Anda di halaman 1dari 30

Index

Introduction

Jharkhand State at a Glance

Economy and Infrastructure

Regional desparity in jharkhand

Social Disparity

Expanding Access to Primary and Secondary Education

Income and Property

Resource Transfer from the Centre to the States

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction
A disparity between the standards of living applying within a nation. It is difficult to quantify the prosperity or poverty of a region, but there are two basic indicators. The first is unemployment, which has been used in Britain as a symptom since the 1920s. Most UK regional policy has concerned the alleviation of unemployment. The second indicator is per capita income, which in Britain generally

falls to the north and west. Other factors indicating disparity include the type of industry and its growth or decline, numbers of young people in further education, housing standards, and the quality of the environment. Some would assert that economic development brings about regional inequality

One of the main cause for regional disparities in India is the language. The other being caste, race etc....All parties have some thing and they act to that time and energy....It is the people of a region which makes the difference and hence the disprities will persist unless people of the region araea developed to become sincere and hardworker for their prosparity.

India is a large federal nation and it is well known that there are widespread disparities in the levels of economic and of social development between the different regions of the Indian nation. It is generally recognised that interregional economic disparities increase, at least in the initial stages of national economic development. As a result, governments everywhere including India used to initiate deliberate policy measures to reduce these disparities. But with the reaffirmation of faith in the market mechanism in the liberalised economic scenario the world over now, there is a tendency to withdraw such measures under the implicit assumption that the invisible hand will deliver the goods in this regard too. India has also witnessed a sea change in its economic policy in recent years. While there are some who feel that these changes were initiated in the early eighties, all agree that there have been very major

changes in this regard particularly since the early nineties.. From a closed economic set-up having considerable faith in centralised planning and with commanding heights reserved for the public sector, India has now become a highly liberalised and globalised economy with great faith in the efficacy of the market mechanism. It is hence a matter of considerable research interest to know the manner in which inter-regional disparities in the levels of economic and social development have changed in India over time in the past two decades. A comparison of Indias regional development experience over the past two decades would therefore give at least a broad idea of the impact, if any, of these changes on the regional aspect of Indias development. This is all the more so because economic liberalisation was brought about in a big way since the 90s in India on the plea that growth could not trickle down under the earlier

command and control regime. There was serious concern then at the fact that some Indian states with large populations and vast natural and mineral resources were pockets of poverty. This concern has even greater relevance to-day because the changes over time in the boundaries and in the number of states in India have been such as to make each them more and more linguistically, culturally and even ethnically homogeneous. On top of it we also have the phenomenon of regional parties coming up in a big way the last few years, having a say not only at the concerned state level but also as members of coalition governments at the centre. In such a scenario, widespread inter-state disparities in levels of economic and social development can have serious economic, social and even political consequences, this being particularly so if these have persisted over long periods of time. A detaailed study examining the nature, extent, possible causes and manner

of change of inter-state economic and social disparities in India and drawing broad inferences regarding regional policy in India would hence be of considerable relevance to policy-makers and planners in India, particularly since the period covered by the study includes a decade before the economic reforms and another afterwards. This is all the more so because at the time the study was undertaken, there was a real paucity of studies of this kind. A critical survey of studies related to Regional Economic Development in India by Nair (1993a) has clearly shown the paucity, till 1990, of studies of the type being attempted here. Earlier work mainly consisted of examining issues related to the choice of regions for anlaysis, estimation of indicators of regional well-being, regional impact studies and studies testing the validity of growth theories at the regional level. Barring few exceptions like the study by Nair

(1982) dealingwith the pre-80 period, these did not link regional development experience to government policies in this regard for regional development. The situation has remained more or less the same since the 90s. There have of course been a number of meaningful studies about indicators of regional well being like the ones by Cassen(2002), Malhotra(1998) and the Planning Commission (2002). There have also been some attempts to find out the relationship between economic growth and poverty at the regional level like the one by Datt and Ravilion(2002). There were also some efforts at linking regional development experience to regional policy. One of these by Nair(1993 b) was a mere exploratory note and that too concerned with just one state Orissa. The other was a much more detailed one by Kurian(2000) and dealt with the major Indian states, but it focused mostly on the period

since the 80s. There is no detailed study of inter-state regional experience in economic and social development in India examining the nature, extent and possible causes of disparities, the patterns of regional change and the interrelationship between economic and social development at the regional level, linking all this up with changes in regional policy and covering both the pre and the postreform periods.

