Dr. Devendra Kothari
Population and Development Analyst,
Forum
for Population Action
"Unless the Government of India and so called BIMARU
states engineer a common agenda for human resource development to lift these economies, the shadow
of poverty and illiteracy as well as poor governance issue will continue to
haunt India and thwart its tryst with destiny. This
is a challenge for India’s development in the years immediately ahead".
What is “BIMARU, a term often heard in the
development debate of India? BIMARU, Hindi for sick, was coined by the
population scientist - Prof. Ashish Bose in the early eighties to denote four states' backwardness,
namely:
Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan
and Uttar Pradesh. [1] These states had poor reproductive
and human resource development (HRD) indicators. They recoded high fertility,
high maternal and infant mortality, low contraceptive prevalence, low female
literacy and a poor sex ratio amid poor socio-economic development. [2] The Rajan Committee report has also included
these states in the category of the “least developed states” of India.[3]
The term - “BIMARU”-, however, is a derogatory one;
it has come to mean chronic backwardness and sickness. Such connotation can
only demoralize people in the places it refers to. Therefore this outdated term – BIMARU
- needs jettisoning.
Why not give the nametag a timely burial? True, poverty and underdevelopment have not vanished. It is better refer these
states as Four Large North Indian (FLNI) States.
The term was coined in the 1980s
to denote FLNI States' backwardness. Much has changed since. In post-reforms
India; these states markedly improved their showing. In fact, better-off states
like Punjab have seen decelerated growth in recent times. But two of FLNI
laggard states - Bihar and Madhya Pradesh- have grown faster than the global 7%
benchmark for miracle' growth. The Indiabulls study reveals that per capita income in the FLNI
States has started to grow at 13%, matching the national average as against a
poor average of 5% in the past.[4] Unsurprisingly, the fast moving consumer goods sector is
eyeing them as markets providing avenues for expansion. The Fast Moving
Consumer Goods (FMCG) segment is the fourth largest sector in the Indian
economy. The market size of FMCG in India is expected to grow from US$ 30
billion in 2011 to US$ 74 billion in 2018. According
to the Report that “a major chunk of its growth coming from Bihar, Madhya
Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan in the next two years.
We must qualify this
story. Fast GDP growth in FLNI States does not automatically mean that growth has
reached all people. We have to agree that these FLNI States are still far
behind from other states of India and needs special attention. But simply
providing the fund is not going to solve their problems. Reasons being backwardness in the FLNI States
should be studied as well as the progressiveness of relative developed states like
of Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and Kerala. When Prof. Bose coined
the BIMARU acronym, his purpose was clearly to categorise and segregate the
states retarding India's overall development process. Rather than trying to be
politically correct, Bose's objective was to identify ‘grey' states in India's
map and spur action on the part of the government.
What is holding back growth story of the FLNI States? HRD related variables are very crucial, [5] which are not given due importance in the development planning of these states. These states are growing slowing not because of low per capita consumption expenditure, high level of poverty, low level of urbanization and poor connectivity, but mainly due to failure to give importance to human resource development variables in the development planning like reproductive health; literacy especially female literacy; household amenities among others as compared to the relatively developed states of India during initial stage of development
The India Human Development Report,
2011[6] placed Kerala on top of the Human Development Index (HDI)
in the year 2007-08 for achieving highest literacy rate, quality health
services and consumption expenditure of people. Punjab, Maharashtra and Tamil
Nadu were placed at fifth, seventh and eighth position, respectively (Table 1).
According to the report, India's HDI has registered impressive gains in the last decade as the index increased by 21% to 0.467 in 2007-08, from 0.387 in 1999-2000. However, the report noted that the Four Large North Indian States of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh as well as Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Jharkhand, and Assam are those states which continue to lag behind in HDI and remain below the national average of 0.467. The overall improvement in the index was largely attributed to the 28.5%t increase in education index across the country. It ranges from 0.92 for Kerala to 0.41 in the case of Bihar. The report also indicates that improvement in the health index, as compared to education, has been lower. It ranges from 0.82 in Kerala to 0.41 in Assam. Despite the Right to Education Act, school education faces challenges of quality and employability especially in FLNI States. The report also highlighted the fact that 60 percent of the poor were concentrated in states like Bihar, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh.
