GDP and national income are aggregative measures that capture the total size of the cake. They tell us nothing about what it is made up off or how it is distributed between different segments of society. This simple truth is one reason why GDP and its rate of growth have never been considered to be the perfect yardsticks for judging a society's well being. Yet in India, those who should know better often ignore this. They remain obsessed with achieving high growth, celebrate India's success in this, and contend that this is necessary to lift millions of Indians out of poverty. In the process, however, they indulge in more than a sleight of hand.
Imagine a society with a fixed population where, to begin with, half the income accrues to the top 20% of the population. This corresponds to a situation where the average income of the top 20% is four times that of the remaining 80%. Now consider three possible scenarios. In scenario 1, the income of the top 20% increases by 10% every year while that of the remaining 80% increases by 2%. In scenario 2, the situations are reversed such that the incomes of the top 80% increase at 2% and the rest at 10%. In scenario 3, both segments of the population achieve increases in income at the rate of 6% every year. The trajectory of the annual rate of growth of the aggregate income in both scenarios 1 and 2 would be identical -6% in the first year, but inching upwards every subsequent year and approaching 10%.
However, the trend in the inequality between the levels and shares of the two groups would be very different in the two cases. Inequality would grow explosively in scenario 1, while scenario 2 would achieve a leveling of incomes in 18 years. Naturally, the level of income attained in the process by the bottom 80% would be greater in the latter case, in fact nearly four times what it would be in scenario 1. Moreover, equality would be achieved not with a reduction in incomes of the top 20% but instead with their steady increase. Compared to scenario 1, the bottom 80% would also be better off with scenario 3, which would result in the rate of growth of the aggregate remaining at 6% every year. In other words, even with a trajectory involving lower growth than in scenario 1, this 80% in 18 years would be twice as well off than they would under a high-growth scenario 1.
The high growth India has been witnessing in recent years is of the scenario 1 kind. Aggregate growth rates not only reflect the growth in incomes of the minority of India's citizens but are increasingly doing so. GDP growth is becoming a meaningless indicator for the rest of the population. One might therefore ask the growth fetishists -if one is to have high growth, why not the inequality reducing high growth of the scenario 2 kind? They would probably turn around and say that is impossible and if you try and achieve it you would kill all dynamism in the economy and produce stagnation. If this argument is valid, it must also mean that the increasing inequality currently being generated cannot ever be reversed by a scenario 2 kind of growth in the future. In such a situation one would ask: what about the scenario 3 option? If growth is necessary to lift the incomes and standards of living of the majority of Indians, would not such a relatively low rate of growth be a better path than the high growth road India is hurling along? Even in this case, the majority of Indians, after two decades, would be living on an income that would be less than Rs 3000 per month per person today. If this too is impossible to achieve then we might as well stop pretending that growth in India will ever become inclusive.
-TOI
It's immoral for us to slow growth
Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said last Sunday that his country's annual growth target has been lowered to 7% for the next five years. He made this remark in an online chat with the nation. "We must no longer sacrifice the environment for the sake of rapid growth as that is unsustainable," he said. He urged the government to shift its focus from GDP growth to the quality and benefits of growth.
Premier Wen's statement comes in the wake of huge concerns in the west over the impact of China's (and India's) economic growth on the global environment. China's GDP growth reached 10.3% last year and is expected to be 9% this year. Although he was talking to his netizens, Wen's message was aimed at his critics in the west. His remarks appear to be eminently sensible -- who could be against protecting nature? But is Premier Wen right to slow down the growth rate of a poor nation? I do not think so.
There is a saying that a woman can either be beautiful or faithful but not both. The proverb illustrates the human tendency to create mental boxes and fit people into them. Wen appears to have fallen into the ecological trap in believing that you can either have high growth or a clean environment. We too will soon be asked that if China is taking steps to lower its growth rate, why is India still obsessed with high growth? Indeed, the day after Wen's online chat, India's finance minister Pranab Mukherjee presented a road map in the Budget to achieve a 9% GDP growth rate, hoping that it might go higher.
The dichotomy between high growth and protecting the environment is false. A nation can grow rapidly and save its environment just as a woman can be both beautiful and faithful. The only sensible way to grow, in fact, is to make peace with nature and save the green-blue film on which life itself depends. But to ask a poor country to slow down its economic growth is immoral — it is to condemn its poor to penury. The past 200 years teach us that the poor will only rise into the middle class if there is growth. Growth creates jobs and wealth, which the government taxes and spends on roads, education and healthcare, and this enables the poor to rise. Indeed, 350 million Chinese and 225 million Indians have risen out of poverty in the past 25 years because of high growth.