Jharkhand State at a Glance


Jharkhand is popularly known as Vananchal (meaning land of woods). The state of Jharkhand was carved out from the state of Bihar on November 15, 2000. The date is important as it also marks the birth anniversary of the legendary Bhagwan Birsa Munda.

The state capital is Ranchi, which is also the industrial city of the state. Jharkhand shares its border with the states of Bihar to the north, Uttar Pradesh and Chhattisgarh to the west, Orissa to the south, and West Bengal to the east. The state comprises of eighteen districts of the erstwhile Bihar- Ranchi, Gumha, Lohardanga, East Singbhum, West Singbhum, Hazaribagh, Giridih, Kodarma, Chatra, Dhanbad, Bokaro, Palamau, Garhwa, Dumka, Deoghar, Godda, Pakure and Sahebgunj. With an area of 74,677 sq km the new state is bordered by Bihar, MP, Orissa and West Bengal to its north, west, south and east respectively. 35% of the population of former Bihar is in the Jharkhand region. Jharkhand is quite popular for its rich cultural heritage. Known for its unique folk tradition the state is mostly inhabited by Proto Austroloid and mixed Dravidian communities from time immemorial. Since the state has

not been influenced by any foreign culture, it has maintained its identity and uniqueness. A glimpse of which can be got through its festivals and languages. Some of the famous festivals celebrated with great vigor and enthusiasm in Jharkhand are Sarhul, Bhagta Parab, Rohin etc. Languages spoken by the locals of the state include Korku, Mundari, Kurmali,Santhali, Bhumij, Ho and Kharia.

Economy and Infrastructure


Jharkhand is one the most industrialized regions of the country today. The region accounts for 35.5% of the country's known coal reserves, 90% of its cooking coal deposits, 40% of its copper, 22% of its iron ore, 90% of its mica and huge deposits of bauxite, quartz and ceramics. It is home to the largest steel plant in Bokaro, apart from

Jamshedpur being practically the city of TISCO and TELCO. Due to its huge reserves of forests and natural resources, the future seems bright for this predominantly poverty ridden region. With total revenue of Rs 3,775 crores, Jharkhand may be able to alleviate its poverty. Its revenues can now be utilized for its own development and no longer be diverted to the state's coffers of Bihar as has been the case. Naturally the biggest loser is Bihar. Bihar will suddenly find its lifeline of revenues shrunk since 63% of Bihar's total revenue comes from this region. As far as infrastructure is concerned Jharkhand is on its way to rapid progress. Jharkhand is marked with a good network of roads, railways, airways, telecommunication, power and water system. The State is well connected by roads, the length of its National High Way is 1600 Km and State High Way is 2711 Km.With everything in its favor, Jharkhand is poised to become the Industrial powerhouse of the country,

that is, if its leaders set the wheel of development rolling.

Regional desparity in jharkhand


Tribes of Jharkhand
The Scheduled Castes (SCs), also known as the Dalit, and the Scheduled Tribes (STs) are two groupings of historically disadvantaged people that are given express recognition in the Constitution of India. During the period of British rule in the Indian sub-continent they were known as the Depressed Classes. The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes make up around 15% and 7.5% respectively of the population of India, or around 24% altogether, according to the 2001 Census.[1] The proportion of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the country's population has steadily risen since independence in 1947. The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 lists 1,108 castes across 25 states in its First Schedule,[2] while

