Indian Agriculture: Emerging Issues and Policy Perspectives

Indian Agriculture: Emerging Issues and Policy Perspectives[1]

Srijit Mishra 

Introduction

The summer of 2014 got drenched with the elections euphoria, but for Indian agriculture all eyes are set on the prospects of a good monsoon. Is there a possibility of an El Nino? Will it lead to a drought like condition and have an adverse impact on agricultural production? How will this impact those dependent on agriculture for their livelihood? What about farmers' suicides? These questions remind us of the larger agrarian crisis and its interrelated dimensions of an agricultural developmental crisis. The former is about declining share of the overall pie towards agricultural sector, poor returns to cultivation, and nutritional deprivation while the latter is about inadequate and inappropriate planning that led to a deceleration in the growth rate of production and productivity, and an increase in risk and vulnerability. This also calls for alternative policy thinking.

Agrarian Crisis

The share of agriculture and allied activities in gross domestic product at constant 1999-2000 prices decreased from 41 per cent in 1972-73 to 14.6 per cent in 2009-10 while during the same period the share of employment in the sector declined from 73.9 per cent to 53.2 per cent. This means that the average returns per worker in agriculture and allied activities as a proportion of average returns per worker in non-agricultural activities has declined from 24.5 per cent in 1972-73 to 15.0 per cent in 2009-10.

There is an increasing marginalisation of holdings as indicated through agricultural census. Between 1970-71 and 2010-11 the distribution of operational holdings indicate that the share of marginal (0-1 hectares, ha) increased from 51 per cent to 67.1 per cent while that of others declined - for small (1-2 ha) from 18.9 per cent to 17.9 per cent, for semi-medium (2-4 ha) from 15 per cent to 10 per cent, for medium (4-10 ha) from 11.2 per cent to 4.2 per cent and for large (10+ ha) from 3.9 per cent to 0.7 per cent.

A situation assessment survey conducted for the agricultural season of 2002-03 indicates that average monthly household income compared to expenditure is lower for small (Rs.1,659 and Rs.2,482), medium (Rs.2,493 and Rs.3,148) and semi-medium (Rs.3,589 and Rs.3,685) holdings while it is higher for medium (Rs.5,681 and Rs.4,626) and larger (Rs.9,667 and Rs.6,418) holdings. What is more, even after increasing the returns by one-third to account for the drought, per capita per day returns to farmer households was less than Rs.8. Assuming a 6 per cent annual average growth rate, which is much on the higher side, the per capita per day returns in 2013-14 would double to Rs.16. This explains the poor returns to cultivation. With nearly half the population being still dependent on agriculture, the non-farm opportunities remain limited.

The 2013 Global Hunger Index puts India at a rank of 63 from among 78 countries, which is lower than some of the Sub-Saharan countries and all the other South Asian countries. The per capita per day availability of foodgrains, as indicated in the State of Indian Agriculture 2012-13, has reduced from 510 grams in 1991 to 463 grams in 2011. This is also reflected in the per capita per day calorie and protein consumption as the national sample survey estimates of 1993-94, 2004-05 and 2009-10 suggest. Such an outcome is also because of a shift in the cereal production and their consumption from millets to rice and wheat. There have been recent initiatives to increase the millets production and their consumption.

The manifestation of the agrarian crisis has been identified with farmers' suicides. However, it is symptomatic and its absence does not necessarily preclude risks. A comparison of suicide mortality rates (SMRs, suicide deaths for 100,000 persons) between farmers and non-farmers suggests that at the all India level the difference in the rates diverged the most in 2004 (18.8 and 13.6) and then there was a secular decline in the gap till 2008 (16.9 and 14.7) to diverge again in 2009, a drought year, and then started converging again from 2010 to 2012. However, a closer look at the six states with relatively higher incidence of farmers' suicides indicate that for the recent three years (2010 to 2012) the rates are diverging in Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Kerala and converging in Chhattisgarh, Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh. The turnaround in Chhattisgarh is because it has stopped reporting farmers' suicides and instead increased reporting of a category called self-employed others. In addition, West Bengal did not report profession-wise suicides data for 2012. Thus, the convergence that one observed at the all India level is more on account of inappropriate and incomplete reporting. In any case, one has to look up other aspects to identify possible changes.

