1. Introduction:
This report is based on the Human Development Report,
submitted to the Government of Andhra Pradesh, by Center for Economic
and Social Studies (CESS). It is aimed to show the existence of
regional imbalances in Human Development.
Most of the data in CESS report
was from early 1990s to early 2000s. Since, this is from a recent
decade, after Economic Reforms, and after better infrastructure and
communication establishments, it is a very good indicator of the
disparities that exist in the development of the different
CESS took each district as a unit
in their data collection and different statistical calculations. Since
the arguments are based on the regions (Telangana, Andhra and
Rayalaseema), I have taken each region as a unit. I have computed each
value in simple averaging method. Telangana consists of 10 districts, so
I averaged each value for those 10 districts. Similarly, for 9
districts in Andhra and 4 districts in Rayalaseema regions. Though, the
current arguments are between Telangana and Seemandhra, I have separated
3 regions in my analysis. Because major arguments are between Andhra
& Telangana and I am not sure what Rayalaseema representatives want?
Sometimes, they want a united state, and sometimes they want their own
Greater Rayalaseema. Since, that is not clear to me, I kept that as a
separate region.
It is also being argued that
Telangana is developed by looking at the development in and around
Hyderabad; I divided Telangana as Telangana with HYD and Telangana
without HYD. This is to insist that “Developed Hyderabad does not
represent developed Telangana”.
This is not to interpret the Cess
report for wrong reasons, since Cess report is considered to be more
genuine and unbiased; it is being used to study the genuine differences.
Also, this report does not cover other aspects of Telangana movement, like Political, cultural and employment indifferences.
Objectives of the Report:
- To obtain information on where Telangana as a region stands, in terms of development, compared to whole AP and Andhra region
- An attempt to get facts to all those who argue, without any basis, on the development of Telangana
- To recognize the existence of genuine regional imbalances between Telangana and Andhra, in terms of development, whether these imbalances are a result of organized discrimination or not is secondary, but first of all, everyone should recognize the underdevelopment of Telangana compared to Andhra region
- To show that, Hyderabad alone is developed exponentially, but not the rest of the Telangana.
There are other
undeveloped/underdeveloped areas/districts in all 3 regions, since there
is a strong demand for a separate Telangana; this report is targeted to
view the development aspect of all “regions” as units.
2. Analysis:
2.1 Human Development Index (HDI):
CESS Definition of HDI:
The concept of development has been
extended to be more comprehensive and go beyond the mere material
dimension of increase in per capita income, complemented by the
non-material dimensions (like levels of education, status of health and
access to basic amenities). Thus development, apart from income, relates
to general well-being and economic capabilities of the people.
The Planning Commission of India
considered the following indicators for three dimensions of HDI in NHDR:
literacy rate (7+ years of age) and adjusted intensity of formal
education for education, life expectancy at age one and infant mortality
rate (IMR) for health, and consumption expenditure (per capita per
month) for command over resources (NHDR, 2001). Each of these parameters
are analyzed separately in the later part of this report
Table 1: Human Development Index (HDI) in different regions (Higher the value, better the situation)
|
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
Early 1990s
|
0.402
|
0.4008
|
0.3998
|
0.378
|
0.392
|
|
Early 2000s
|
0.537
|
0.54667
|
0.5393
|
0.519
|
0.50625
|
Interpretation: In this
Table, though the absolute values seem to be very close to each other,
we have to see the net difference between these smaller values. There is
definitely difference between the regions. Since the indicators
considered are smaller in absolute values, these differences look small.
For those, who have been arguing that Telangana(with HYD) is more
developed than Coastal Andhra, the statistics show that Coastal Andhra
is more developed than Telangana (w. HYD), though they don’t have a
capital city in the region. If the comparison is Telangana (w/o HYD),
the difference is higher.
Obviously, this difference
trickles down to the rural areas when they compare their life style with
the other regional counter parts. I believe, this is the main reason
for a stronger Telangana movement in rural areas.
