By Dr Utsav Kumar Singh
The idea of humanity lie at the core of human development. Human development goes beyond the notion of economic growth of gross national product or gross domestic product at macro level or rise in personal income of an individual at micro level, which are concerned with wealth maximization of the economy and less on individual’s development. The concept of human development is more about expansion of freedom, enhancement of capabilities, providing equal opportunities to all, and ensuring a long, healthy and prosperous life.
In the post-war era, policy makers across the world have been preoccupied with attaining rapid economic growth by expanding Gross National Product and full employment with very less attention on investment in humans. The move toward Human development was a significant shift in the assessment of economic growth and development when the focus in analysis shifted to ‘human capital’ from the conservative physical capital. Amartya Sen (1998) called it a return to Adam Smith’s approach of development, with more focus on person’s capabilities essential to improve the standard of living. This approach resonates with the Aristotelian idea of prioritizing functioning that individual required for ‘flourishing’ his/her life as human beings. Amartya Sen (1999) explained that the meaning of freedom for an individual is to pursue his/her actual ability to achieve the functioning necessary for a decent life. Sen held that the transformation of individuals’ capability into functioning, to some extent, relies on public policies to advance human development.
Mahbub Ul Haq and Amartya Sen, conceptualized the human-centric approach to development in the first human development report published by United Nations Development Programme in 1990. They famously stated the maxim ‘humans are the real wealth of nation’. Human Development Reports attempts to assess the development of countries through the lens of human beings as the ends as well as primary objective of development since 1990. The particular dimensions of Human development Report examine the progress made by an individual to maintain a kind of life they have reason to value. The same report recognised three key dimensions of individual’s prosperous life, to be maintained by the process of development: longevity (life expectancy at birth), knowledge (access to education), and command over resources needed for decent standard of living.
Longevity and knowledge are human capital required for enhanced capability while command over resources is a tool for other ends. Income is considered as proxy for command over resources since access to health and education with other capabilities depend on income. Further, the geometric of all three-dimension is taken to develop Human development Index (HDI). HDI has changed the locus of measurement of country’s development from economic growth to the progress in wellbeing and capabilities of people of the country.
Human Development Report 2021/22
The Human Development Report 2021-2022 has signalled an alarming situation for India. In the global ranking of HDI, among 191 countries India’s slipped to 132 in 2022 from 130 in 2000. For the first time in the history of independent India, Life expectancy at birth contracted to 67.2, which was nearly stagnant since 2015 (see fig1).
Fig1. Trends in Life Expectancy in India and Bangladesh
Source: UNDP, 1990, 2001, 2006, 2016, 2019, 2020, 2021and 2022
The deterioration in human development figures has often been blamed on the COVID-19 pandemic and international crisis such as the Ukraine-Russia conflict. In contrast, the same report found that the neighbouring country of Bangladesh performed far better than India. Bangladesh managed to maintain the life expectancy at birth which shows negligible negative fluctuation of 0.2. Despite it’s s lower per capita GNI ($5472) compared to India’s ($6590), Bangladesh has been continuously thriving in aspects of Human development which is manifested in average annual growth in HDI ranking; India’s annual growth fell to 0.88 in between 2010-2021 from 1.59 during 2000-2010, while during the same period Bangladesh, average growth doubled touched 1.64 from 1.32. The picture cemented the argument that growth is not the parameter to measure the development of an individual or an economy.
What’s wrong with India?
The year 1991 witnessed structural changes in the Indian economy, popularly referred to as ‘economic reform’. The change entailed the reintegration of India’s economy with the rest of the world, collectively expressed as LPG (liberalization, Privatization, and Globalization).
Within a decade of liberalization, India began to reap the benefits. The country witnessed a surge in growth rate starting from 2003-04. The growth was an unprecedented 8.5 percent a year from 2003/04- 2010/11. In between, the global recession deaccelerated India’s growth rate to 6.7 in 2008/09 but rebounded to 8.5 percent in the next three years after 2008/09. For the first time real wages in agriculture sector due to pro poor policies like MGNREGA, capable institution integrated growth and development. The annual average of HDI increased from 1.24 to 1.59 across the period 1990-2000 and 2000-2010.
Till 2013, the Government of India published social statistics at regular intervals which were useful in policy formation. For example, earlier poverty was estimated in India at national and state level by Planning Commission at regular interval of five years. The last data was released in 2013. In response to a question raised by Srinivas Keswani, Lok Sabha MP, regarding poverty estimation in India, the ministry of Rural Development stated that after the dissolution of the Planning Commission l, the Government relied on Socio-Economic Caste Census (2011) till the first Multi-Dimensional Poverty Index published by the NITI Aayog in November 2021. In contrary, Bangladesh has been conducting the Demographic and Health Survey at regular interval of three years since the 1990s.
Way forward
Capabilities are not inborn, they can be enhanced by society depending on political will. Sen (2005) contends that to achieve development’s objective the government policies must focus on the 3R’s, reach (reach of the reason to be achieved), range (ways and means to be used), and reason (priority to pursue). The marginalised are not free to expand their choices, they are not free to achieve their functioning. The state must ensure equal opportunity for every citizen to live the life they want, free to do or to be. Thus, becoming an active participant in democracy and an agent of humanity and taking the country on the path of human development.
Author is Assistant Professor, Economics, Shaheed Bhagat Singh College, University of Delhi & Fellow, Institute of Social Sciences, New Delhi.
Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal and do not reflect the official position or policy of Financial Express Online. Reproducing this content without permission is prohibited.