Agricultural Developmental Crisis

Using triennium ending data divided to three sub-periods, 1981-82 to 1993-94, 1993-94 to 2004-05 and 2004-05 to 2010-11, an analysis of growth rates computed through a double-kinked exponential curve suggests that the growth of agriculture and allied activities in the first period (3.3 per cent) was statistically significantly higher when compared with the second period (2.7 per cent) and there has been an increase in the growth rate in the recent period (3.0 per cent). An analysis in terms of value addition points out that the growth rate in the first period was statistically significantly higher than the second period for cereals (3.3 per cent and 1.0 per cent), pulses (1.5 per cent and -0.03 per cent), oilseeds (6.1 per cent and 0.5 per cent), cotton (4.1 per cent and 1.0 per cent), milk (5.0 per cent and 3.7 per cent) and meat (5.1 per cent and 2.9 per cent); the growth in the third period was higher than the second period for all the above except for milk (3.5 per cent) and it was statistically significantly higher for pulses (2.5 per cent), oilseeds (4.8 per cent) and cotton (13.7 per cent).  The trends observed till 2010-11 have continued till 2013-14, but for a setback in 2012-13 because of delayed onset and deficient rainfall.

Conventionally, in monsoon India, the farmer was exposed to either yield or price shocks that were supposed to move in opposite directions counterbalancing each other. Today, the possibility of yield risk increases because of unavailability of power that in turn affects water availability at a crucial time, or because of spurious seeds or due to an increase incidence of pest attack or because of weather changes. Further, because of global integration, price volatility has increased and price shocks could be because of higher subsidies in the United States or the European Union. And, with these changes the two risks do not counterbalance each other and the farmer can also be exposed to both the shocks in the same season.

 

Over the years, the farmer is increasingly relying on the market for inputs. The link between ground realities and publicly funded research and extension is waning and the farmer depends on the input-dealer leading to a supplier-induced-demand. What is more, the private provisioning of inputs without any regulation to address the sale of spurious products or other market irregularities increases farmers' vulnerability. Further, with changes in technology, the farmers' current knowledge become redundant and there is deskilling.

Adequate, affordable and timely availability of credit would be essential for any enterprise, but this has been eluding the Indian farmer. In addition, agricultural credit is about doing the same things again and again and not linked to horizontal or vertical expansions. Thus, any shocks are likely to make debt non-serviceable and this would make the farmer ineligible for subsequent loans from formal sources. This would increase the reliance on informal sources at a greater interest burden.

Input-intensive cultivation practices bring in risks that go beyond weather and market uncertainties. There can be inappropriate fertiliser applications having an adverse impact on soil health resulting in yield fatigue or pesticides having harmful impact on livestock and human health or depletion of groundwater among others. A way out being propagated is an expansion of the same, that is, to bring more areas under the input-intensive approach - the look east policy being touted under a second green revolution or an evergreen revolution. The argument put forward in favour of this or other technology-driven approach is that there is no alternative (TINA).

Alternative Policy Thinking

In practice, multiple alternatives exist (MAE, an acronym that sounds as mother in some vernacular languages and we refer to it as mother earth depicting the multiple alternatives that she provides) that is context-specific. It differs across locations and evolves over time. It questions the one-size fits all approach. Such thinking takes advantage of the variability of the natural resource base and the diversity in the production systems. As each crop has a different life cycle, the diversity spreads out the vulnerability from each episode of unforeseen climatic events. In addition to an integration of different crops, the system is also integrated with livestock production. These could lead to low external input sustainable agriculture (LEISA). The application or propagation of this approach is knowledge centric.

Comparing knowledge-centric MAE to technology-driven TINA, one can state the following.

• MAE is bottom-up where different knowledge providers will not only have to keep the local specifics in mind, but will have to work in tandem with the users. TINA is top-down where the provider of the technological-fix, as a solution to some presumed problem, is considered hierarchically superior to the user of that technology.
• MAE is context-specific, requires an understanding of the system dynamics and evolving of effective structures to manage them. TINA is crop-specific and involves application of inputs/technology to enhance production.
• MAE focuses on the production of a complex system with an important emphasis on risk reduction. TINA focuses on a single crop or livestock with an emphasis on improving productivity.
• MAE understanding of efficiency is from a system perspective. TINA looks into efficiency in the technological and economic sense that is normalised per unit of input.
• MAE involves marginal lands with the crop-livestock system spread over a larger area and in that sense is extensive. TINA is mainly in areas with better soils and with access to water (preferably through irrigation) and input-intensive.
• MAE is about integration of mixed and multiple crops with livestock. TINA is about specialisation that espouses mono-cropping.
• MAE production on private lands is dependent on commons. TINA production is in owner-operated lands.

Despite these differences, MAE like TINA, cannot happen on its own. To promulgate it, one needs the support of appropriate knowledge, resources and adequate leverage with marketing opportunities and information technology. It also requires constant monitoring and evaluation.

One of the recent initiatives in-line with MAE is the interventions in comprehensive pilots through the Revitalizing Rainfed Agriculture Network (RRA-N) comprising of a number of civil society groups spread across the country. The comprehensive pilots are spread across different agro-ecological conditions and focuses on integrating knowledge-centric interventions on water, soil, seed, livestock, fisheries, credit and institutions among others. They also collaborate with the local-level line departments and other government functionaries, as that is very essential to scale-up within the pilot area. The interventions that started in Kharif 2012 have attracted the attention of the Planning Commission, the Department of Science and Technology and the Food and Agriculture Organization. This requires greater research engagement that will delineate the specificities in each comprehensive pilot and identify the similarities across comprehensive pilots to facilitate their application beyond the pilot areas.

To sum up, Indian agriculture has been going through a crisis that is agrarian as also agricultural. A way out of this is to explore context-specific knowledge-centric approaches. This, to borrow a term, has the potential for an inclusive, sustainable and food-secure India.

---

[1] This is a slightly edited and hyper-linked version of a write-up that has been published in Yojana, June 2014, pp.58-60 (the PDF version of the issue is available in Google drive). It draws from some of my recent works. They include: Technology, Development, and Farmers' Suicides in India: A Misplaced Debate, Visiting Fellows Seminar, Asia Research Centre, London School of Economics and Political Science, 20 March 2014; Agriculture in India: Performance, Challenges and Opportunities (with S Mahendra Dev and Vijaylaxmi Pandey) in Ashima Goyal edited The Oxford Handbook of the Indian Economy in the 21st Century, Oxford University Press (OUP), New Delhi, 2014;  Rainfed Agriculture: for an inclusive, sustainable and food secure India (with A Ravindra and Ced Hesse), IIED Briefing Paper, April 2013; Persistence of Crisis in Indian Agriculture: Need for Technological and Institutional Alternatives (with D Narasimha Reddy), in Dilip Nachane edited India Development Report 2011, OUP, New Delhi, 2011; and Agrarian Crisis in India (co-edited with D Narasimha Reddy), OUP, New Delhi, 2009 among others.

Some earlier related blogs on this theme are:

India's best dramebaaz

Farmers' suicides and crisis in Indian agriculture

Remarks on rural credit for globalising farmers

Opinions and priorities for agriculture in India

The farmers' strain

An open letter from an ordinary citizen

The general elections have been concluded in India. It is a foregone conclusion that her next Prime Minister will be the Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP's) Mr Narendra MODI. Much has been said and there are two broad possibilities that one foresees. The best-case scenario is the 'Making Of Democratic Institutions', an euphemism that I use for development, governance and all that the supporters are enthused about. As against this, the worst-case scenario is that it would 'Mar (nay, M...) Our Democracy Inevitably', an euphemism that I use for crony capitalism and divisiveness among others that many others fear. For both these scenarios, the acronyms match with the last name of our Prime Minister.

In this MODI vs MODI diatribe, the development vis-a-vis crony capitalism discussion will continue to remain a matter of interpretation and ideological moorings and the debate will be difficult to conclude. There will also be differences of opinion from withing the ruling party and its affiliates and one has to see which direction it takes. The so-called Gujarat-model or the trumpeted Kerala-model. Well, one has to take the best of both worlds and make Jagdish Bhagwati and Amartya Sen come to an agreement.

The contentious part will be juxtaposing governance and divisiveness. Ideally speaking, any polarization leading to divisiveness anywhere should be considered as a failure of governance. However, from a practical consideration it is possible that the government reaches out to a larger section while ignoring a smaller section. What is more, the principle of exclusion could be based on caste, class, gender, religion and other such identities. If these fears are addressed they will definitely not exorcise the ghosts of the past, but they will bode well for the country's future. Where will we head to? Only time will tell.

In reality, the actual path will be somewhere in between. Politically, if extreme adversities do not come in the way, the future looks like advantage BJP. It is hear that I am concerned as an ordinary citizen because for an effective democracy we need a credible and responsible opposition, which is missing. True, the drubbing of 2014 will lead to soul-searching by all parties, but it is difficult to know what would emerge.

The Congress still seems to have a proportion of population voting for them. Perhaps they identify them with the freedom movement or because of their loyalty to the family. However, if the party has to come-back then it has to go beyond these loyal voters and for that it needs to get out of dynastic politics and develop its grassroots organisation - a tall order indeed.