2.2 Human Poverty Index (HPI)
CESS Definition:
While the HDI measures the overall
progress in achieving human development, the HPI measures the
distribution of progress through the level of deprivation. The broad
dimension by which this deprivation is measured is the same as those of
HDI – health, knowledge and standard of living – but there is a slight
variation in the indicators. Moreover the level of deprivation is the
yardstick for measurement while achievement levels are considered for
HDI. Therefore, the indicators taken are as follows: adult illiteracy
rate and percentage of children not attending school for education;
infant mortality rate for health; and percentage of household not having
access to basic amenities like drinking water, housing, sanitation,
cooking fuel and electricity for command over resources
Table 2: Human Poverty Index (HPI) in different regions (Lower the values, Better the situation)
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
| Early 1990s |
0.583
|
0.616
|
0.5714
|
0.609
|
0.60725
|
| Early 2000s |
0.469
|
0.485
|
0.4613
|
0.488
|
0.48025
|
Interpretation: The
difference of HPI between the regions is not high. Hyderabad helped
Telangana in this calculation, by reducing the HPI value in the region.
But, rest of the Telangana is almost equivalent to Coastal Andhra &
Rayalaseema
2.3 Gender Development Index (GDI)
CESS definition
The gender-related development
index (GDI) is the third important index in the series used by the UNDP.
It measures achievements in the same dimension and uses the same
variables as the HDI does, but takes into account the inequality in
achievement between women and men. The greater the gender disparity in
basic human development, the lower is the GDI of a region when compared
with its HDI.
Table 3: Gender Development Index (GDI) in different regions (Higher the value, better the situation)
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
| Early 1990s |
0.553
|
0.554
|
0.544
|
0.537
|
0.54425
|
| Early 2000s |
0.62
|
0.618
|
0.6132
|
0.6044
|
0.5825
|
CESS Analysis of all 3 Indices:
There seems to be some convergence
across districts in human development in Andhra Pradesh, indicating that
the more backward districts are catching up with the developed
districts. On the other hand, regional disparities have not changed much
for human poverty index and gender development index.
Whatever the differences seen in
the Human Development got widened when each of the criterions were
looked at separately.
2.4 Different aspects of Development – Individually
Each parameter of the development
is looked into, individually, to observe the statistics more closely,
in the following tables.
2.4.1 Income Dimension of HDI
Table 4: Per capita GDDP (Higher the value, better the situation)
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
| 1993 – 1994 |
7416
|
7540
|
7062
|
6993
|
7553
|
| 2004 – 2005 |
11756
|
11963
|
11818
|
11381
|
9968
|
There is a clear
difference across the regions, in terms of per capita Gross District
Domestic Product. Reader has to observe that, the GDDP in Coastal Andhra
is higher than Telangana with Hyderabad. Telangana without Hyderabad is
further lower compared to Telangana (w. Hyd). So, this income dimension
is clearly felt across all sections of the people. This also proves
that there is not a much of dependency on Hyderabad, from Andhra region.
They will still be able to maintain the same level of income, even
without Hyderabad being part of their region
Table 5: Growth of Gross District Domestic Product (GDDP)
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
| 1993-1994 |
5.7
|
5.3777
|
6.22
|
5.977
|
4.4
|
| 2004-2005 |
4.3
|
4.3333
|
4.57
|
4.3666
|
2.925
|
Table 6: Growth of per capita District Domestic Product (DDP) in Rs
.
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
| 1991 |
840
|
842
|
820
|
810
|
842
|
| 2001 |
1300
|
1325
|
1309
|
1259
|
1083
|
Interestingly,
though the development of GDDP is similar across the regions, the Net
value of the growth in Rs. is clearly different. These Net differences
in the income & income growth are felt in Telangana region across
all sections of people
2.4.2 Health Dimension of HDI
Table 7: Infant Mortality Rate (Lower the value, better the situation)
|
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
1991
|
49
|
50
|
46
|
48
|
52
|
|
2001
|
43
|
42
|
40
|
42
|
45
|
Health dimension (Infant
mortality) seems to be equal across the region. Though, there were
differences in 1991 and Telangana had an edge then, Andhra region caught
up by 2001. This is a good sign.