Once upon a time i used to be a huge fan of the ecology movement, but i feel gloomy today. I am upset that so many fine projects have suffered from endless delay at the hands of activists. No one calculates the real cost of delay--the lost future of a starving child who does not realize a dream when a factory or power plant does not come up. The movement has evolved into an anti-science, anti-growth, secular religion. I shudder to think that if activists had been as zealous in the 1960s, they would have killed India's 'green revolution', which multiplied our wheat and rice crop many times and succeeded in feeding 500 million additional mouths.
Meanwhile, bureaucrats and politicians have captured ecology and made it a lucrative business in India. Indeed, the prime minister complained in 2009, "Environmental clearances have become a new form of licence raj and corruption." Hence, i was glad when a clean, modern minister came in 2009. But my optimism soured quickly when he turned activist and began to reopen major projects, such as Niyamgiri, Lavasa and POSCO, and proceeded to "make an example" of them. His arbitrariness resounded around the world and turned investors against India. The Reserve Bank reported recently that India's foreign direct investment declined by 36% in the first half of 2010-11 primarily because of "environment policies in mining, integrated township projects and ports." Of course, the environment ministry must ensure that projects meet standards, but it must do so by creating transparent institutions and not through arbitrary acts.
All of us must become sensitive to nature, especially with the rapid degradation of forest cover and global warming. But we must also be aware of the fundamentalist and irrational nature of the ecology movement, which is willing to sacrifice human opportunities to preserving nature. Environmentalists have nostalgia for vanishing, old lifestyles and refuse to admit that their earlier Malthusian predictions were wrong. Despite massive population growth, people around the world are better off today, and as prosperity and education spreads, population growth has begun to slow down in most countries. Obviously, we have to protect nature, but if it does come to a choice, human beings, i think, must precede nature. To believe the contrary is not only elitist but immoral.
-TOI
They don’t steal mangoes in ANNA COUNTRY
It's immoral for us to slow growth
Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said last Sunday that his country's annual growth target has been lowered to 7% for the next five years. He made this remark in an online chat with the nation. "We must no longer sacrifice the environment for the sake of rapid growth as that is unsustainable," he said. He urged the government to shift its focus from GDP growth to the quality and benefits of growth.
Premier Wen's statement comes in the wake of huge concerns in the west over the impact of China's (and India's) economic growth on the global environment. China's GDP growth reached 10.3% last year and is expected to be 9% this year. Although he was talking to his netizens, Wen's message was aimed at his critics in the west. His remarks appear to be eminently sensible -- who could be against protecting nature? But is Premier Wen right to slow down the growth rate of a poor nation? I do not think so.
There is a saying that a woman can either be beautiful or faithful but not both. The proverb illustrates the human tendency to create mental boxes and fit people into them. Wen appears to have fallen into the ecological trap in believing that you can either have high growth or a clean environment. We too will soon be asked that if China is taking steps to lower its growth rate, why is India still obsessed with high growth? Indeed, the day after Wen's online chat, India's finance minister Pranab Mukherjee presented a road map in the Budget to achieve a 9% GDP growth rate, hoping that it might go higher.
The dichotomy between high growth and protecting the environment is false. A nation can grow rapidly and save its environment just as a woman can be both beautiful and faithful. The only sensible way to grow, in fact, is to make peace with nature and save the green-blue film on which life itself depends. But to ask a poor country to slow down its economic growth is immoral — it is to condemn its poor to penury. The past 200 years teach us that the poor will only rise into the middle class if there is growth. Growth creates jobs and wealth, which the government taxes and spends on roads, education and healthcare, and this enables the poor to rise. Indeed, 350 million Chinese and 225 million Indians have risen out of poverty in the past 25 years because of high growth.
Once upon a time i used to be a huge fan of the ecology movement, but i feel gloomy today. I am upset that so many fine projects have suffered from endless delay at the hands of activists. No one calculates the real cost of delay--the lost future of a starving child who does not realize a dream when a factory or power plant does not come up. The movement has evolved into an anti-science, anti-growth, secular religion. I shudder to think that if activists had been as zealous in the 1960s, they would have killed India's 'green revolution', which multiplied our wheat and rice crop many times and succeeded in feeding 500 million additional mouths.
