5:32 pm - Tuesday November 25, 0600

Bihar ‘ Growth Miracle ‘: Myth and Reality : क्या बिहार की अप्रत्याशित उन्नति मृग मरीचिका है

बिहार की उन्नति की ख़बरें बहुत दिनों तक छाई रहीं पर अब लगता है की यह सब मृग मरीचिका ही थी . वास्तव मैं कोई ऐसा पालिसी का परिवर्तन  या प्रशासनिक परिवर्तन नहीं  हुआ था जो ऐसी जादू भरी उन्नति दे सके . एक आंकड़ा ही कलाई खोल देता है .यह कहा गया की नितीश सरकार ने  १८५४ नए पुल बनाये परन्तु इनमें उन छोटी छोटी पुलियनों को शामिल कर लिया जो प्रधान मंत्री की सड़क योजना मैं थीं . मात्र १३५४ करोड़ रूपये मैं इतने पुल बन गए!

ऐसा ही खेती का विकास है . २००१ से खेती का उत्पादन इतना गिर चूका था की नितीश सरकार ने उसे कुछ सहारा दे दिया . पर अब भी पुराने स्तर  तक नहीं पहुंचा है . अकेले पोंडिचेरी का औद्योगिक उत्पादन आज भी समस्त बिहार के औद्योगिक उत्पादन से ज्यादा है .

यह सच है की लालू सर्कार ने बिहार को बेच ही दिया था . नितीश सरकार ने कानून व्यवस्था , सड़क , शिक्षा इत्यादि को पहले जैसा कर दिया . परन्तु उन्नति तो एक अलाग बात है जो अभी कहीं दीख नहीं रही है .

बिहार की उन्नति नितीश सरकार के बस की बात नहीं है . शायद किसी नेता के बस की बात नहीं है . परन्तु यदि कोई अत्यंत साहसिक नेता मार्गरेट थाचेर की तरह का आ जाये तो शायद बिहार की किस्मत जग जाएगी . सारांश मैं बिहार मैं नरेन्द्र मोदी की जरूरत है पर देश मैं कितने नरेंद्र मोदी हैं .

