Imbalance
Regional disparities are the result of our unfinished task of nation building. These
reflect essentially the inadequacies of the development strategy followed since
independence and its failure to correct the distortions brought about by colonial rule.
Of late, these tensions have acquired alarming proportions and are threatening to
strike at the very roots of the nation state. This has brought to sharp focus the need
of better understanding of the pattern of regionalization, the nature of regional
imbalances and their changing structure over time.
• Man made in the sense of neglect of some regions and preference of others
for investment and development effort.
• Inter-state or intra-sate,
• Total or sectorial,
3
Indicators of Regional Imbalance
To study the regional imbalance, the 15 major states of India have been classified
into two major groups:
These 15 states taken together accounted for 90% of the total population in 2001.
4
(Source:
http://www.mapsofindia.com/census2001/population/population-
india.htm#)
5
Since, per capita income shows the average annual earnings of a single
person in a particular region. It can be treated as an indicator for regional
development. As the past record shows that:
o Punjab topped the list as it had the highest per capita income in 1990-91 and
Orissa was at bottom.
o In 2002-03, Maharashtra was at top and Bihar was at bottom on the basis of
per capita income.
o However, this list was again changed in 2005-06, Haryana was at top and
Bihar was at bottom on the basis of per capita income.
This implies that the backward states with very large population share – U.P.,
Bihar and Madhya Pradesh – acted as a drag on the growth process of the
Indian Economy.
6
Haryana 5.37% 8
Gujarat 6.79% 3
West Bengal 6.88% 2
Karnataka 6.91% 1
Kerala 5.86% 5
Tamil Nadu 5.26% 9
Andhra Pradesh 5.65% 6
Backward
States
Madhya
1.78% 14
Pradesh
Assam 3.18% 12
Uttar Pradesh 2.79% 13
Rajasthan 5.11% 10
Orissa (2004-
5.52% 7
2005)
Bihar -0.99% 15
(Source: Dutta & Sundram, Indian Economy 60th Edition, Page No. 475)
In the above table, shows that the average growth rate of Net State Domestic
Product of Forward States was 6.03%, while that of the backward states was only
2.69% per annum. These differentials aggravated regional disparities during the
post-reform period. While forward states like west Bengal, Karnataka and Gujarat
indicated very high growth rates of NSDP (over 6%), the backward states like Uttar
Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Bihar (with very large population) indicated very low
growth rates during the 14-years period (1990-91 and 2004-2005). The most
distressing fact was that Bihar indicated a negative growth rate of NSDP at (-)
0.99%, while U.P. with a population of 166 million (16.2% of total population)
indicated a very low growth rate of 2.79%.
7
This implies that the backward states with very large population share- U.P., Bihar
and Madhya Pradesh – acted as a drag on the growth process of the Indian
economy.
Disparities in Infrastructure:
Punjab 187.6 1
Maharashtra 112.8 6
Haryana 137.5 4
Gujarat 124.3 5
West Bengal 111.3 7
Karnataka 104.9 8
Kerala 178.7 2
Tamil Nadu 149.1 3
Andhra
103.3 9
Pradesh
Backward
States
Madhya
76.8 14
Pradesh
Assam 77.7 13
Uttar Pradesh 101.2 10
Rajasthan 75.9 15
8
Orissa 81 12
Bihar 81.3 11
All India 100
(Source: Dutta & Sundram, Indian Economy 60th Edition, Page No. 478)
Transport
26%
facilities
Energy
24%
Consumption
Irrigation
20%
facilities
Banking facilities 12%
Communication 6%
Educational
6%
facilities
Health facilities 6%
9
Punjab has the highest value of IDI as 187.6, followed by Kerala and Tamil
Nadu as 178.7 and 149.1 respectively. Lowered value of IDI was for
Rajasthan (75.9), followed by Madhya Pradesh (76.8) and Assam (77.7).
The above result may be analyzed as since Punjab is having the highest
irrigated area(95%) as a proportion of gross cropped area, it has the highest
productivity per hectare, but in Uttar Pradesh though this proportion was quite
high (63%), yet its productivity per hectare was relatively low. This only
highlights the fact that whereas Punjab and Haryana were able to harness this
infrastructure facility for agricultural development, Uttar Pradesh did not
succeed adequately in this regard.
Infant mortality rate and literacy rate are two very good indices of physical
quality of life. Infant mortality rate shows a tendency to decline with economic
10
and social development. From this point of view, Kerala is far ahead of other
states. In 2005 infant mortality rate in Kerala were 14 per 1000 live births as
against the national infant mortality rate of 58 per 1000 live birth. Punjab,
Maharashtra, west Bengal and Tamil Nadu had infant mortality rates in range
of 36 to 55. The states registering high infant mortality rates in 2005 were
Madhya Pradesh (76), Orissa (75), Uttar Pradesh (73), Assam (68),
Rajasthan (68) and Bihar (61).
Literacy Rate in general and female literacy rate in particular are regarded as
good indicators of development. On these criteria Kerala (the first ranked
state) has done extremely well vis-à-vis other states. According to 2001
census, the overall literacy rate in Kerala was 90.9%, as against the national
average of 65.4%. Even the female literacy rate in Kerala was as high as
87.9%. In states of Bihar, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh the literacy rates
ranged between 47.5 and 61.0. In these states the female literacy rate ranged
from 33.8 to 44.3 %. Interestingly in Haryana, the first ranked state in terms of
per capita income both overall literacy rate and the female literacy rate were
more or less the same as all-India rates. This perhaps is due to the low
priority given to education in primarily agrarian societies.
11
(Source: http://www.mapsofindia.com/census2001/literacyrate.htm)
12
Causes of Regional Imbalances
There are certain deterrent factors which come in the way of rapid development of a
region; most important of them are:
• Geographical Isolation,
Pre-independence Period:
Historically, the existence of backward regions started from the British rule in India.
The British helped the development of only those regions which possessed facilities
for prosperous manufacturing and trading activities. Maharashtra and west Bengal
were the states preferred by the British industrialists. The three metropolitan cities –
Calcutta, Bombay and madras – attracted all industries and rest of the country
remained backward.
Further, under the land system of British, the rural areas were continuously
pauperized and the farmers remained the most oppressed class; the zamindars and
the money lenders were of course the most prosperous person on the rural sense.
The uneven investment in irrigation during the British period helped some areas
become prosperous under the British rule.
Geographical Factors:
For example, Japan and Switzerland have overcome the handicaps of mountain
terrain but our Himalayan states and the hills district of U.P., Bihar and NEFA, have
remained backwards and underdeveloped mainly due to inaccessibility.
Locational preferences:
Some regions are preferred because of certain locational advantages. The location
of iron and steel factories or oil refineries will have to be only in those technically
defined areas; which are optimal from all the viewpoints. They also attract labour,
capital, trade and the external economies offered by the developing regions.
13
Post-independence Period:
Total
Total
assistance to Percentage of
assistance in
Plans Backward Assistance of
all states (Rs.
States (Rs. Backward States
Crore)
Crore)
Sixth Plan(1980-
16560 7590 46%
85)
Seventh Plan
31420 13200 42%
(1985-90)
Eighth Plan(1992-
93830 35160 37%
97)
Ninth Plan (1997-
185260 69990 38%
2002)
Tenth Plan (2002-
254100 91080 36%
07)
(Source: Dutta & Sundram, Indian Economy 60th Edition, Page No. 482)
The planning mechanism has itself accentuated the disparity between the states by
having a strong bias in favour of developed states and neglecting less-developed
states. Data shows that by and large, the more developed states were clearly
favored and the less developed states were neglected in planned outlay. Punjab and
Haryana have always received the highest per capita plan outlays form the first plan
to Eighth plans. At the same time, the poorest states like Bihar, Orissa, Uttar
Pradesh and Rajasthan have continued to receive the smallest allocation per capita
in all the plans. Accordingly, the disparities between the states in India has been
widening, this is despite a clear objective of planning to achieve regional balance in
development.
14
15
Measures to remove
Regional Imbalance
As recognized earlier the major three policies can short out the major disparities
among the states in greater degree of deals. They are:
The Finance Commission in India has used backwardness of a state as one of the
criteria for the transfer of funds from the central pool to the states. The resource
transfer relate to central assistance for state plans, transfer effected under the
recommendations of finance commission, ad hoc transfer from the Centre to the
states, the distribution of assistance for centrally sponsored schemes, the distribution
of assistance of long-term and short-term credit from financial institutions etc. the
share of backward states in plan outlay and in central assistance steadily rose from
48% in the First Plan to 57% in the Third Plan. Since, then, the share of the
backward states in central plan assistance has been gradually declining to 50% in
the Fifth Plan, 46% in the Sixth Plan and 37% in the Eighth Plan (as shown below)
There are certain difficulties in solving the problem of regional disparities and
backwardness through transfer of resources from the Centre to the Sates. There is
16
no guarantee that the resources transferred from the Centre to the States would be
automatically used for the development of the backward areas or district. In fact
there is a tendency to divert funds intended for backward and difficult areas to more
forward areas and easier programs.
Specific Plan schemes have been formulated with Central assistance to develop-
prone areas. Moreover, schemes of rural development directed towards the
improvement of specific groups like small framers and agricultural laborers were also
located in backward areas. In course of time, these special schemes for particular
target groups become an apart of the program of block level planning for integrated
rural development and full employment.
The Eleventh finance Commission did not make backwardness as such a criterion
for resource transfer, but in the formula for resource transfer, among the different
criteria, the relative distance of the per capita income of the state with the income of
the state with highest per capita income and index of infrastructure development
were indirectly include backwardness. On the basis of new formula, backward states
and special category states, taken together would receive 61.2% of total resource
transfer.
Various incentives have been provided in order to tackle the problem of industrial
backwardness and to promote private investment in backward areas. These
incentives have been provided by the Centre, by the States and by public sector
financial institutions.
17
land, buildings, plant and machinery. The rate of subsidy was
subsequently raised to 15% and still later to 20%.
State government has also offered incentives to attract private sector units to
the backward region. These incentives include:
Provision for developed plots with water and power with no-profit
and no-loss basis
The three major public sector financial institutions, i.e., Industrial Finance
Corporation of India (IFCI), Industrial Development Bank of India (IDBI) and
the Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India (ICICI) provide
concessional finance for industrial projects located in backward areas. These
concessions relate to:
18
Tenth and Eleventh Five year plan
And regional disparities
Tenth Five year plan for less developed States
The major initiative and strategies adopted by the government in this plan to remove
regional imbalances are as follows:
• Imitative towards the better governance and institutional reforms to make the
targeted investment effective.
The eleventh five year plan has listed the programs which are particularly targeted
towards poor areas and poor people with the prime objective of resource transfer
from forward to backward states.
• Indira Awas Yojana gives 75% weightage to housing shortage and 25% to
poverty ratios.
• National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) focuses on 18 states which have weak
public health indicators or weak infrastructure. 23% of funds from the scheme
are provided to two states, i.e., U.P. (16%) and Bihar (77%).
• Sarv Shiksha Abhiyan – under this program, seven states, i.e., Uttar Pradesh,
Bihar, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan and Orissa
received 59% of total outlay.
Taking all the five schemes together, out of a total allocation of Rs. 31,901 crore
the allocation for the backward states was Rs. 17,864 crore – that is 56% of the
total.
19
Bibliography
Text Referred:
Dutta Ruddra and Sundharam K.P.M., 60th Edition (2009), Indian Economy,
Balannced Regional Developemnt, S.Chand & Company Ltd., New Delhi
Mishra S.K. and Puri V.K., 20th Edition, Indian Economy, Regional Planning in
India, Himalyan Publishing House, New Delhi
Journal Referred:
http://www.mapsofindia.com/census2001/population/population-india.htm#
http://www.mapsofindia.com/census2001/literacyrate.htm
20