According to the report, India's HDI has registered impressive gains in the last decade as the index increased by 21% to 0.467 in 2007-08, from 0.387 in 1999-2000. However, the report noted that the Four Large North Indian States of Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh as well as Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Jharkhand, and Assam are those states which continue to lag behind in HDI and remain below the national average of 0.467. The overall improvement in the index was largely attributed to the 28.5%t increase in education index across the country. It ranges from 0.92 for Kerala to 0.41 in the case of Bihar. The report also indicates that improvement in the health index, as compared to education, has been lower. It ranges from 0.82 in Kerala to 0.41 in Assam. Despite the Right to Education Act, school education faces challenges of quality and employability especially in FLNI States. The report also highlighted the fact that 60 percent of the poor were concentrated in states like Bihar, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh.
Table 1: Ranking of States having population 30 million
and more in 2011 by HDI value
State
|
HDI 2007-08
|
HDI 1999-2000
|
||
Value
|
All India Rank
|
Value
|
All India Rank
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Kerala
|
0.790
|
1
|
0.677
|
2
|
Punjab
|
0.605
|
5
|
0.543
|
5
|
Maharashtra
|
0.572
|
7
|
0.501
|
6
|
Tamil Nadu
|
0.570
|
8
|
0.450
|
8
|
Haryana
|
0.552
|
9
|
0.501
|
7
|
Gujarat
|
0.527
|
11
|
0466
|
10
|
Karnataka
|
0.519
|
12
|
0.432
|
12
|
West
Bengal
|
0.492
|
13
|
0.422
|
13
|
Andhra
Pradesh
|
0.473
|
15
|
0.368
|
15
|
Rajasthan
|
0.434
|
17
|
0.387
|
14
|
Assam
|
0.444
|
16
|
0.336
|
17
|
Uttar
Pradesh
|
0.380
|
18
|
0.316
|
18
|
Jharkhand
|
0.376
|
19
|
0.368
|
23
|
Madhya
Pradesh
|
0.375
|
20
|
0.285
|
20
|
Bihar
|
0.367
|
19
|
0.292
|
19
|
Orissa
|
0.362
|
22
|
0.275
|
22
|
Chhattisgarh
|
0.358
|
23
|
0.278
|
21
|
India
|
0.467
|
-
|
0.387
|
-
|
Source:
India Human Development Report 2011, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2011
|
||||
The
main reason of slow pace of human resource development in the FLNI States is
high rate of population growth mainly fueled by unwanted fertility, as shown in
Table 2. Total Fertility Rate (TFR)
indicates the average number of children expected to be born per woman during
her entire span of reproductive period. On an average, a woman in India
produces 2.4 children during her lifetime; however, there is a wide diversity
of fertility levels among States. It ranges from 1.7 in Tamil Nadu to 3.6 in
Bihar, as per the SRS-2011. The replacement level
fertility of 2.1 children per woman, required to initiate the
process of population stabilization, has already been attained by the relatively
developed states of Tamil Nadu (1.7),
Kerala (1.8) and Maharashtra (1.8), whereas FLNI States of Bihar (3.6), Uttar Pradesh (3.4), Madhya Pradesh (TFR
3.1) and Rajasthan (3.0) have a long way to go before they achieve this
level. At the same time total unwanted
fertility was the highest in Bihar and lowest in Kerala. What are the implications of such scenario?
The emerging demographic peculiarity could have major
ramifications as India attempts to continue its high growth rate over the
coming decades and future development of the FLNI States. One has to improve
the availability of reproductive health services in FLNI States looking to the
needs of clients.[7]
Another issue which
needs equal attention is quality of education, especially female education. Also,
living conditions are equally important
in producing an enabling environment for human resource development, as shown
in Table 2. Any
improvement in access to toilet facilities, water, electricity and LPG is
likely to result in a considerable reduction in domestic drudgery especially
for girls/women, freeing up their time for other activities including
schooling. [8]
Table 2: Human Development indicators and level of
development, some selected States, 2011.