This is also true for the multitude of regional parties that have lost. They need to get back to their drawing board and re-invent themselves. Those who have withstood the change will end up supporting the ruling alliance because of the dynamics of centre-state relationships, but also because of their personal vested interests. 

Today, the only party that seems to be articulating against vested interest in word and deed is the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). But then some of their elected representatives from Delhi seem to have developed cold-feet with the prospect of loosing a fresh election and are clamouring for a fresh go at government-formation. If hastily resigning was a sign of immaturity then their trying to get back to power again when they do not have the strength and after the recent drubbing will be identified with opportunism. This is a catch-22 situation for them.

AAP may try their old style referendum to know what people in Delhi want, but even if people want they cannot form a government because either BJP or Congress has to agree to that arrangement. In any case, BJP fresh with a victory may now like to go for a fresh election and this time AAP will have a tough time.

Yes, AAP did increase its vote share in Delhi, but it has also lost some supporters and the BJP has increased its share by a larger proportion. Will AAP be able to get back those votes that moved away from it if there is a fresh election? Will it be able to add votes from those who did not vote for them or BJP? Will it be able to counter the new BJP campaign that will also have their government at the centre? Will it have resources and volunteers to campaign for it if there is a fresh election? 

At the national level, obtaining resources and volunteers will be essential for building up a strong organisational structure. Where are they going to get this from in the next five years? How does it plan to address vested interests within their organisational structure? Does it plan to build alliances or at least seat sharing or not putting up candidates if another party seems to have a reasonable candidate who may have disagreements with them but subscribes to some people-centric principles and is not corrupt?

What are the plans that they have for the four constituencies that they have won in Punjab. In principle they are against use of MP and MLA funds. This will be an ideal set-up if the government is also theirs. However, with the conventional governance structure it would be better if the candidates for these four constituencies use the funds in a meaningful way. 

As an outside lay citizen, the advantage of AAP is that it has taken into its fold people with different views and ideologies. This would give space for internal deliberations and space for multiple views. This itself makes it like the Congress party of yore and it should take advantage of this.

Idealism is good and people respect AAP for that. However, practical considerations are also important. For instance, emphasis need not be on legislation always and that too when one does not have a majority, but rather focusing on governance and achieving many other things that could be possible without legislation.

To sum up, the future seems to be advantage BJP. Congress and the multitude of regional satraps need soul-searching. AAP that once provided hope and aspirations to some will have a lot of questions to answer. It is a churning between the Congress, the regional satraps and AAP that could perhaps give a reasonable opposition. Let us wait and see.

My other recent election related musings are:

A tall order there for pluralism to resurface

ABC of Indian Elections 2014

Rawlsian veil, Smithian impartiality and Indian Elections of 2014

A tall order there for pluralism to resurface

In this moment of all round euphoria,
Hope lies in a honey-toned world-view,
A time for mass jingoistic hysteria,
All your aspirations are going to be true.

Do not question the carefully camouflaged,
Be pragmatic and erase the unpleasant past,
Or else you will be sorrowfully glued,

Missing the development that will come fast.

The other is dissent creating discordant,
An act that lacks sense or substance,
Trash it as an incoherent cynical rant,
Preach them vows of patience for penance.

Logic is given the go by, reason has no space,
A tall order there for pluralism to resurface.

(This poem or poetry is written in the form of a sonnet. It is a reflection following the counter-reactions to concerns raised following the results of the 2014 elections in India while its implication is general and goes beyond the elections. The poem espouses plural concerns and in that sense is philosophical and perhaps both Bayesian and Rawlsian.) 

Poverty as Unfreedom: Is it a State of Mind?

The renowned philosopher J. Krishnamurti in his Freedom from the Known (Chapter 8) said “Freedom is a state of mind - not freedom from something, but a sense of freedom...” From this perspective, an individual’s attachment to either physical or mental aspects would be a hindrance to freedom, or, rather, to a sense of freedom.

From a different perspective, Amartya Sen would suggest that doing away with hindrances that would improve physical or mental well-being will improve freedom. This is more in line with freedom from something and it is in this sense that poverty is an ‘unfreedom’.  We will focus on this latter interpretation and try to understand the notion of poverty, as a state of mind with the help of two stories.

