Growth and Development Dynamics of Indian States: A Comparison

Dr. Sanjay Tiwari

October 01, 2013 | Dr. Sanjay Tiwari Web Excl !i"e!, #rowt$

The growth story of India during the last two decades has been exhilarating barring a period of economic slowdown which persisted from 2008-10. The inclusive growth model-adopted by the government during the 11th lan strives for educational! financial! technological and political inclusion of masses which are being termed as "#$demographic dividend"#% by economists of the world-may ta&e the credit for persistent growth of Indian economy even in the global slowdown phase. The emergence of civil society and '()s during the recent past and the passage of important bills li&e *ood +ecurity! ,TI! ,T- and ension *unds ,egulatory .uthority bills are live manifestation of inclusive growth philosophy of the government at centre. +ome states are growing but not developing as far as other social parameters are concerned while others may not seem to be growing but on parallel have good governance. There is a need to compare and analyse the growth and development performance of the states and how governance has an impact on these variables. The growth is measured in terms of (ross +tate /omestic roduct 0(+/ 1! state per capita income! industrial development! tax and revenue administration! investment! consumption while the parameters of development include2 socio-economic indicators! health 0Infant 3ortality ,ate-3,! 3aternal 3ortality ,ate-33,! 4ife -xpectancy at birth1! education 0elementary! secondary and higher1! infrastructure which consists of availability of potable water! usage of power! sanitation facility! road length per s5uare &ilo meter! housing infrastructure etc. (ood governance is based on the principle that authority must be deployed and even necessarily based on a larger purpose "#6 the good of the people being governed. )n the other hand governance is related to the designing! monitoring! assessing and evaluating the systems of delivery of services and the fulcrum around which governance revolves is planning and implementation of economic policies for e5uitable distribution of resources to the public at large. The returns of growth can be realised provided there is consonance in the policies and good governance practices adopted by states. The performance of states in terms of economic growth and development is decided by the structure and practice of governance prevailing in these states. There are three dimensions of governance i.e. legislative! 7udicial and executive. 8owever! generally the executive part is much tal&ed about. . comparison of performance of states on growth and development measuring variables reveals that the states which are fastest growing li&e 9ihar! :har&hand and (u7arat! un7ab also have "#$governance deficit"#% as revealed by various reports! studies and empirical evidence. 'ow the basic 5uestion remains to be answered is that "#;/oes good governance also lead to growth and development or growth and development are governance neutral<"# INDIAN STATES : G !"T# AND DE$E%!&'ENT .n analysis of growth performance of Indian states measured as percentage in (ross +tate /omestic roduct 0(/ 1 reveals that during 200=-0> to 2011-12 the states li&e .runachal radesh! 9ihar! ?hhattisgarh! (u7arat! @arnata&a! 3aharashtra! Attara&hand! )rissa! 8aryana has been satisfactory 0table11. The growth rate in industrial sector in the states li&e .ndhra radesh! 9ihar! ?hhattisgarh! (u7arat! '- states! un7ab! )rissa is above the national growth in this sector particularly during later five years period. .s far as growth in service sector is concerned all states have shown growth rate touching and even crossing the national average during the last five years which may be termed as service led economic growth. The growth in agriculture and allied sectors is exceptionally higher as seen in 9ihar! 3aharashtra! :har&hand!

?hattisgarh! ,a7asthan! (u7arat and in 'orth -astern states li&e 3iBoram! Tripura while in states li&e 8aryana! 3 ! 8imachal radesh the agriculture and allied sector has grown moderately. The states li&e un7ab! A ! Attara&hand! Cest 9engal are sluggish in agricultural growth and @erala has shown negative growth during the period 200=-0= to 2011-12 0Table 11.