Indicators
|
Relatively developed States
|
FLNI States
|
||||||
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
TN
|
Punjab
|
M’sthra
|
Kerala
|
Bihar
|
MP
|
UP
|
Raj.
|
|
A. Reproductive health:
|
||||||||
·
Decadal
population growth (%) 2001-11
|
15.6
|
13.7
|
16.0
|
04.9
|
25.1
|
20.3
|
20.1
|
21.4
|
·
Total
Fertility Rate
|
1.7
|
1.8
|
1.8
|
1.8
|
3.6
|
3.1
|
3.4
|
3.0
|
·
Unwanted
births per
woman
(2005-06)
|
0.4
|
0.5
|
0.4
|
0.1
|
1.6
|
1.0
|
1.5
|
1.0
|
·
Infant
Mortality Rate
|
22
|
30
|
25
|
12
|
44
|
59
|
57
|
52
|
·
Maternal
Mortality Rate (2007-08)
|
97
|
172
|
104
|
81
|
261
|
269
|
359
|
318
|
B. Literacy level
|
||||||||
·
Female literacy (%)
|
74
|
71
|
76
|
92
|
53
|
60
|
59
|
53
|
·
Male
literacy (%)
|
87
|
82
|
90
|
96
|
73
|
80
|
79
|
80
|
C. Household with amenities like:
|
||||||||
·
Tap water
|
80
|
51
|
70
|
77
|
04
|
23
|
27
|
41
|
·
Flush latrine
|
42
|
59
|
43
|
65
|
20
|
26
|
30
|
28
|
·
No latrine
|
52
|
21
|
47
|
5
|
77
|
71
|
64
|
65
|
·
Electricity
|
93
|
97
|
84
|
94
|
16
|
67
|
37
|
67
|
·
LPG as cooking
fuel
|
48
|
54
|
43
|
36
|
08
|
18
|
20
|
23
|
Source: Census
of India 2011 – Tables on Houses, Household Amenities and Assets and SRS Bulletin, Registrar General &
Census Commissioner, India’ and National Family Health Survey-3, Mumbai,
IIPS, 2007.* Annual Status of Education Report 2011, Pratham, 2012.
|
||||||||
In conclusion, the immediate but basic objective behind
development planning of these states must be to increase the productivity of
human resources. Human resource development means investment in human capital.
So people can act as capital assets which yield a stream of economic benefits
over their working life. What is needed is an integrated approach for
development and growth, without education and proper health facilities as well as
better living conditions; it is difficult to achieve balanced growth in the FLNI
States. "Educated and healthy labour force is the biggest guarantor”,
argued by The Nobel laureate Amartya Kumar Sen.
In coming months,
we will discuss each of these Four Large North Indian States.
[1]
Historically,
the chronically poor states were Orissa plus the BIMARU quartet (Bihar, Madhya
Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh), of which Bihar, MP and UP have been sub
divided in the year 2000 into Jharkhand,
Chhattisgarh and Uttaranchal, respectively.
[2] Emerging
demographic divide: A dilemma for India” Blog
Entries by Devendra K Kothari at:
http://kotharionindia.blogspot.in/2012/02/emerging-demographic-divide-dilemma-for.html.
[3] “Rajan Panel Report on backwardness of States of India”, Blog
Entries by Devendra K Kothari at: http://kotharionindia.blogspot.in/2013/10/rajan-panel-report-on-backwardness-of_3169.html.
[4]For details,
see: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2010-07-18/news/27625339_1_fmcg-consumption-penetration-indian-fmcg.
[5] “India: Why pace of
development is slow?” Blog Entries by Devendra K Kothari at
kotharionindia.blogspot.com, posted September 25, 2013.
[6] India Human
Development Report 2011, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2011.
[7] Kothari, Devendra
and Sudha Tewari. 2009. Slowing Population Growth in India: Challenges, Opportunities
and the Way Forward. MIPD Policy Brief No. 2, Management Institute of
Population and Development, (Parivar Seva Sanstha, New Delhi).
[8] “Quality of life and living environment in India”, Blog Entries by Devendra K Kothari
at kotharionindia.blogspot.com, posted September 9, 2012.
