The growth story of Gujarat is one of a state punching above its weight.

With only 6 per cent of India's land

mass and barely 5 per cent of its population, Gujarat has managed to account for 7.6 per cent of the country's
GDP and 22 per cent of its exports. Its annual Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP) growth from 2001 to
2013 (growth has slowed down since) averaged nearly 10 per cent, which is faster than India's. This is an
extraordinary accomplishment. Between 1980 and 2013, Gujarat grew at an average rate of 5.1 per cent. If
Gujarat were a country with a 10 million-plus population, this would be the third-fastest growth rate in the
world, after China and South Korea.

What were the factors that helped Gujarat accomplish this extraordinary growth? Was it geography, native
entrepreneurship, a historical edge in commerce and trade or simply good governance? The reasons for
Gujarat's growth can be debated. Did the fact that Gujarat has the longest coastline-1,600 km-contribute to its
rapid growth? Gujarat has served as an integral native trading hub for centuries, one of the most dominant in
the Arabian Sea. After all, in India, most coastal states have shown higher growth than the BIMARU (an
acronym for Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and UP, referring to their poor economic standing) states. A
coastal state has the twin advantages of greater global access as well as lower transportation costs. Other
coastal states, such as Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Kerala, have also performed well. But sustaining rapid
growth, as Gujarat has done, is not easy. Almost 25 per cent of India's sea cargo passes through Gujarat's
ports.

Was it the renowned

Gujarati entrepreneurial
spirit that helped bring
about Gujarat's
transformation from being
only the seventh richest
big state in 1980-81 (in
terms of per capita GSDP)
to the third richest in
2013-14? Gujaratis have
dominated businesses all
over India for centuries.
The Indian diaspora is
dominated by Gujarati
businessmen. Or was it
good governance under
successive regimes in
Gujarat that brought about
such development?
Gujarat has been among
the fastest growing states
even in the past. Despite
poor rainfall, it has made
strides in agriculture.
Unlike Punjab and
Haryana, states which
launched the first Green
Revolution with
government support,
Gujarat's agricultural
transformation came via the market route. Cash crops such as cotton, oilseeds and tobacco dominated the
farm growth story. A milk revolution and largescale exports of fish accompanied the growth in horticulture and
sharp increase in agricultural productivity. The agricultural turnaround-with growth rates as high as 11.1 per
cent between 2000 and 2013-was accomplished despite water scarcity. Gujarat knows the art of turning every
calamity and tragedy into an opportunity. Despite the plague in Surat and the earthquake in Kachchh, the
state's economic growth rate has surged in the last one-and-a-half decades. The good governance story of
Gujarat, however, takes a knock when it comes to inclusive growth and social sector development. Gujarat is a
'model state' in economic growth but a 'middle state' in social sector growth. Both agricultural and
manufacturing growth is in double digits, but of the 20 major states in India, Gujarat's ranking is always
between 9 and 12 on all major social sector rankings. This is irrespective of how the measurements are done.
Education, health and other social sectors have grown much more conservatively. The challenge for the
leaders in Gujarat is
finding ways to bring
about inclusive growth,
alongside the remarkable
growth rate.

  


With a firm belief that the
future of the country lies
in its states and Union
territories, the State of
the State (SoS) survey,
started in 2003, emerged
as the gold standard for
analysing the
performance of states.
The State of the State
report was the next
logical step. It analyses
the performance of
districts in each state
over a period of time, and across various categories. Each category is usually a composite index of a few
parameters, which are measurable across time, provided data is available. In the case of Gujarat, ideally one
should compare all 33 districts. Seven of these districts were created in 2013, and eight were created over the
period of 1997 to 2010. Data for the recent seven is not available. For the eight districts created earlier, data is
available sporadically. Thus, the district analysis presented in this report is for the 18 'original' districts.