Meanwhile, bureaucrats and politicians have captured ecology and made it a lucrative business in India. Indeed, the prime minister complained in 2009, "Environmental clearances have become a new form of licence raj and corruption." Hence, i was glad when a clean, modern minister came in 2009. But my optimism soured quickly when he turned activist and began to reopen major projects, such as Niyamgiri, Lavasa and POSCO, and proceeded to "make an example" of them. His arbitrariness resounded around the world and turned investors against India. The Reserve Bank reported recently that India's foreign direct investment declined by 36% in the first half of 2010-11 primarily because of "environment policies in mining, integrated township projects and ports." Of course, the environment ministry must ensure that projects meet standards, but it must do so by creating transparent institutions and not through arbitrary acts.
All of us must become sensitive to nature, especially with the rapid degradation of forest cover and global warming. But we must also be aware of the fundamentalist and irrational nature of the ecology movement, which is willing to sacrifice human opportunities to preserving nature. Environmentalists have nostalgia for vanishing, old lifestyles and refuse to admit that their earlier Malthusian predictions were wrong. Despite massive population growth, people around the world are better off today, and as prosperity and education spreads, population growth has begun to slow down in most countries. Obviously, we have to protect nature, but if it does come to a choice, human beings, i think, must precede nature. To believe the contrary is not only elitist but immoral.
-TOI
They don’t steal mangoes in ANNA COUNTRY
The mangoes are ripening in the sun. The hundreds of trees planted by Anna Hazare are laden with tempting fruit these days. No one's keeping watch. Does anyone ever steal mangoes around here? Apparently not. "The notice boards you see, warning of a Rs 100 fine for plucking fruit or flowers is for people coming from outside. We get hundreds of visitors who come to see Anna's work or to receive training in watershed development at our training centre," says Anil Sharma, who lives in Ralegan Siddhi and is Hazare's secretary.
The village, 80km from Pune, is home to 2,500 people. Listen to the locals and it is a veritable paradise on earth. But what do the police records say? Last year, the local Parner police station recorded five 'crimes' in Ralegan Siddhi. Two were accidents, the others family disputes. This year, just one 'crime' — a quarrel between brothers — has been registered so far, says Inspector T K Vahile, who looks after Parner police station. The crime rate — if it can be called that — is "extremely low" in Ralegan Siddhi, says Vahile.
What makes Ralegan Siddhi so special? Appearances count. At first glance, Ralegan Siddhi turns a smiling face to a watching world. Despite being in a drought-prone area, it is lush and green. Its tree-lined roads are clean; neat houses abut them; every villager seems healthily and happily busy harvesting the onion crop. Unlike the typical Indian village, Ralegan Sidhi does not have open drains; its trees are not festooned with plastic bags and its streets are not clogged with litter.
Look as hard as you might but there is no one to be found smoking, chewing tobacco or spitting. Anna Hazare's paradise on earth bans cutting trees, putting cattle out to pasture, liquor dens and the sale of tobacco, cigarettes and bidis. Datta Awari, 27, is proud to explain the law enforcement process of the village. "Old and decaying trees are cut after taking permission from the gram sabha. But before cutting a single tree, at least five new ones are planted. Now we have reached a stage where there is hardly any land available for tree plantation."
He says the rules governing cattle are strict. "The ban on open grazing does not mean we send our cattle to the next village for grazing. Our cattle are stall-fed and we buy the fodder when the forest department holds auctions to sell hay."
The village appears to have had a knock-on effect on others in the area. Awari claims the neighbouring villages of Vadule, Panule, Sangvisurya and Pimpalner took a leaf out of Ralegan Siddhi's book five years ago and now pursue developmental work.
The state government introduced a model village scheme in 2001, which offers money for watershed development, tree planting, sanitation and carefully designed cropping patterns. Hazare was given responsibility for drafting the rules that govern the scheme. Maharashtra had 201 model villages in 2010. A further hundred will convert to 'model village' by 2014.
Inspector Vahile corroborates some of the transformative magic worked by Ralegan Siddhi. He says there is complete prohibition in Ralegan Siddhi, Pimpalner and Panule. "Other villages in the area do not have liquor shops or dens but as they are located on the highway the villagers have access to beer bars on the highway. However, nobody dares to take liquor from outside into these villages," he says.
But don't villagers chaff at these rules? Not at all, insists middle-aged Badambai Bhalekar. "Why would we oppose the rules laid down by Anna and the gram sabha? He is not teaching us anything bad, is he? When you live in cities, you too must be following some rules. We are doing the same, following rules that are for the good of the village and us. Had you seen the pathetic condition of our village before Anna came here, you would not have asked me why we do not mind following these rules," she says.
It is a reference to the hard life Ralegan Siddhi endured before Hazare wrought his quiet revolution. Then, the village grew little food, had little water at the height of summer and 80% of its people had to walk five kilometres a day on average in search of work. For many, operating a liquor den was the only reliable source of income. It took its toll. Indubai Mapari recalls that whole "families were destroyed". She says that "men would drink and do nothing. It was impossible for village women to step out of our homes after 4pm because the roads will be filled with sozzled men. We had to go to neighbouring villages in search of work so that we could feed our families." Things got so bad that almost 40% of the village migrated to Pune and Mumbai. Most returned only in the 1980s when farming became a paying activity thanks to Hazare.
Ganesh Bhapkar, a young man, says his peers are happy to shun the vices that afflict others around the world. "In the earlier days some of the old people had become addicted to liquor and would do anything to get it. But once liquor dens were removed, their families kept a watchful eye on them and any attempt to bring liquor from outside was dealt with firmly — by sound thrashing by the family members," he says.
Shopkeeper Arun Bhalekar is a senior citizen and remembers the difficult transition to an alcohol-free zone. "Anna came here in 1975 and the next two years were spent convincing villagers to shun liquor. We had stooped to such level that wood planks and logs from the village temple were stolen to be used as fuel in liquor dens. Anna spent his own money to rebuild the temple, held gram sabhas to convince us about the importance of voluntary labour, watershed development and tree plantation. When we asked him how we can become prosperous, he said giving up liquor and removing the dens would help. Surprisingly the first support came from a villager who owned four dens."
Hazare set the village to work — and on the course to a more sustainable future. They learnt to conserve water, built nullahs and bunds and dug trenches. They planted meadows and 500 hectares with crops. They constructed weirs. Ground water levels rose and Hazare was able to work out a cropping pattern suitable for the soil and available water. The village was finally able to grow enough food to feed itself and its wells stayed full of water even at the hottest time of year.
But the biggest change has been in social behaviour — perhaps at the cost of some personal freedom? No one here would admit this and in any case, many might think this a small price to pay for the freedom from want. Suresh Pathare was one of those who left the village but returned when it had remade itself. "My parents and uncle shifted to Mumbai in 1972 but after hearing about Anna's work my parents decided to come back in 1982 after I was born. I graduated from Shirur and came back to Ralegan Siddhi to work in a project started by Hazare and I was so impressed that I decided to continue working for him."
Pathare says his generation likes Hazare's code of conduct. "All the rules were unanimously passed by the gram sabha in a democratic manner. Nobody imposed them on us," he says.
Is Ralegan Siddhi too good to be true? No, says Sunita Gupta, head of the sociology department in Pune's Fergusson College. People like Hazare have the moral authority to tell people what to do, she says. "Be it Anna Hazare in Ralegan Siddhi or Popatrao Pawar in Hivre Bazar village, both have done commendable work and improved the conditions there. Though some decisions may have been taken unilaterally, there is no doubt about the quality of work done by them. It is in our culture to deify such persons and once that happens nobody can think of opposing people like Hazare. The tendency is to do what they say."
The village, 80km from Pune, is home to 2,500 people. Listen to the locals and it is a veritable paradise on earth. But what do the police records say? Last year, the local Parner police station recorded five 'crimes' in Ralegan Siddhi. Two were accidents, the others family disputes. This year, just one 'crime' — a quarrel between brothers — has been registered so far, says Inspector T K Vahile, who looks after Parner police station. The crime rate — if it can be called that — is "extremely low" in Ralegan Siddhi, says Vahile.
What makes Ralegan Siddhi so special? Appearances count. At first glance, Ralegan Siddhi turns a smiling face to a watching world. Despite being in a drought-prone area, it is lush and green. Its tree-lined roads are clean; neat houses abut them; every villager seems healthily and happily busy harvesting the onion crop. Unlike the typical Indian village, Ralegan Sidhi does not have open drains; its trees are not festooned with plastic bags and its streets are not clogged with litter.
Look as hard as you might but there is no one to be found smoking, chewing tobacco or spitting. Anna Hazare's paradise on earth bans cutting trees, putting cattle out to pasture, liquor dens and the sale of tobacco, cigarettes and bidis. Datta Awari, 27, is proud to explain the law enforcement process of the village. "Old and decaying trees are cut after taking permission from the gram sabha. But before cutting a single tree, at least five new ones are planted. Now we have reached a stage where there is hardly any land available for tree plantation."
