Dimensions of Regional Disparities in Socio Economic Development of Haryana
- Dr. Shobha Chaudhary - Ms. Nisha, Ms. Mahak
The problem of regional imbalances has become a worldwide phenomenon today. Regional disparities in the levels of socio economic development have been either a myth or reality in Indian context since British times. In spite of a planned economy for the last 65 years, one of the main objectives of our national planning to narrow down these regional disparities at all levels of development could not be achieved. These regional disparities could lead to serious complications in the domain of economy as well as polity of the state. The issues of concern are that the regionally skewed distribution of organized economic activities can cause further social disharmony in the state. If these disparities are allowed unabated, it could lead to serious social and political discontent in the state. Therefore it needs immediate intervention and course of correction. In order to design appropriate policy response to rectify the problems related to disparities, the phenomenon needs to be investigated (Bishnoi, M.K & Aneja, R, 2008) . “The task cannot be obtained without identifying the comparatively lagged areas and probing into their levels of socio economic development” (Kalmar. S.C, 200 2 ) . The main problem faced by Haryana economy is the alarming growth rate of regional differences among different districts in terms of socio economic development in fields such as agriculture, irrigation, power, industry, health, education and infrastructure.
DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS AND REGIONAL DISPARITIES IN HARYANA:
(1) Agricultural Indicators (2) Industrial Indicators (3) Demographic Indicators (4) Infrastructural Indicators
Haryana is an agriculturally important state of India and is the second largest contributor of foodgrain (17.6% during 2009-10) with merely 1.4% (4.4 M ha) of the geographical area of the country. Agriculture is the mainstay and backbone of its economy and more than 65% of the population is directly or indirectly dependent on agriculture and related activities. The share of agriculture in GSDP went down to 7.5% during 2008-09 to 5.1% during 2011-12. But the state has made remarkable progress in the field of agricultural production and it has emerged as the grain bowl of the country. Resultantly, the food grains production in the state touched an impressive 161.66 lakh tonnes during 2009-10 from 25.92 lakh tones during 1966-67 registering a more than six fold increase. The gross area sown was 45.99 lakh hectares during 1966-67 and it has increased to 65.00 lakh hectares during 2009-10 and 59.15% during 2010-11.The total area of the state under cultivation has already reached a saturation level and thus there is hardly any scope to bring more area under
cultivation. The agriculture production can only be increased through enhanced cropping intensity, change in cropping pattern, improvement in seeds of high yielding varieties, better cultivation practices and development of post harvest technology etc. But these facilities are available in some districts and on the other hand some districts clearly reflected the regional differences in soil cover and irrigation facilities. These differences ultimately affect the agricultural productivity, cropping intensity and ultimately the levels of agricultural development. The state government is trying to re-orient agriculture through various policy measures for increasing the production. For agriculture development itself industrialization is vital.
Industrialization also plays a vital and crucial role in the development of an economy. It accelerates economic growth and thereby increases the contribution of industrial sector in the state domestic product (GSDP) by way of increase in the production and employment. The industrial sector is the 2nd largest contributor to the state GDP, the contribution of this sector in the state GDP had improved continuously before 2005-06. But thereafter, the share of this sector decreased considerably from 32.7 percent in 2005-06 to 29.1 percent in 2011-12. During these years, the services sector has grown at the rate much higher than the growth rate of industrial sector which eventually resulted in the decreased share of industry sector and increased share of services sector. It is true that the services sector has become the growth engine for the State economy but the good growth of Industry Sector is also equally essential for the balanced and higher growth of state economy (Economic Survey of Haryana, 2011-12).
Development of agricultural and industrial sectors requires a balanced human resource development in the country. Higher growth of population generally encounters numerous constraints to development. Further for improvement in human resource development various determinants of population such as population density, female literacy, total literacy rate and sex ratio also have to improve. According to Population Census 2001, the population of Haryana was about 211.45 crore. The crude birth and death rates are 26.8 and 7.6 respectively. The infant mortality rate in the State was 66.0 and sex ratio was 848 during 2001. Literacy rate of Haryana was 68 percent according to census 2001 but in 2011 it increased to 76.75 per cent which is comparatively higher than 2001. Regional disparities in the state can also be observed in terms of male-female literacy; male literacy rate in Haryana was 78.49 and female literacy rate was only 55.73 percent during 2001, and literacy rate for male was (85.38) and female was (66.77) respectively during 2011 which indicated the gap in male female literacy rate both in rural and urban areas in Haryana. Thus the efforts are made to enhance the quality of life of people by providing the basic necessities of life as well as effecting improvement in their social and economic wellbeing and to decrease these regional disparities. Infrastructure has the potential to fuel the economy for economic growth & development. In this regard the state government has taken various short term and long term measures for improving infrastructure facilities like metalled roads, energy, and health f acilities. Development of agriculture depends, to a considerable extent, on the adequate expansion and development of irrigation facilities. Industrial progress depends on the development of power, electricity generation and transport etc, roads are basic means of transportation for the development of any economy. Haryana state has an efficient network of roads but there are interdistrict disparities from the point of view of metalled road facilities in Haryana. In addition to enhancing the availability it has also undertaken
other measures for the improvement in operational efficiency. The state has also undertaken reforms in the power sector, which have increased the power generation capacity of the state. Energy plays a crucial role in development of vital input in agriculture. With increased power availability it would be possible for the state to meet the increased demand of all the consumers in the state and reduce the regional disparity in power sector. Health institutions are also increased by state government to provide the better health facilities to the people in rural and urban areas and reduce these disparities. But infrastructural disparities do exist in the total length of metalled roads and villages connected with metalled roads, health services, and insufficient increase in number of hospitals per million population. Public health services are largely inaccessible though poor quality with long waiting period. Regional disparity shows that in some district, health services increase rapidly and on the other hand some districts are backward in these facilities.
Various dimensions of economic and social disparities of Haryana have aggravated in the recent period. Socio-economic indicators of development show that disparities exist in the state in agricultural growth, level of literacy, total road length, electricity, infant mortality rate, sex ratio and health etc. Although successful attempts have been made to reduce the disparity yet efforts should be made to reduce regional disparities in Haryana in term of various indicators. To analyze the development of these sectors and regional disparities existing in a total of thirty two developmental indicators have been taken depicting the progress of agricultural, industrial, demographic and infrastructural development of socio-economic development in Haryana. (S.C. Rai and V.K. Bhatia, 2004)
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The main objective is to examine the district wise regional disparities in the levels of socio-
economic development in Haryana.
The data used in this study is secondary in nature. It has been collected from Statistical Abstract of Haryana(2008-09), issued by Economic and Statistical Adviser, Planning Department, Government of Haryana, Economic Survey of Haryana (Various issues).
The dimensions of socio economic development have been analyzed with the help of thirty two indicators (Table available with authors). The study has been carried out on the year 2008-09 at district level. The Principal Component Analysis Method has been used to analyze the data because it gives mathematical weightage in a purely objective manner and provides solution to the problem of multicollinerity and assesses the relative levels of development. The data regarding all the selected indicators is subjected to this method to derive composite scores of individual districts in terms of the levels of development. The technique involves transformation of the original data set into a new set consisting of general components, the number of which equals to the number of variables in the original data set. It is generally seen that the first few components explain a greater part of the total variance in the original data set. Further, the correlation coefficient of each of the component with the variables in the original data set i.e., the component loadings can be meaningfully interpreted only in the case of first few components. The loadings of the selected components (correlation coefficient between the component and the original values interpreted very much in a similar way) are used as weights of the standardized values of the given variables for working out component scores corresponding to each of the observation.
“PCA describes the variation of a set of correlated multivariate data (X's) in terms of a
set of uncorrelated variables (Y's), known as
principal components . Each Y is a linear combination of the original variables X.
Where, Yij is the standardized values of observation 'i' on the variable 'j'; Fij is the loading of variable 'j' on the component 'J'; Yij is the score of observation 'i' on component j; and summation is overall 'm' variables. The Yij's (between -1 to 1) are the weights of each X variable contributing to the new Yi”. ( Y H Chan, Principal component
and factor analysis). To calculate the overall score we convert the raw score to a Z-score. SPSS will do this by using Analyze - Descriptive - Descriptive Statistics - Save Standardized Values. Then we do the sum of Z-score and find
the component scores for the variables. ( Jeromy Anglin- Psychology and Statistics “Calculating Composite Scores of Ability and
Other Tests in SPSS”). A high and positive score indicates that a particular district is more developed than others with lower scores.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The composite indices of development have been obtained for different districts for agricultural sector, i ndustrial sector, demographic and infrastructural development. The districts have been ranked on the basis of developmental indices. The composite indices of development along with rank of districts are given in table 1.1
Table 1.1 (with authors) reveals the scores of each component with overall scores for the 19 observations. The scores of individual components indicate the direction and extent to which an observation is associated with the respective components. The aggregate score of each indicator indicates the relative position of each of the observation. In some cases, the scores work out to be positive, while in the remaining others they are negative. A high and positive score indicates that a particular district is more developed than others with lower scores. It may be seen from the table that in case of agricultural development , the district ofAmbala is ranked first and district of Bhiwani is ranked last. The composite indices of development vary from 4.6 to -6.98. In case of industrial development the districts of Faridabad and Gurgaon are found to occupy the first and second position and district of Mahindrgarh is on the last place. The composite indices of development vary from 6.5/6.3 to -3.5. As regards demographic development the district of Gurgaon is on the first position and Fatehabad is on the last position. The composite indices of development indicate 7.5 to -5.3. On the other hand infrastructural facilities, the district of Panchkula is on the first position and Panipat on the last position, because of Capital of Haryana infrastructural facilities are better in Panchkula. The composite i ndices of development indicate 9.3 to -4.04. If we see the overall socio economic development in the state Faridabad district is in first position and again Mahindrgarh is in last position. The composite indices value 8.3 to -0.93 of overall socio economic indicators reveal the wide variation in developed and backward districts. No doubt, certain regions are more conducive to fetch overall prosperity to the people of those regions in comparison to other regions. A concerted effort is paramount in order to enhance the overall economy of all the districts. In fact Haryana is relatively a small state and therefore much attention is not paid pertaining to the sensitive issue of regional disparities. However, the analysis demonstrates that the issue cannot be ignored any further.
RELATIVE POSITION OF SOCIO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS IN HARYANA
To indicate the comparative level of disparities in socio economic development, the overall scores have been categorized into following three categories (as given in table 1.2
above): Accordingly, the state has been divided into three regions (i) Highly Developed Region (ii) Moderate developed Region (iii) Low developed Region.
The result pertaining to the agriculture development is depicted in Table (1.2). The table demonstrates that in 2008-09 seven districts were developed, five districts were moderate and seven districts were less developed in the agriculture sector. Ambala, Fatehabad, Kurukshetra, Gurgaon, Sonipat and Sirsa districts were highly developed whereas Kaithal, Faridabad, Panchkula, Jhajjar and Yamunagar were moderately developed districts in the state and Jind, Panipat, Mahindrgarh, Rewari, Bhiwani, Hisar and Rohtak districts were agriculturally less developed. The result of agricultural indicators shows that agriculture development in Haryana clearly reflected that the regional disparities increased in most of indicators e.g. percentage of gross area sown under commercial crops to total cropped area, percentage of net area irrigated to net area sown, gross value from agriculture per hectare at current prices, Non-Food grains as percentage of gross value of agricultural output at current prices, fertilizer consumption in terms of nutrients, pesticides and cropping intensity. High value of composite score of these indicators has shown that regional disparity increased in agriculture development in Haryana. All this happened due to lack of irrigation facilities, use of HYVS, and increases in the use of consumption of fertilizers but these facilities are used by the larger farmers, small farmers cannot increase their output due to unavailability of these facilities. This shows the regional disparity in agriculture output increase because of rise in the standard of living of the farmers in rural areas. This is one of the key challenges in agricultural development in Haryana. Therefore, agricultural production is being increased through enhanced cropping intensity, change in cropping pattern, improvement in seeds of high yield varieties and availability of modern technology in less developed districts in the state.
Table (1.2) reveals that Faridabad, Gurgaon, Panipat, Yamunagar and Kurukshetra districts are industrially developed. On the other hand, Ambala, Hisar and Bhiwani are moderately developed district and Panchkula, Karnal, Jind, Sonipat, Rohtak, Sirsa, Fatehabad, Kaithal, and Mahindrgarh districts are less developed in
industrial development. Gurgaon and Faridabad emerged as the industrially most developed district. The concentration of industrially developed districts clearly shows that the areas around Delhi have made significant progress but not all the areas of the state. It increases the regional variation and shows that the interdistricts disparities are growing over time. Interestingly, industrially developed districts have been agriculturally backward districts of the state. For the balanced regional development of the state the backward areas must be identified and efforts must be made to develop them.
District wise human resource development is presented in table (1.2). In demographic development Panchkula, Faridabad, Gurgaon, Yamunagar, Ambala, Panipat and Rohtak districts are highly developed in human resource development due to literacy. On the other hand, districts of Kurukshetra, Rewari and Sonipat are moderately developed and Jhajjar, Karnal, Mahindrgarh, Bhiwani, Jind, Hisar, Fatehabad and Sirsa are l ess developed i n human resources development. Demographic indicators significantly indicate the regional disparities in the level of human resource development in the state. Therefore, increase in welfare and improvement in quality of life of the people should be the main concerns of the development. Sex ratio is an important social indicator to measure the extent of the prevailing equity between males and females in a society at a given point of time. The grim picture of unfavorable sex ratio prevails at the district level which reflects the underlying socio-economic patterns of a society in different ways. The declining sex ratio and female literacy are matters of great concern, as these will lead to serious demographic imbalances and adverse social consequences .