the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 lists 744 tribes across 22 states in its First Schedule.[3] Since Independence, the Scheduled Castes have benefited by the "Reservation" policy. This policy was made an integral part of the Constitution by the efforts of Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar, regarded as the father of the Indian constitution, who participated in Round Table Conferences and fought for the rights of the Depressed Classes. The Constitution lays down general principles for the policy of affirmative action for the SCs and STs. From the 1850s these communities were loosely referred to as the "Depressed Classes". The early part of the 20th century saw a flurry of activity in the British Raj to assess the feasibility of responsible self-government for India. The Morley-Minto Reforms Report, Montagu Chelmsford Reforms Report, and the Simon Commission were some of the initiatives that happened in

this context. One of the hotly contested issues in the proposed reforms was the topic of reservation of seats for the "Depressed" Classes in provincial and central legislatures. In 1935 the British passed the Government of India Act 1935, designed to give Indian provinces greater self-rule and set up a national federal structure. Reservation of seats for the Depressed Classes was incorporated into the act, which came into force in 1937. The Act brought the term "Scheduled Castes" into use, and defined the group as including "such castes, races or tribes or parts of groups within castes, races or tribes, which appear to His Majesty in Council to correspond to the classes of persons formerly known as the 'Depressed Classes', as His Majesty in Council may prefer". This discretionary definition was clarified in The Government of India (Scheduled Castes)

Order, 1936 which contained a list, or Schedule, of castes throughout the British administered provinces. After independence, the Constituent Assembly continued the prevailing definition of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, and gave (via articles 341, 342) the President of India and Governors of states responsibility to compile a full listing of castes and tribes, and also the power to edit it later as required. The actual complete listing of castes and tribes was made via two orders The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 and The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 respectively.

Social Disparity Social disparity in health and nutritional indicators is equally striking. The nutritional status of children from Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) groups was found to be much worse as compared to socially advantaged, groups Sixty-one percent of children from ST groups were underweight, compared with 38 percent from non-SC/ST/backward groups.105 A recent econometric study carried out in the three newly created states, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Uttaranchal, indicates the relevance of socioeconomic characteristics in health care access.106 The positive association between education of women and delivery illustrates the importance of social

development through education for achieving 100 percent institutional deliveries. More importantly, the state-specific logistic models for Jharkhand showed that women belonging to SC, ST or lower economic strata tend to utilize lesser delivery care. Hence, the RCH program should address the needs of these women and create a conducive environment for them to utilize delivery care.

Expanding Access to Primary and Secondary Education As with health, the education scenario in Jharkhand was in an adversely affected condition at the time of bifurcation. As per the census (2001) figures, the literacy rate of the state is the second lowest in the country (after Bihar) at 54.1 percent against the national average of 65.4 percent. With the male literacy rate at 67.9 percent and female literacy rate at 39.3 percent, the state has the second highest gender disparity rate in the country after Rajasthan. In rural areas, one-third of the men and twothirds of the women cannot read or write. The literacy rates of the SC and ST population are as low as 37.6 percent and 40.7 percent respectively.

Another important feature in the education sector was the high initial spatial disparity. Literacy rates also varied across districts with a low of 30 percent in Pakur district to a high of 69 percent in East Singhbhum . The task of improving educational outcomes was thus complicated by the fact that most children were first-time learners from households with illiterate parents. Given the low literacy rates, the average duration of schooling of an adult (aged above 14 years) as per the NSS 55th round stood at 4.25 years. The latter, although somewhat close to the all-India average of 4.5 years showed high differences across districts.

It comes out clearly from the discussions in the preceding section that if the past trends, especially those of the recent past continued for the next two decades or so Even in rural areas amenities of modern life and reasonably efficient civic facilities will be available. Almost all the children of school-going ages will be attending schooling. There will be hardly any difference between boys and girls in school. The gender difference in literacy will have almost disappeared. Population growth might have come down below replacement level. Income and Property The most common indicator of the economic development of a society is the per capita annual income generated by it. The level of poverty or the share of population which do not have minimum income to meet its basic requirements is an

indicator of the level of economic development as well as the inequality in the income distribution. Resource Transfer from the Centre to the States There is an in-built imbalance between the expenditure responsibilities and the revenue sources of the State governments. The founding fathers of the Indian Constitution were aware of this fact and ensured a comprehensive scheme of devolution of Central Tax revenues through the mechanism of Finance Commissions. The sharing of Personal Income Tax and Excise duties collected by the Centre with the States is periodically reviewed by the Finance Commission appointed every five years.8 The Commission also decides the principles and the formula by which the allocable funds are to be distributed among the States.

An important aspect of the devolution of Central tax revenues under Finance Commission dispensation is that it has an in-built bias in favour of fiscally weak States. Population and per capita income of the State get high weight-age in the distribution formula.9 A State with larger population and lower per capita income gets a higher share in the Central tax revenues. The gap between revenue receipts (other than the Central tax revenues) and revenue expenditure is another parameter, which decides the level of a States share. As a result the Central tax share constitutes a major revenue source for the backward States. While it constitutes about one-third of the total tax revenues of all the States taken together; it accounts for more than 50 per cent of the total tax revenues of less developed States like Bihar and Orissa; but its share is less than 15 per cent of the total tax revenues of more

developed States like Gujarat, Haryana, Maharashtra and Punjab. A second channel of resources flow from the Centre to the States is Planning Commission, which provides Central Assistance for State Plans. The State plans are financed partly by States own resources and the balance by Central Assistance. Central assistance is provided as a block assistance of which 30 per cent is grant and the remaining 70 per cent is a long term loan. The rationale for this grant-loan proportion is imbedded in the fact that about 30 per cent of the plan expenditure was of revenue nature and 70 per cent was of capital nature when this proportion was decided in the late Sixties. Since plan expenditure of revenue nature is not expected to yield any financial returns for servicing the loan, this share was provided as grant by the Centre.

The distribution of Plan assistance to the States has been governed by Gadgil Formula since the Fourth Five Year Plan (1969-74). As in the case of Finance Commission devolution, Gadgil Formula which is administered by the Planning Commission also has its built in bias in favour of backward States. Population and per capita income together account for 85 per cent of the weight in the formula. The remaining 15 per cent weight-age is equally divided between State performance in the achievement of certain priority national objectives and the special problems of the States. Central assistance constituted about 45 per cent of the State Plans when all States are taken together. While the share of Central assistance constitutes less than 25 per cent of the Plan finances of the more developed States, it accounted for the major share of Plan finances of the backward States. Indeed, the Plans of

the most backward States, especially the Special Category States, have been fully financed by Central Assistance. In the wake of the foreign exchange crisis in the early nineties, the Centre has been encouraging States to seek and absorb more and more external aid for development projects. The external aid to the States is routed through Central budget and devolved as additional Central Assistance for State plan on the same terms and conditions as the normal Central assistance to the State Plans. From the early Nineties, there has been a substantial increase in aid flows to the States. However, the major share of such flows have been absorbed by a few developed States. As a result, during the nineties, there has been an apparent increase in the Central assistance to the more developed States. While Gadgil Formula based normal Central assistance continued to be positively discriminating towards backward States, additional Central assistance for

externally aided projects was skewed towards better off States. Indeed, external aid accounted for 40 to 60 per cent of Central Plan assistance to some of the developed States, while such assistance contributed less than 10 per cent of the Central Plan assistance to most of the backward States.

Conclusion

A disparity between the standards of living applying within a nation. It is difficult to quantify the prosperity or poverty of a region, but there are two basic indicators. The implications of these divergent demographic trends on population density, employment opportunities, social sector investments and the overall development can be extremely grave. One of the major objectives of development planning initiated immediately after Independence has been, among others, reduction of regional disparities in social and economic development. Direct investment by the Central Government and Centrally directed investment of the private sector have been two powerful instruments to achieve this objective.

Bibliography
Books Shivangan publication, Jharkhand ki Ruprekha, Dr. Ram Kumar Tiwari, 2010 Shivangan publication, Jharkhand kaun, kya, kahan, Dr. Md. Shah Nawaz.2010 Website www.jharnet.in www.regionaldisparity.nic