कृपया लिंक पर क्लिक कर पढ़ें

http://www.cpiml.org/liberation/year_2010/march_10/commentary3.html

Bihar ‘Growth Miracle’:   Myth and Reality

Observer

There has of late been a lot of media  hype about the recent ‘CSO’ (Central Statistical Organisation) data on Bihar’s  ‘growth miracle’ in the last 5 years. At a five-yearly average of 11.03 per  cent, Bihar under Nitish Kumar has apparently been next only to Gujarat which  clocked a growth rate of 11.07%, only marginally higher. The CSO has of course  been quick to distance itself from this statistical miracle, attributing the  figures to data supplied by the Bihar government.   Be that as it may, an average GSDP growth rate of 11.03 per  cent per annum in the last five years (from 2004–05 to 2008–09) is, no doubt,  quite impressive at first sight. But a closer look makes it clear that it is  more a case of statistical illusion than any real transformation on the ground.   Starting from a very low base, even an otherwise relatively  marginal increase in GSDP/NSDP in absolute terms would give a very impressive  picture in terms of growth rate figures. For instance, Bihar’s NSDP (Net State  Domestic Product) may have nearly doubled from Rs. 66,040 crore in 2004 to  nearly Rs. 1,19,443 crore  in 2008–09, which is still paltry when compared to TN (Rs. 2,99,119 crore),  Maharashtra (Rs. 5,04,950 crore) or Gujarat (Rs. 2,57,694 crore).   Coming to the sectoral picture of the Bihar economy,  agriculture has reportedly registered an unbelievably high growth rate of 9 per  cent per annum average between 2004–05 to 2008–09, with agricultural NSDP  increasing from Rs. 18,155 crore  in 2004–05 to Rs. 26,399 crore in 2008–09. This 9 per cent growth rate claim  certainly does not tally with the stagnant and crisis-ridden agricultural scene  on the ground. Once again, it is a case of statistical illusion. Actually, the  agricultural NSDP in Bihar in 2005–06 at Rs. 17,812 crore was lower than Rs.  18,735 in 2000–01 and the intervening years witnessed virtual stagnation in  Bihar agriculture. In view of this prolonged stagnation, recovery in 2006–07  which saw an agricultural NSDP of Rs. 23,700 crore marked a sharp increase in  growth rate in 2006–07 over 2005–06, something like 29% in a single year!!!  This jacked up the overall trend growth rate per annum in the last five years. rally   But after 2006–07, it was again a story of stagnation in  Bihar agriculture with the NSDP recording Rs. 23,251 crore in 2007–08  (marginally lower than in the previous year of 2006–07) and hence showing a  relatively higher increase to Rs. 26,399 crore in 2008–09 over the previous  year (i.e., 13.5 per cent, in the year of Kosi disaster when, according to the  government figures themselves, about 1,20,000 hectares of land went under water  in August, destroying not only the kharif crop but also sharply reducing the  rabi acreage.) If we calculate the trend growth rate of the average per annum  from 2000–01 to 2008–09, the average agricultural growth rate of Bihar works  out to a modest 4.5 per cent per annum. Thus, the relatively “impressive”  growth rate during Nitish period was more due to the stagnation in the earlier  period and the recovery is also marked by repeated spells of stagnation in  between in the Nitish era itself.   It should also be noted that much of Bihar’s agricultural  ‘growth’ revolves around horticulture. Bihar is the fourth largest  horticultural producer in the country. Fruits and vegetables are cultivated in  about 8 lakh to 1 million hectares of Bihar, or nearly 20 per cent of net  cropped area, producing 3.2 million tonnes of fruits and 7.6 million  vegetables. But, leaving the corporate trade in litchi, not even 1 per cent of  this horticultural produce is processed and not even five per cent of the horticultural  area is covered by coldstorage infrastructure (the whole State has only 200  coldstorages with a meagre 4 lakh tonnes capacity) and hence one can imagine  the low prices and distress sale by farmers and the stranglehold of mercantile  capital. In 2008, potato farmers suffered heavy crop loss due to blight disease  and farmers got no compensation.   The overall industrial sector – comprising mining &  quarrying, manufacturing (registered and unregistered), construction and  electricity-gas-water supply – NSDP has also clocked a significant 25.4 per  cent growth (23.4 per cent in GSDP) over the five years from a negative growth  earlier. But the manufacturing subsector within industrial sector tells a  different story. The manufacturing sector in Bihar grew from a paltry Rs. 3379  crore in 2004–05 to Rs. 4852 crore in 2008–09 but the manufacturing NSDP of  Maharashtra in 2008–09 was Rs. 90,819 crore, 18 times more than that of Bihar!  Why, the manufacturing NSDP of the tiny Puducherry (Pondicherry) was more than  the big Bihar’s, at Rs. 5203 crore in 2008–09!   The secret of high growth in Bihar during the Nitish period  lies in the exceptionally high growth in construction. The construction sector  in Bihar grew from Rs. 3766 crore in 2004–05 to Rs. 12,033 crore in 2008–09,  almost three-and-a-half-fold increase. This jacked up the overall growth rate  to some extent.   What explains this major stride in construction growth in  Bihar? Housing boom? No, not at all. Bihar records a pathetic figure even in  Indira Awas Yojana (state-subsidised housing with Central assistance), and with  only 10% urbanization we can hardly talk about any major boom in urban housing.  What then is the secret behind this construction growth in Bihar? Actually, the  substantial growth in Bihar NSDP is accounted for by public investment in which  the Central Plan assistance is a very major component. Central assistance to  State Plans as well as Central Plan projects in Bihar has nearly tripled during  the Nitish period and averages around Rs. 6000 crore per annum (Rs. 30,000  crore in the last five years).   In the four years of Nitish raj, 1854 “bridges” have  reportedly been constructed and 6800 kms of roads laid. But this figure  includes 1600 mini-bridges and even culverts! This is evident from the amount  spent by the Nitish Government – Rs. 1340 crore was spent from the State’s  coffers to build 1854 “bridges”! Most of them were constructed under the  centrally funded national highway project which involved four-laning of major  highways, or all-weather rural roads construction under Pradhan Mantri Gram  Sadak Yojana (PMGSY).   True, private investment in Bihar in the last five years has  also recorded an increase. But to put it in perspective, Bihar’s aggregate  private investment in the last five years stands at nearly Rs. 20,000 crore,  whereas in a state like Tamil Nadu, in a single year alone (in 2008), it  exceeds Rs. 31,333 crore, and that too in organised/registered manufacturing!  If one closely examines the investment pattern in Bihar, the bulk of private investment  – and also of the overall investment including public investment – is accounted  for by construction sector and not (registered) manufacturing or  agriculture/primary sector The Bihar State Investment Promotion Board has  listed only 115 investment proposals for medium and large units (not all  industries but include hotels, colleges and hospitals) approved. Out of these,  45 are ethanol and/or sugar units (35 of them being only ethanol), 5 cement  units and 6 thermal power units. The rest are insignificant except a tractor  unit and a few steel rolling mills needed for construction industry. So it is  construction, especially the Central funds for roads, which is driving Nitish  Kumar’s growth story.   This reinforces one fundamental truth about a backward state  like Bihar – growth in Bihar can only be initiated and sustained by a spurt in  public expenditure and the neo-liberal model which relies overwhelmingly on the  market and private initiative of big capital has little relevance even from the  limited objective of raising economic growth. Yet, Bihar government continues  to woo big private capital and borrow its economic policy inputs from the  notorious DFID (Department for International Development, a United Kingdom  government department which promotes corporate interests and neo-liberal  economics in the developing world). The International Growth Centre funded by  DFID has chosen Bihar along with African countries like Ethiopia, Ghana, Sierra  Leone and Tanzania and neighbouring Pakistan and Bangladesh to supply policy  inputs for ‘development’! Mere increase in public expenditure will however not be  enough to sustain growth, let alone reach its benefits to the sectors of the  economy and sections of the people who suffer the most because of lack of  development. What is needed is to orient and prioritise public expenditure so  that sectors like agriculture and small scale enterprises that cater for the  overwhelming majority of Bihar’s population get the maximum attention and  benefits. Such a trajectory of growth must begin with land reforms, investment  in irrigation and agricultural development, increased agricultural credit for  small peasants and tenants and, of course, increased generation and improved  transmission of electricity. In the absence of this, growth will remain tilted  heavily in favour of a tiny nexus of criminals, middlemen and corrupt officials  and their political bosses and patrons.

Tailpiece: Along with construction, Bihar has witnessed another boom in recent years –  liquor boom despite continuing popular protests, especially by rural women.  Governments however continue to justify the liquor boom by pointing to growing  revenues from increased excise earning. But in Bihar, the excise minister has  raised the issue of a massive excise scam and instead of appointing a  commission of inquiry into the alleged scam, Nitish Kumar has thrown the  minister out of the cabinet. So much for his rhetoric of transparency and good  governance !

 

 

Filed in: Articles, Economy

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply