MAPPING INEQUALITY IN BIHAR

14Mapping Inequality in BiharMapping Inequality in BiharEXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe democratic values of Liberty, Equalityand Fraternity have been accepted largelyby the world community. Existing deviationsfrom these democratic values have broughtworld leaders together to create advisoryregulations and various policies andprogrammes with the aim of keeping thedemocratic values intact. As a result, socioeconomic and political dynamics across theglobe have changed significantly.The recent development discourse oninequality has focused mainly on twodimensions: i) inequality of outcome beingaccountable for educational achievementsor levels of income and ii) inequality ofopportunity being accountable for the gap inaccess to public services and employment.There is a need to look beyond inequalityeither of opportunities or of outcomes bythemselves as portrayed in the developmentdiscourse and comprehensively analysethe relationship between the inequalitiesbetween outcome and opportunities due totheir interdependency.This study analyses the regional disparityand inequality in Bihar with respect tothe other states in India and inter-districtvariations within the state. It is based mainly46.942.942.242.035.8on secondary data from published officialreports, individual studies, etc. The studyis, thus, constrained by a limited databasedue to a time lag in the availability of datain the public domain. For instance, the percapita domestic product for districts of Biharis available only up to 2011-12. Similarly,literacy and life expectancy data are availablefor 2011. However, National Family HealthSurvey (NFHS)-4 provides sampled healthindicators and literacy rates up till 2015-16.Therefore, inadequacy of updated data hashad its bearing on this analysis. Despitethese limitations, this study attempts toprovide insights into the state of Bihar. Abrief account of the findings is mentionedhere for readers.India has been experiencing a . The Gross National Income(GNI) of the country rose by 30.75 timesbetween the years 1951 and 2020. However,the rate of rise in per capita net nationalincome (PcNNI) doesn’t correspond withthe growth in GNI and Net National Income(NNI). Moreover, the outcome of growthhas been disproportionate across thestates leading to horizontal and verticalinequality. Vertical inequality is indicated by33.9Rural poverty in Odisha is thehighest, followed by Jharkhand,Bihar, Chhattisgarh, MadhyaPradesh and Uttar Pradesh.OdishaJharkhandBiharChhattisgarhMPUP15