He says the rules governing cattle are strict. "The ban on open grazing does not mean we send our cattle to the next village for grazing. Our cattle are stall-fed and we buy the fodder when the forest department holds auctions to sell hay."
The village appears to have had a knock-on effect on others in the area. Awari claims the neighbouring villages of Vadule, Panule, Sangvisurya and Pimpalner took a leaf out of Ralegan Siddhi's book five years ago and now pursue developmental work.
The state government introduced a model village scheme in 2001, which offers money for watershed development, tree planting, sanitation and carefully designed cropping patterns. Hazare was given responsibility for drafting the rules that govern the scheme. Maharashtra had 201 model villages in 2010. A further hundred will convert to 'model village' by 2014.
Inspector Vahile corroborates some of the transformative magic worked by Ralegan Siddhi. He says there is complete prohibition in Ralegan Siddhi, Pimpalner and Panule. "Other villages in the area do not have liquor shops or dens but as they are located on the highway the villagers have access to beer bars on the highway. However, nobody dares to take liquor from outside into these villages," he says.
But don't villagers chaff at these rules? Not at all, insists middle-aged Badambai Bhalekar. "Why would we oppose the rules laid down by Anna and the gram sabha? He is not teaching us anything bad, is he? When you live in cities, you too must be following some rules. We are doing the same, following rules that are for the good of the village and us. Had you seen the pathetic condition of our village before Anna came here, you would not have asked me why we do not mind following these rules," she says.
It is a reference to the hard life Ralegan Siddhi endured before Hazare wrought his quiet revolution. Then, the village grew little food, had little water at the height of summer and 80% of its people had to walk five kilometres a day on average in search of work. For many, operating a liquor den was the only reliable source of income. It took its toll. Indubai Mapari recalls that whole "families were destroyed". She says that "men would drink and do nothing. It was impossible for village women to step out of our homes after 4pm because the roads will be filled with sozzled men. We had to go to neighbouring villages in search of work so that we could feed our families." Things got so bad that almost 40% of the village migrated to Pune and Mumbai. Most returned only in the 1980s when farming became a paying activity thanks to Hazare.
Ganesh Bhapkar, a young man, says his peers are happy to shun the vices that afflict others around the world. "In the earlier days some of the old people had become addicted to liquor and would do anything to get it. But once liquor dens were removed, their families kept a watchful eye on them and any attempt to bring liquor from outside was dealt with firmly — by sound thrashing by the family members," he says.
Shopkeeper Arun Bhalekar is a senior citizen and remembers the difficult transition to an alcohol-free zone. "Anna came here in 1975 and the next two years were spent convincing villagers to shun liquor. We had stooped to such level that wood planks and logs from the village temple were stolen to be used as fuel in liquor dens. Anna spent his own money to rebuild the temple, held gram sabhas to convince us about the importance of voluntary labour, watershed development and tree plantation. When we asked him how we can become prosperous, he said giving up liquor and removing the dens would help. Surprisingly the first support came from a villager who owned four dens."
Hazare set the village to work — and on the course to a more sustainable future. They learnt to conserve water, built nullahs and bunds and dug trenches. They planted meadows and 500 hectares with crops. They constructed weirs. Ground water levels rose and Hazare was able to work out a cropping pattern suitable for the soil and available water. The village was finally able to grow enough food to feed itself and its wells stayed full of water even at the hottest time of year.
But the biggest change has been in social behaviour — perhaps at the cost of some personal freedom? No one here would admit this and in any case, many might think this a small price to pay for the freedom from want. Suresh Pathare was one of those who left the village but returned when it had remade itself. "My parents and uncle shifted to Mumbai in 1972 but after hearing about Anna's work my parents decided to come back in 1982 after I was born. I graduated from Shirur and came back to Ralegan Siddhi to work in a project started by Hazare and I was so impressed that I decided to continue working for him."
Pathare says his generation likes Hazare's code of conduct. "All the rules were unanimously passed by the gram sabha in a democratic manner. Nobody imposed them on us," he says.
Is Ralegan Siddhi too good to be true? No, says Sunita Gupta, head of the sociology department in Pune's Fergusson College. People like Hazare have the moral authority to tell people what to do, she says. "Be it Anna Hazare in Ralegan Siddhi or Popatrao Pawar in Hivre Bazar village, both have done commendable work and improved the conditions there. Though some decisions may have been taken unilaterally, there is no doubt about the quality of work done by them. It is in our culture to deify such persons and once that happens nobody can think of opposing people like Hazare. The tendency is to do what they say."
-TOI
No comments:
Post a Comment