One story is about a landlord who was envious of his peasant neighbour, as the latter was content and never agreed to work for the landlord.  One day the landlord left a bag of 99 gold coins at the peasant's house and when asked also denied that the bag was his. As there were no other neighbours, the peasant was happy to have got this bag of gold coins. But, this happiness was short-lived. Counting the coins led to a search for the 100th coin that was not found and the peasant took a decision to work hard and save so that she could add that 100th coin to the bag. She was now willing to work for the landlord and sacrifice small pleasures of life like spending time with her family. This change of lifestyle in pursuit of that elusive 100th gold coin also did away with her mental state of being content.

The other story is about a ruler who had difficulty in managing the affairs of the state. This left her worried and with many a sleepless nights. A well-meaning adviser suggested that if she were to stay for one day in the house of a person who had no worries then her worries would vanish. A search was initiated and with much difficulty a person who did not have any worries was identified, but to the ruler’s dismay, the person did not have a house. Of course, the person to take another term from Sen, did suffer from ‘physical condition neglect’, but this did not affect the person’s mental state of being worry-free. Over the years, the ruler learnt to be calm and as a consequence gave more time to improve the well-being of the people, which among other things included shelter for the homeless.

It is possible that a person who is homeless or jobless or sick or suffers from some other deprivations is content and happy about her situation. This, according to Sen, is an adaptive preference. However, this will not prevent the homeless person from valuing, and hence, desiring the possession of a house. In fact, a reliance on the mental state alone would lead to this ‘valuational neglect’ along with the earlier mentioned ‘physical condition neglect’. A welfare-state should address these neglects.

An aspect that is increasingly accepted in a discourse on poverty is that it is multidimensional. The multidimensional poverty index (MPI) computed for India by the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) indicates that between 1999 and 2006 the headcount ratio declined from 56.8 per cent to 48.5 per cent. Though the reductions are impressive, yet the levels remain higher than the neighbouring countries of Bangladesh and Nepal that have relatively lower per capita incomes. The Global Hunger Index 2013 ranks India at 66 among 78 countries and considers the situation to be alarming. An estimate for 2010 used in the Human Development Report 2013 shows that less than two-fifths of the 25+ population have completed their secondary education. Thus, the material/physical condition neglects in India are serious.

One of the livelihood interventions in India, to address some of the deprivations, has been through the formation of female self-help groups. At the national level, this is being spearheaded by the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) through Aajeevika - livelihood mission. Similar state level interventions exist in Andhra Pradesh (Indira Kranti Patham), Bihar (Jeevika) and Kerala (Kudumbashree) among others.  There have also been initiatives by non-governmental organizations in different parts of the country. In fact, in August 2013, MoRD entered into an agreement with PRADAN (Professional Assistance for Development Action) that already works in more than 40 of the poorest districts largely located in the Naxal affected areas of the country to facilitate this. A recent impact evaluation of PRADAN that this author was part of indicates that their livelihood intervention enables capabilities of individuals to manage themselves, organises them into producers’ companies/cooperatives and facilitates forward/backward linkages. For instance, they have promoted the tasar silk product now branded as Eco Tasar that is being sold in Fab India and other outlets.

To sum up, being content, worry-free, and happy are essential aspects of mental well-being, but these will not help us identify the poor. It is the civic, economic and other deprivations (being without food or home or job or health care or social dignity or rights among others) that should be the basis for identifying the poor. Organizing the poor and enabling their capabilities, which could include their mental strength and self-confidence, should be important aspects of implementation, but only after the poor are identified and the interventions focus on their deprivations. We end by referring to Mahatma Gandhi’s talisman – “whenever in doubt think of the poorest person and you will find your doubts melt away.”

ABC of Indian Elections 2014

I have already discussed about the elections under a veil. Now, let me open the veil a bit and discuss the ABC of Indian Elections 2014. A is for AAP (Aam Aadmi Party), B is for BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) and C is for the Congress or INC (Indian National Congress).

The Congress has a national following because it is identified with the country's independence movement. It is this identity that made the Congress to be the ruling party for about 50 year's in the nation's 67 years democracy. The Congress party of yore was thought to represent all kinds of views - the left, the right, the centre, the left of centre. the right of centre and so on and so forth. Over the years, the party's leadership got identified with a single family - the Nehru-Gandhi family (they have no relationship with Mahatma Gandhi) and its current President and Vice-President are Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi respectively. They have also been the leading party of an alliance that has been ruling for the last ten years that was marred with corruption. In the current election the Congress faces serious anti-incumbency on account of corruption and dynastic politics.