16Mapping Inequality in BiharMapping Inequality in Biharinequality among individuals or households,whereas horizontal inequality is indicatedby disparities between groups based ongender, religion, race, geography, age, etc.The second chapter on inter-state analysisof growth, disparity and inequality in Indiafocuses on Bihar vis-a-vis other statesin terms of (i) growth in the economy,(ii) livelihood, (iii) consumption, (iv) health,(v) education and (vi) gender.Although poverty has declined significantlyover the years, the pace has been slow.India experienced a sharp rise in urbanpoverty in 2004-05 as a result of distressmigration of the rural poor to urban slumsin search of better livelihood options.Inequality in income distribution has alsoincreased over the years. This inequality hasrisen in tandem with a slow rate of povertyreduction. This double whammy has led tothe widening of rural-urban and inter-stateinequality. Inter-state variations in povertyand inequality suggest that rural povertyin Odisha is the highest (46.9 percent)followed by Jharkhand (42.9), Bihar (42.2),Chhattisgarh (42), Madhya Pradesh (35.8)and Uttar Pradesh (33.9).Bihar is at the bottom of inter-statedistribution of PCI in India. This indicates askewed distribution of income and inequalityacross the states affecting the growth of thestate concerned as well as the growth of thecountry. Despite being an agrarian economy,the annual growth rate of crops in Bihar hasbeen fluctuating around zero and has eventouched the negative figures. Overall growthrate of agriculture has been merely 0.6 percent.As a result, a large chunk of the populationsuffers from low productivity and income.1Livelihood encompasses the methodsand means of making a living in a society.Employment and access to assets includingland are the major indicators that showavailability of livelihood options. A joblessgrowth process1 has worsened employmentopportunities. Data for Bihar indicates thatgrowth in tertiary sectors has not been ableto provide livelihood opportunities to itsworkforce. Crises of employment can alsobe understood by analysing the trends inmigration. As per Census 2011, Uttar Pradeshand Bihar experienced out-migration of20.9 million people. Work and business arethe two major reasons for such trends inmigration. This trend indicates the limitedlivelihood options available in Bihar and thestate government’s failure in generatingemployment despite experiencing a highergrowth rate between 2005 and 2015.Although the percentage distribution ofland ownership holdings and area undertheir possession witnessed a marginaldecline in inequality between 2002-03 and2013, land concentration in Bihar, Odishaand Uttar Pradesh has increased. This hasled to landlessness, and inequality in thedistribution of ownership holdings in thesestates. Access to assets has increased inIndia, but inequality in household economicwellbeing and ownership of assets hasincreased across states. Bihar has remainedat the top in terms of level of inequality inasset score since 2005-06 in India.The rising income inequality has hadserious implications on consumption.There has been a marginal decline in ruraland urban inequality of monthly per capitaconsumption expenditure (MPCE) at all Indialevel. Despite this decline, states like Bihar,Jharkhand and Karnataka have experiencedwidening inequality in rural MPCE after 2005.Jobless growth refers to growth of the economy without an increase in employment.Despite being an agrarian economy,the overall growth rate of agriculturein Bihar has been merely 0.6 percent.Access to quality healthcare is an importantindicator of equality. Data shows thatmore than 40 percent of children belowfive years are stunted in states like Bihar,Uttar Pradesh, and Jharkhand. Bihar hasthe highest percentage (48.5) of stunted2children in India. However, average lifeexpectancy at birth has increased as aresult of improving healthcare. Kerala hasthe highest life expectancy at birth (75.2years), whereas Uttar Pradesh has thelowest (65 years); Bihar has the fifth lowest(68.9 years) life expectancy at birth. In termsof per capita health expenditure and healthexpenditure as a percentage of total stateexpenditure across the states, Bihar is theworst and the second worst respectively.Inter-state variations of these healthindicators underline prevailing regionalimbalances in quality healthcare.Inter-state variations in literacy are alsosignificant. Kerala has the highest literacyrate at 94 percent and Bihar has the lowestat 61.8 percent. Parameters of malnutritionand education show that developmentoutcome of children in Bihar, Jharkhand andRajasthan is lower than other states of India.Low development outcome of children alongwith lower PCI in these states will furtherincrease the gap between the rich and poorstates. Thus, inter-state analysis showsthat despite a steady growth of the Indianeconomy, regional disparities in growth,livelihood, health and education remainto be bridged. Economic growth has beenunable to reduce inequality across statesand a state like Bihar continues to grapplewith unemployment, poverty and inequality.The third chapter maps inter-districtinequalities within Bihar across thedimensions of (i) growth, (ii) demographicdevelopment, (iii) work participation,(iv) land-ownership, (v) consumption,nutrition, health and (vi) education. Thisexercise underlines that Bihar is the thirdmost populous state in the country, andis predominantly an agrarian economy.Intermittent droughts and floods haveposed a challenge to the infrastructuraldevelopment and growth of its economy.Despite experiencing a high growth rate, thestate has remained home to people with lowPCI, low levels of literacy and high levels ofmalnutrition with intraregional disparitiesacross its districts. Growth in secondaryand tertiary sectors has been better thanthe primary sector but the base is verylow. Growth rate of the primary sector, onwhich a majority of the population of the2The percentage of children under five years whose height for age ratio is below two standard deviations from the WHO ChildGrowth Standards.17

18Mapping Inequality in BiharMapping Inequality in Biharstate depends, witnessed a decline (mainlyagriculture and animal husbandry).The low growth rate of this sector providesan explanation for the low per capitanational state domestic product (NSDP) ofthe state and rising inequality in incomedistribution. Sheohar district has the lowestaverage NSDP (INR 4,748) and Patna has thehighest NSDP (INR 38,415). Improvementscan be seen in the growth rate of NSDPin 16 districts between 2000 and 2012.However, 14 districts witnessed a declinein their growth rate indicating inter-districtdisparity in growth.Disparity in demographic development canbe understood through population, literacy,health and consumption. This study hasseen an inverse relationship between interdistrict total fertility rate (TFR) and increasinglevels of development, urbanization, literacyand employment.Opportunities of decent work for a growinglabour force are one of the necessities forinclusive development. However, a glimpseat the district-wise work participation rate(WPR) reveals that most districts in Biharhave a WPR only slightly above 20 percent.Male WPR in a majority of the districts is30 percent or less whereas female WPR isminimal. These numbers indicate a lack ofemployment opportunities, lower earningand a higher dependency ratio.Significant inter-district disparities can beseen in Bihar in terms of literacy. More than30 districts of Bihar are below the nationalaverage, about 12 districts have a literacyrate below 60 percent and only e

poorest rural state in India. The Bihar Inequality Report is conceptualized at this juncture when, on the one hand, there is a rising growth in Bihar at an average rate of 4.4 percent per annum and on the other hand, Bihar is at the bottom of inter-state per capita income (PCI). This indicates a skewed distribution of income and rise in inequality.