Districtwise development in basic infrastructure and services is presented in table (1.2). In infrastructural development Panchkula, Faridabad, Gurgaon, Rewari, Bhiwani, Hisar and Fatehabad districts are highly developed due to industrialization in these districts and Panchkula is the capital of the state. On the other hand Kaithal, Jhajjar, Jind and Karnal are moderate in infrastructural facilities and Ambala, Yamunagar, Kurukshetra, Panipat, Sonipat, Rohtak and Mahindrgarh are less developed in infrastructural facilities. If we look at all the socio economic indicators, Mahindrgarh district is a least developed district in the state. It seems that the fruitfulness of all other factors is based on the availability of favorable physical resources. Infrastructure disparity increases in the total length of metalled roads and villages connected with metalled roads in Haryana. Infrastructural disparities also increase in health services because there has been insufficient increase in number of hospitals per million population. Public health services are largely inaccessible having poor quality with long waiting period and with overlapping functions among various tiers leading to duplication and inefficiency in services. Regional disparity shows that in some district health service increases rapidly and on the other hand some districts are backward in these facilities. Electricity has an important role in development of any area. Its availability is crucial to modernization of agriculture, establishment of industries and running of diverse educational medical and other facilities. These disparities are attributable to the factors of the initial advantage which different parts of the state enjoyed in terms of their administrative history, infrastructural base, physical resources and relative, location. Broadly speaking western Haryana is far behind than its eastern counterpart.
Out of 19 districts two districts are classified as overall developed districts, while two districts are moderate and all the indicators are poor in low developed districts. The results of the principle component analysis during 2008-09 indicate that the Gurgaon and Faridabad districts are highly developed because of industrial development. On the other hand Ambala and Panchkula districts are moderate in all the socio economic indicators. The district of Ambala is
developed in agriculture and Panchkula is the capital of the state which consist of a small area of the state but highly developed in infrastructural facilities. As regards this all the other districts are in category of less developed due to many socio economic indicators in the analysis which affect the value of one variable to the other. Thus the government needs to make concerted efforts to spread development in all districts, particularly in agriculturally and industrially backward districts of the state.
The forgoing analysis proves that Haryana is a developed part of India. But there are interdistricts disparities of various dimensions in social and economic development of the state. The indicators used in the analysis show that some parts of the state are highly agriculturally developed and some are highly industrially developed. But on the other hand, some districts are neither agriculturally developed nor industrially developed. The progress of socio economic development is found to be positively related with agriculture and industrial development. These disparities arise due to imbalances in facilities for agricultural and industrial development. Infrastructural facilities have also left positive impact on overall socio economic development of agriculture & industry benefiting the development of these sectors. The result of the socio-economic indicators of development shows that disparities exist in the state in irrigation, soil, and cropping intensity, level of literacy, total road length, electricity, infant mortality rate, sex ratio, health and infrastructural facilities etc. If these disparities are not addressed immediately then they may generate, friction among various sections of the society with tragic, undesirable and even
violent outcomes. Thus successful efforts have to be made to reduce these disparities in various indicators through massive private investment to be done on development for backward districts in the state. Government will strive to remove disparities at various levels and will take immediate measures to ensure sustainable and balanced development in the entire region of Haryana.
Ardeshna,N.J and Shiynai, R.L (2012) “Growth Dimensions of Agriculture in Gujarat State: A Factor Analysis Approach”, Economic Affair, Vol.No-57(1), p.p-41-50. Bhandari, L. “District Level Deprivation in New Millennium”, Edited by Bibek. Debroy, Rajeev Gandhi Institute for Contemporary Studies IndicusAnalytics Bishnoi, M.K and Aneja, R (2008) “Regional Variations of Socio- Economic Development in Haryana: A District Level Analysis”, Indian Journal of Regional Science, Vol-XXXX, No-2. Chan Y. H (2004) “Biostatistics 302. Principal component and factor analysis”, Singapore Med J 2004 Vol 45(12) : 558 Government of Haryana (2011-12), “Economic Survey of Haryana 2011-2012 ” Ministry of Finance, Chandigarh. Government of India (2009), “Haryana Development Report ” Planning Commission, Academic Foundation, New Delhi. Government of Haryana (2007-08 &2010-11), “Statistical Abstract of Haryana ” Economic and Statistical Adviser, Planning Department, Chandigarh, Haryana, various issues. Kalwar, S. C( 2002) “Resources and Development”, Ritu Publications, Jaipur, P173. Kurian.N.J (2007) “Widening Economic and Social Disparities: Implication for India”, Indian J Med Res 126, Oct 2007, pp374-380, Council for Social Development, New Delhi, India. Narain.P, S.D. Sharma, S.c. Rai and V.K. Bhatia (2005) “Estimation of Socio-Economic Development of different Districts in Kerala” Indian Society ofAgricultural Statistics. New Delhi,Jour. Ind. Soc. Ag. Statistics 59( I). 2005 : 41-55 . Sharma, Urmila ( 2010) “Agricultural Development in Haryana” International Research Journal, Vol -1 issue, May”. Singh, M and Harvinder, K (2004) “Economic Development of India” Deep & Deep Publication Ltd. Delhi
Table 1.2 Relative Position of Socio Economic Development Indicators in Haryana