Table 8: Health Facility Available per ten lakh population, 2004-05
|
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
Hospitals
|
4
|
4
|
4.9
|
4.66
|
4.25
|
|
PHCs
|
20
|
20.889
|
19.1
|
21.22
|
22
|
|
Beds
|
449
|
399.222
|
467.6
|
345.44
|
423.75
|
|
Dispensaries
|
3
|
3.6666
|
2.4
|
1.111
|
2.75
|
|
Doctors
|
92
|
83.111
|
85
|
57.2222
|
99.5
|
|
Contract Doctors
|
9
|
8.6666
|
10.2
|
10.77777
|
10
|
|
All Doctors
|
101
|
91.5555
|
95.2
|
68
|
109.5
|
Though, there are slightly higher number of hospitals and PHCs,
there is a substantial difference in number of doctors compared to other
regions. I don’t think number of facilities would help the population
without enough staff
2.4.3 Education Dimension of HDI
The
differences in education dimension seem to be very high and Telangana
region did not catch up with the Andhra & Rayalaseema in any of the
following areas of education dimension. This should have been primarily
the Government’s responsibility to realize differences amongst the
regions and the backward regions should have been taken care with utmost
importance.
Table 9: Percentage of Children 5-14 Age group Attending School (Higher the value, better the situation)
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
| 1991 |
49.12
|
50.24
|
47.22
|
44.7
|
50.17
|
| 2001 |
73.8
|
75.02
|
73.46
|
72.82
|
72.9
|
Table 10: Literacy Rate for 7+ yrs Children (Higher the value, better the situation)
|
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
1981
|
29.9
|
31.61
|
26.22
|
22.65
|
30.2
|
|
1991
|
44
|
44.73
|
40.48
|
37.03
|
45.025
|
|
2001
|
60.5
|
62.13
|
57.18
|
54.77
|
59.725
|
Table 11: Adult literacy is for the age group 15 years and above (Higher the value, better the situation)
|
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
1991
|
38.3
|
39.27
|
34.5
|
30.74
|
38.775
|
|
2001
|
54.2
|
55.88
|
50.07
|
47.06
|
53.3
|
Table 12: Literacy rate for the age group of 15+ yrs, in 2001
|
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
| Non-Literatue |
45.8
|
44.12
|
49.94
|
52.93333
|
46.7
|
Lower the better
|
| LRP+ |
44.4
|
45.0111
|
41.18
|
37.91
|
44.675
|
Higher the better
|
| LMD+ |
28.7
|
26.9666
|
29.64
|
26.51
|
26.675
|
Higher the better
|
LRP+: Literate person with education level primary and above
LMD+: Literate person with education level middle and above;
The incidence of Non-Literate people is higher in Telangana region compared to the other regions.
Table 13: Drop-out Rate in Primary and Upper Primary Stages, 2005 (lower the value, better the situation)
|
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
| Class I to V |
27.04
|
19.34
|
33.08
|
33.88
|
18.57
|
| Class I to VII |
43.22
|
40.59
|
43.82
|
47.55
|
35
|
It is highly
important to note the difference in dropout rates. Telangana is
definitely neglected in this case in terms of curbing the dropout rate.
Again, this falls under Government’s responsibility to concentrate on
the backward region and ensure effective implementation of Govt.
schemes.
2.4.4 Agriculture dimension
Table 14: Percentage of Irrigated Area by Different sources, 2004 – 2005
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
||
|
% in Net Sown Area
|
Canals |
12.9
|
27.86
|
—
|
2.665
|
3.65
|
| Tanks & Others |
6.1
|
12.85
|
—
|
4.45
|
1.775
|
|
| Wells |
18.2
|
13.1
|
—
|
28.98
|
17.35
|
|
| Total |
37.2
|
53.82
|
—
|
36.12
|
22.775
|
|
|
% of wells in Net Irrigated Area
|
49.1
|
24.4
|
—
|
80.07
|
74.175
|
|
|
Other wells in Total wells
|
34.1
|
27.91
|
—
|
36.98
|
22.6
|
|
Agriculture being the main
occupation for the people across all regions, it is a MAJOR indicator of
the backwardness. This is one of the major indicators of the
backwardness of Tealangana. These differences are genuinely felt across,
because of the fact that Agriculture is the main occupation for the
people of all regions.
Though the major rivers, Krishna
& Godawari enter Telangana first, the percentage of Net sown area is
much less in Telangana compared to Andhra. This is due to several
reasons some interdependent.
Where people from Telangana are
dependent more on Wells/Borewells,( due to the non-availibility of canal
systems) Andhra region is dependent more on Canals & Tanks which
allows for a larger cultivable land as compared to well irrigation..
