|
India has showed no progress in its ranking among countries on the Human Development Index, according to the latest Human Development Report for the year 2007, released by the United Nations Development Programme. But India’s average annual growth rate for literacy, life expectancy and income are moving up slowly
India continues to rank 134 among 182 countries in 2007 -- the same as its ranking for 2006 released last year -- on the Human Development Index (HDI). In its immediate neighbourhood, China has moved up seven places to 92, Pakistan has moved up one rank to 141, and Bangladesh has moved up two ranks to 146, compared to their last year’s rankings. Norway continues to top the chart, while Australia, Iceland, Canada, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden, France, Switzerland and Japan make up the top 10. The US ranks 13 while Britain and Germany are further down at 21 and 22. Out simultaneously across the world on October 5, in India the Human Development Report for the year 2007 was jointly released by Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission Montek Singh Ahluwalia and United Nations Resident Coordinator Patrice Coeur-Bizot. The authors of the report point out, however, that progress in basic HDI for India has been consistent over the last 27 years. Between 1980 and 2007, the country registered progress in most of its underlying indicators like life expectancy at birth, adult literacy and combined gross enrolment. Between 1980 and 2007 the country witnessed an increase in life expectancy at birth by approximately eight years, in adult literacy by 25 percentage points, and an increase in combined gross school enrolment by 20 percentage points. GDP per capita, however, increased 199%; this marks a slow annual human development growth rate of 1.33%. So, India might be the fastest growing economy in the world after China but quality of life in India still leaves much to be desired. Asia’s third largest economy has slipped in comparative terms in ensuring a better quality of life for its citizens. In the HDI, India started with 0.427 in 1980, moved to 0.453 in 1985, 0.489 in 1990, 0.511 in 1995, 0.556 in 2000, 0.596 in 2005, 0.604 in 2006 and 0.612 in 2007. There has been a 1.36% increase between 2000 and 2007, according to the UNDP report. China, ranked at 99, progressed from a mere 0.533 in 1980 to 0.772 in 2007. The report also measures India on the Human Poverty Index (HPI) and finds it ranks 88th among 135 countries. HPI measures severe deprivation in health by the proportion of people who are not expected to survive to the age of 40. Education is measured by adult illiteracy rates. On adult literacy, India scores 34%, while in the number of people with no access to an improved water source it scores a respectable 11%. In the matter of underweight children (under five years), India scores 46% along with Bangladesh (48), East Timor (46), and Yemen (46). Migration The report’s focus on migration casts new light on common misconceptions on the subject and proposes a series of policies to increase people’s freedom and improve their lives. It says: “The poorest and the low skilled could benefit the most by moving, yet they face the largest barriers to movement: legal, financial, social.” The report shatters the many myths around migration, including the fact that most of it is international and towards North America. Also, that migrants adversely impact the exit and entry locations. The Indian popular imagination has long painted migration negatively as a “brain drain”, while host countries have, in turn, seen immigrants as a burden, as people who take away jobs. According to the 2009 HDR, not only are these perceptions untrue, most migration does not take place between developing and the developed countries. It does not even take place between countries: “The overwhelming majority of people who move do so in their own country.” The report estimates that nearly 1 billion (one out of seven) people the world over are migrants. Of this, 740 million are internal migrants -- almost four times as many as those who have moved internationally. Among those who have emigrated out, just a third, or only about 70 million people, have moved from a developing to a developed country. “Most of the world’s 200 million international migrants moved from one developing country to another or between developed countries.” The report lays out the case for government to reduce restrictions on movement within and across their borders, so as to expand human choices and freedoms. It argues for practical measures that can improve prospects on arrival, which in turn will have large benefits both for destination communities and for places for origin. Movement from India In the period 2000-2002, the movement of immigrants from India was as follows: 72% to another country in Asia, 15% to northern America, and 9.7% to Europe. However, nearly half of all Indian immigrants went to a country with a very high Human Development Index, the vast majority obviously to the United Arab Emirates. Migrants, internal or international, benefit themselves, the communities they move into and those they leave behind, says the report. The gains are larger for international migrants who earn higher incomes, obtain better access to health and education, and improve prospects for their children. And though the poorest people are the least mobile, they gain the most from emigrating out, witnessing “an average of 15-fold increase in income, a doubling in education enrolment and a 16-fold reduction in child mortality after moving to a country with more opportunities”. The report adds that, contrary to popular belief, immigrants do not crowd out locals from the job market; instead they boost economic output and improve rates of investment in new businesses and initiatives. Job generation The report argues that migration ought not to become a substitute for development in the countries of origin. Nonetheless, mobility brings new ideas, knowledge and resources, besides generating jobs for local workers. In Kerala, for instance, the exodus to the Gulf countries yielded a construction boom in the state. Origin countries also benefit financially from handsome remittances, which in many countries, including India, exceed official aid. There are social dividends to origin communities in the form of reductions in fertility, higher school enrolment and women’s empowerment. Source: The Hindu, October 6, 2009
The Economic Times, October 6, 2009
Business Standard, October 6, 2009
http://www.undp.org/hdr2009.shtml, October 2009
|