Taking advantage of this, the BJP and its allies have made a head start. They have announced Narendra Modi to be their Prime Ministerial candidate. This itself charged the adrenalin of many extreme right wing party cadre and supporters while for some others it brought back the memories of divide and misrule aligned with one of the worst communal violence of India that rocked Gujarat in 2002 only a few months after he was sworn in as its Chief Minister.  Today, after being in charge of the state for more than 12 years, he is being championed as a poster boy of development whose report card by Arvind Panagariya drives the punters with one feet in the share-bazaar gong-ho, but independent analysis by Maitreesh Ghatak and Sanchari Roy show that the claims of development do not add up. 

The BJP is not leaving any stones unturned and has set up pre-poll alliances, taken back into its fold people who were recently distanced on account of corruption and given tickets to candidates who are turncoats from the Congress and other parties. Thereby, making it obvious that it is NOT a party with a difference. What is more, BJP's campaigning has made use of Modi's persona to such an extent that many supporters are not keen to know who the party's candidate is from their constituency. This should be an important case study in marketing, but then the basis of representative democracy is made to stand on its head.

To bolster the case for representative democracy, to be a party with a difference, to question dynastic politics and to rake up the case for corruption is a recent entrant in India's democratic polity, the AAP. For many, this party is identified with another poster boy - Arvind Kejriwal who was the Chief Minister of Delhi for 49 days as a minority government. His sudden resignation from this has become a scoring point for the other parties and a sore point that its candidates have to answer the electorate. But then those interested in these answers should keep a watch on Varanasi where Kejriwal has pitted himself against Modi and it is dubbed as the mother of all battles for elections 2014.

While many opinion polls have dismissed AAP in the current elections, my lay guestimate is that they could reach at least 10 to 15 per cent of the popular vote share. Many of my friends and colleagues with whom I discuss may not agree, but let me explain the reasons that I have.

First, AAP is beyond Arvind Kejriwal. It is a conglomerate of views. There are people who are to the left, some other with views to the right and many others that are spread between the two. While this may look like cacophony to someone at one end of the spectrum but then this is what democratic polity is all about - reasonable pluralism.  It gives space to deliberations for a wide spectrum of views. It is like the Congress of yore. Different political entities, including the BJP to a very limited extent, tried to take this space that Congress lost long back, but they have not been successful. This space is being taken over by AAP.

Second, being open to a conglomerate of views has allowed AAP to connect to different kinds of movements that various groups have been independently spearheading - anti-nuclear, crisis in agriculture, displacement, slum housing, and tribal rights among others. This may not lead to an outright increase in votes for AAP by all these disgruntled groups, but it cannot be ignored that there is a consolidation happening.

Third, some people would be interested in a candidate's capability to address issues that matter for the constituency. Many candidates of AAP have done this - they have made attempts to directly engage with their voters and this will be an important motivation for some to vote for these candidates.

Fourth, AAP is contesting in 434 constituencies that is spread across the country. Given the limited resources (time, people and money) they have spread themselves thin and if voters would not like to waste their vote then they may cast it in favour of an winning candidate. While such an impression creation is possible, but this does not cut much ice because most of the winning candidates could get less than half the vote share (say, around 35-40 per cent) indicating that more than half the voters still may not cast their votes for the winning candidate. In short, those who have decided to vote for AAP because of the first three reasons could still vote for them and this would be spread across the country and this will add to their vote share.

Fifth, because of efforts by the Election Commission of India, the Association for Democratic Reforms and Satyamev Jayate there has been an increase in people coming out to vote in this elections. If this increase is by people who did not want to vote because they were disillusioned by the system then it is quite likely that many of these first time voters may cast their preferences in favour of AAP.

It is possible that my guestimates are on the higher side and even it it is correct then it may not transfer into seats. But, if my guestimate is correct then the other parties may better watch out for AAP in the next elections. And, yes the next election could happen very soon if this election gives us a hung parliament, which seems more likely.

To sum up, AAP seems to be a party that gives space to multiple views and also one that makes a difference. The former makes it like the Congress and the latter makes it like what BJP would have  perhaps wanted to be. It is in this sense that AAP is a B team of Congress and a C team of BJP.

Rawlsian Veil, Smithian Impartiality and Indian Elections of 2014

I have decided to come out of my blog hibernation with the  General Election 2014 in India having traversed two-thirds of its path. Six phases of elections are over and another three phases are left and the results would be known to us in another 20 days time by 16 May 2014. 

The immediate reason for my writing is my being at the International Conference on Global Justice and the Global South where I presented a paper on "A Possible Defence of Rawls" where one of the points was to show that Rawls' original position under a veil of ignorance would give the same outcome as that of the Smithian impartial spectator that Amartya Sen invokes. To explain this, I used an old example that I have been discussing in a related context.

There are three candidates contesting to represent the citizens of a democratic polity. The citizens have to elect one person to represent them. Whom should each citizen elect. The details of the three candidates is as follows.

• X has moved up the political ladder, is with experience and seems to have the support base among some important sections.
• Y belongs to a family that has sacrificed for the upkeep of democratic values and institutions in the country and has been groomed to be a leader.
• Z works for the people sincerely and makes genuine efforts to be inclusive and can be identified with an ordinary citizen.

Both the thought experiments take out the personal slant or vested interest associated with it and the conclusion with both the thought experiments will be the same. The three candidates in the above example have an uncanny resemblance to some candidates in the ongoing elections.

X may be identified with the Prime Ministerial candidate of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its alliances. Y seems to resemble a prominent leader from a prominent family of the Indian National Congress (INC). Z could be identified with the leader from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) who was the Chief Minister of Delhi for 49 days. These resemblances, if any, are coincidental as I have been discussing this example in my classes and lectures for at least the last five years and much before AAP was formed or BJP declared its Prime Ministerial candidate. It is true that dynastic politics had already taken roots in India by then, but then, it is not limited to the INC alone.

While discussing with people over the years there are many who have tried to go under a veil or be impartial and they invariably come out with arguments in support of Z. But, now, it is election time and with the blitzkrieg marketing paraphernalia that some parties have at their disposal it is difficult for people to be under a veil or be impartial. It is this that may not augur well for a democracy.

Why should coming out of a veil be a problem in a democracy where citizens ought to vote for themselves. True, citizens should come out of their veil when it comes to information - their decision ought to be an informed choice and being under a veil of ignorance does not prevent that. The veil of ignorance is about caste, class, religion and other such identities that could be detrimental for a democratic polity.

I must say that I have had long discussions on the current elections with many and while most of them think that I am a member of a particular party, I must make it clear that I am not. It is, however, quite possible that my thoughts, arrived at independently under a Rawlsian veil or Smithian impartiality or Gandhiji's Talisman, would be closer to one particular party over the others.

Measuring HDI - the old, the new and the elegant

The Human Development Index (HDI), since its inception in 1990, has come up with an indicator for each country that aggregates the three dimensions of health (representing how long and fulfilled a life one lives), literacy (representing knowledge) and income (as a proxy for standard of living) into a single dimension. This was an important departure from income-based measures that focused on a single dimension. Before aggregating across dimensions, each indicator was normalized and took values between zero and unity.[1]

Prior to 2010, the approach followed to aggregate was a simple averaging across dimensions. A problem with this method was that a deficit in one dimension will perfectly substitute an equal attainment in another dimension. Income remaining same, this means that a country where both health and education attainments have the same value (say, 0.4 each) will have the same HDI as another country where health is 0.2 and education is 0.6 (a situation not quite uncommon in some of the Sub-Saharan countries reeling under a HIV/AIDS epidemic a few years ago).[2]

In 2010, to address perfect substitutability across dimensions, the calculation of HDI was aggregated by the geometric mean. Usage of the geometric mean also meant that the ordinal ranking across countries would not change if the maximum used for normalizing changed therefore the pegging of a maximum to a goalpost was done away with. Note that this was an advantage of the method, but not a requirement to begin with, definitely not when millennium development goals that can influence the various outcomes that are of relevance in the measure of HDI are themselves pegged to a goalpost.

Source: Human Development Index, The Encyclopedia of Earth

We propose another alternative method of aggregation by taking the additive inverse of the distance from the ideal. This method also addresses the perfect substitutability across dimensions. In addition, this proposed method satisfies two other conditions. One is that the emphasis across dimensions should be based on their proportionate shortfall from the ideal (note that this ideal is a goalpost and not be understood as a transcendental ideal) or is shortfall sensitive. The other is that the same gap should be considered worse-off at higher levels of attainment. Or, simply put the gaps should decrease as attainment increases.

We impose a set of intuitive properties as axioms. They are as follows.

Monotonicity (M): An increase/decrease in the value of any of the three indicators, value of other two indicators remaining constant, will lead to an increase/decrease in the value of HDI.

Anonymity (A): If there are two situations where the values of the indicators get interchanged then they will give the same HDI value. For instance, if in one situation health is 0.4 and education is 0.6 while in another situation heath is 0.6 and education is 0.4 then both these will give the same HDI value if income remains same. This is a simple symmetry condition and not to be considered as subsitutability.

Normalization (N): If all the three indicators have zero value then the HDI value should be  zero while if all the indicators have unity value then the HDI value should be unity. The extremes representing no development and full development, respectively.

Uniformity (U): For a given average attainment, a greater deviation should give a lower HDI value. This is in consonance with uniform development across dimensions, which are considered intrinsic.

Shortfall sensitivity (S): The emphasis for future progress across dimensions should be at least in proportion to the shortfall from the ideal. This means that if education is 0.7 and health is 0.1 (their shortfalls being 0.3 and 0.9) then health should get at least three times the emphasis that is given to education in our future enhancement of capabilities.

Hiatus sensitivity to level (H): The same gap across dimensions at a higher level of attainment should be considered worse-off. Suppose at an average value across dimensions of 0.5 we have education at 0.6 and health at 0.4 and when this average value across dimensions increases to 0.7 then we have education at 0.8 and health at 0.6 then the gap remains same. It has not narrowed down with an increase in attainment and we consider this as worse-off. A corollary in a single dimension will be like this. Consider gender differential in literacy attainment to be 10 percentage points when average literacy rate is 50 per cent. Now, the gender differential remains the same even when literacy rate increases to 80 per cent. Thus, an increase in literacy attainment did not narrow down the differential and we consider this as worse-off.

It so turns out the linear averaging method of aggregation satisfies the first three axioms (or MAN axioms), the geometric mean method of aggregation satisfies the first fours axiom (or MANU axioms, of course, montonicity fails when one of the dimension values is at zero and continues to be so while the others dimension increase) while our proposed method (the displaced ideal method) satisfies all the six axioms (or MANUSH axioms).

We also propose an α-class of measures where special cases turn out to be the linear averaging method when α=1 and our proposed displaced idea method when α=2. Further, when α≥2 then these class of measures satisfy the MANUSH axioms.

Our proposed class of measures can be used in different contexts. It can also consider the dimensions as subgroups. Under such an interpretation, the shortfall sensitivity axiom and the related discussions gives two extremes. One is the leximin ordering (like the Rawlsian scenario) where entire emphasis should be given to the neglected subgroup and then equal emphasis needs to be given after they are equal. The other extreme is to give the entire increment to the better off and leave the worse-off subgroup at their subsistence level till the better off group reaches its maximum and after that efforts can be put to increase the capabilities of the worse-off group. The problem with the latter suggestion is that the better-off group will never reach its maximum so the worse-off will continue to be at its subsistence level. In popular understanding, the two extremes may be referred to as ‘left’ and ‘right’,[3] respectively. To address these extreme positions, many proponents have suggested scale invariance or translation invariance as possible reconciliatory approaches. However, these options would still keep convergence across subgroups at bay. Hence, a proportionate to shortfall approach should be considered as an intermediary position. Of course, we are aware that implementation at the ground level might be different from this measurement exercise, but nevertheless, this will facilitate our understanding.

The word MANUSH means human in many South Asian Languages such as Assamese, Bengali, Marathi and Sanskrit among others. Besides, MANUSH can be rearranged to HUMANS. Thus, we propose the axiom of MANUSH or HUMANS for a human development index.

This blog post is based on a working paper working paper co-authored with Hippu Salk Kristle Nathan. In September 2014, this was further revised and put up as another working paper Measuring HDI - the Old, the New and the Elegant: Implications for Multidimensional Development and Social Inclusiveness at the Asia Research Centre, London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE).  One can also listen to podcasts of presentation at OPHI or CASE Social Exclusion Seminars at LSE.[4]

_______________

[1] The scales used to measure available information, the normalizing of these information to indicators, the weights given to each of these indicators or their sub-components are important aspects but beyond the scope of the current exercise.

[2] HIV/AIDS denote human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.

[3] Note that the Rawlsian scenario identified with the left is not an extreme scenario that takes away from one subgroup in favour of another subgroup. That kind of left extremism, analytically speaking, would be a mirror opposite of the current right. In short, the Rawlsian position is actually a middle position akin to respecting pluralism. This can be achieved through a leximin ordering or by following a proportionate to shortfall approach. These two as also all possibilities within these should be considered as possible Rawlsian approaches.    

[4] The antecedents of this works goes back to more than six/seven years and led to two working papers in 2008, viz., An Alternative Approach to Measure HDI, and On a Class of Human Development Index Measures, and a publication in 2010 Progress in Human Development: Are we On the Right Path? (see working paper version). A related work that we propose to do is the Inclusiveness of Human Development in India; also see video below.