There are regions in Telangana where people sold some of their land to
dig Wells/Bore Wells. Telangana is completely dependent on Electricity
to get water out from the wells, they have to pay the electricity bills
without fail, till 2004, whereas, people from Andhra have to pay nominal
water tax for canal water. Higher bills for digging wells &
electricity mean higher production cost for the crop. Though, both the
regions grow similar crops, one region’s production cost is always
higher than the other region. But, the final crop goes to the same
markets and both get the same price. At the same time, irregular supply
of power for the agriculture sector & higher production cost caused
many losses to the farmers of Telangana, especially in 1990s. This
triggered the spate of farmers’ suicides in Telangana region. These
suicides were witnessed by the younger generation of the region.
Subsequent Governments, since the
formation of Andhra Pradesh, should have concentrated on developing the
irrigation projects in Telangana region, to make sure that those
differences are balanced.
Table 15: Share of the Value of Crop Output and Livestock in the GDDP and their Growth across Districts
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
|
Crop output
|
|||||
|
1993 -1994
|
24.6
|
27.51
|
N.A
|
21.2
|
33.08
|
|
2003 – 2004
|
14.2
|
16.72
|
N.A
|
14.41
|
16.83
|
|
Livestock
|
|||||
|
1993 -1994
|
5.5
|
5.61
|
N.A
|
3.57
|
5.62
|
|
2003 – 2004
|
7.4
|
7.5
|
N.A
|
6.68
|
8.65
|
|
Agriculture
|
|||||
|
1993 -1994
|
30.1
|
33.12
|
N.A
|
25.85
|
38.67
|
|
2003 – 2004
|
21.6
|
24.21
|
N.A
|
21.57
|
25.42
|
|
Growth (1993 – 2004)
|
|||||
|
Crop
|
1.3
|
1.28
|
N.A
|
3.2
|
0.925
|
|
Livestock
|
5.8
|
5.34
|
N.A
|
7.06
|
5.75
|
|
Agriculture
|
0.61
|
0.64
|
N.A
|
0.947
|
0.645
|
1. The data considered here is components of Gross District Domestic Product (GDDP);
2. Crop output includes value of output from all the agriculture and allied activities excluding livestock;
3. Growth is exponential growth rate.
Again, this table is interesting
to observe. Differences in Crop output, Live Stock & other
Agricultural products are not huge. But, the NET income to the farmers
has always been lower for Telangana region due to higher investment
(production cost) as explained by reasons above.. That difference in
income is clearly visible in the Table below.
Table 16: Per Capita Gross
District Domestic Product per Worker Agricultural (Aggregate Value of
Corp) output across Districts
|
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
Per Capita GDDP
|
N/A
|
18337
|
–
|
16961
|
15192
|
|
Per Worker Agril. Output
|
N/A
|
13370
|
–
|
8990
|
8493
|
|
Per Hectare Agril. Output
|
N/A
|
33007
|
–
|
20235
|
15337
|
2.5 Other aspects of Development Index
Table 17: Infrastructure Index, in 2004
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
| Population Density |
277
|
368.55
|
1997.8
|
257.88
|
201.5
|
| Road Density |
666
|
761.66
|
710
|
682.33
|
582.5
|
| Percentage of Gross Irrigated Area to the Gross Cropped Area |
39.8
|
51.43
|
34.99
|
38.87
|
25.92
|
| Power – Percentage of Villages connected with Electricity |
100
|
99.888
|
99.95
|
99.94
|
99.82
|
| Bank – Number of (Commercial) Bank Branches available per lakh Population; |
7.08
|
7.21
|
6.897
|
5.94
|
6.411
|
| TP – Number of Telephone connection per lakh Population; |
4121
|
4559
|
4455
|
3548
|
3258
|
| PO – Number of Post Offices per lakh Population; |
21
|
23
|
19.3
|
21
|
26
|
| Composite Index (unweighted) of seven indicators mentioned above |
1
|
1.138
|
1.871
|
0.945
|
0.88
|
| Index includes above seven plus two more indicators representing education and health infrastructure. |
1
|
1.068
|
0.983
|
0.936
|
0.958
|
All the parameters observed in
this Table, Andhra region is higher than the AP state’s average, and it
is more advanced than Telangana with Hyderabad. When Telangana (w.o.
HYD) is compared, the differences are much higher. Though, the major
economic capital, Hyderabad, is in Telangana region, Road density is
higher in Andhra region. If not all of the above, Roads are completely
in control of the State government, which neglected Telangana area in
this regard.
Table 18: Urbanization
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
| 1991 |
26.9
|
24.33
|
28.83
|
20.92
|
23.275
|
| 2001 |
27.3
|
23.44
|
29.55
|
21.72
|
23.2
|
Table 19: Degree of Urbanization
|
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
1961
|
17.4
|
16.6287
|
16.9444
|
13.40556
|
15.325
|
|
1971
|
19.3
|
18.625
|
17.7333
|
13.929
|
16.45
|
|
1981
|
23.3
|
21.87778
|
24.66
|
16.28889
|
20.4
|
|
1991
|
26.9
|
24.3333
|
28.83
|
20.92222
|
23.275
|
|
2001
|
27.3
|
23.44444
|
29.55
|
21.72222
|
23.2
|
The major contribution from Hyderabad to
Telangana region is this Urbanization calculation. Since Hyderabad is
considered as 100% Urbanized, Telangana (w. HYD) shows more urbanized
than Andhra region. But, if Telangana (w.o HYD) is compared, there is
not much difference. We have to remember the fact that, the same
Hyderabad did not help Telangana in terms of Human Development in any
other means.
Table 20: Percentage of Households without selected Basic Amenities, 1991-2001
|
|
Overall AP
|
Coastal Andhra
|
Telangana
(w. HYD)
|
Telangana
(w/o HYD)
|
Rayalaseema
|
|
Dwelling
|
|||||
|
1991
|
49.9
|
59.05555
|
37.81
|
38.777
|
56.25
|
|
2001
|
50.9
|
39.38889
|
57.55
|
57.7111
|
59.075
|
|
Tap Water
|
|||||
|
1991
|
75.6
|
79.52
|
72.45
|
78.48
|
72.6
|
|
2001
|
51.9
|
44.54
|
49.27
|
49.27
|
77.05
|
|
Toilet
|
|||||
|
1991
|
81.6
|
83.85556
|
77.27
|
84.4889
|
86.975
|
|
2001
|
67
|
63.75556
|
68.25
|
70.06667
|
76.25
|
|
Traditional Fuel
|
|||||
|
1991
|
84.5
|
85.1
|
80.14
|
87.88889
|
92.65
|
|
2001
|
73.1
|
67.95556
|
77.22
|
78.95556
|
76.75
|
|
Electricity
|
|||||
|
1991
|
53.7
|
61.24444
|
47.97
|
52.2333
|
46.4
|
|
2001
|
32.8
|
29.38889
|
31.54
|
32.1667
|
45.875
|
Dwelling – Percentage of households with
one or none dwelling rooms; Tap Water – Percentage of households
without tap water for drinking; Electricity – Percentage of households
without electricity connection; Toilet – Percentage of households
without toilet facility; Traditional Fuel – Percentage of households
using traditional fuel for cooking including fire wood, charcoal, etc.,
Numbers in this
Table are another true representation of discrimination. Whether it is
organized OR unorganized is a different argument, but these are the very
basic necessities that people feel difference in. To observe, the very
fact that the numbers in Telangana region for Dwelling have increased
from 1991 to 2001 is very saddening. There is more number of people in
Telangana without the access to Tap Water & Toilet. This situation
is not at all acceptable. People who use fire wood and charcoal are more
in Telangana region.
Interesting observation on this is
Table is, growth rate in Andhra region in all these parameters is more
than Telangana, during the period of observation (1991-2001). The only
exception, Telangana shows better percentages in Electricity.
When people of Telangana compare
their standard of living with that of Andhra region, they can clearly
feel the difference within these factors.
- Cannot discount the existence of regional disparities
- Statistical evidence shows that Telangana region is behind Andhra region, in-terms of every aspect of development
- Hyderabad, being part of Telangana, did not help the region in terms of development. It should be noted that “Developed Hyderabad is not a Developed Telangana”
- Most of the data collected by CESS for this report is from early 1990s to early 2000s. Differences in this period are felt strongly by the younger (10 – 20 yrs age) generation of that decade. I believe this is the reason for the large participation of youth (20 – 30 yrs) in the present Telangana movement. When they compare their standard of living of the same age group in other regions, they obviously feel the differences
http://undp.org.in/sites/default/files/reports_publication/Andhra.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment