01/03/10

how telangana grew more

some doubts were raised here on whether the rest of telangana grew as much as hyderabad in the post-reforms period. dr.jayaprakash narayan of loksatta seems to have looked at that question too. in a television chat show he has tried to answer a similar question:
mahesh:I need some clarification on what factor telangana districts are growing much faster than andhra region districts. Can u please ans me?
Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan: I have presented many parameters and the growth in Telangana & rest of AP over 50 years. The facts speak for themselves. If you see the annual growth rates of gross district domestic product of various districts from 1994-95 to 2006-07, the facts are revealing. 1994-95 to 2006-07 - Annual average growth rate. AP: 6.68%.
Nalgonda: 7.38%
Khammam: 6.99% Warangal: 7.57% Karimnagar: 7.53% Adilabad: 6.46% Nizamabad: 6.30% Medak: 7.34% Hyderabad: 10.41% Rangareddy: 9.32% Mahabubnagar:8.34%
Rayalaseema:
Kurnool: 5.33% Ananthapur: 5.82% Cuddapah: 4.90% Chittoor: 4.73%
coastal AP
Nellore: 5.09% Prakasam: 6.80% Guntur: 4.81% Krishna: 7.01% West Godavari: 5.79% East Godavari: 6.46% Visakhapatnam: 9.65% Vizianagaram: 5.81% Srikakulam: 6.58% you can see these trends - these are long term trends aggregate economic growth over 13 years for each district. The facts speak for themselves. [emphasis mine]
as you can see, in gdp terms, eight (of ten) districts of telangana of grew more than the whole of andhra pradesh in the period 1994-95 to 2006-07, while three (of nine) districts in coastal andhra, and no district (of four) in rayalaseema grew more than the whole of andhra pradesh and these figures match, to a great degree, the results of the study mentioned in my previous post. as i said in my previous post, for unbiased observers, it isn't hard to understand why a large number of districts in telangana grew more. most of them were growing from a lower base, and some like nizamabad had gone through this process much earlier and were now slackening, like many districts in coastal andhra. (also, you'd also find a great deal of other information on development in telangana in other fields too in that lok satta page which strengthen the view that telangana is growing more).

the study i had discussed in my previous post didn't look at gdp figures, but on page 8 of the report you'll find an explanation of why the results of their efforts to measure the 'level of economic activity' across regions differ slightly from gdp figures.

that telangana grew more than coastal andhra in the post-reforms period isn't inconsistent, in my view, with the fact that there are pockets of great distress in the region. it is true that cotton farmers have committed suicide in telangana through the nineties, and it is also true that the area under cotton cultivation has also expanded significantly. the number of farmers' suicides in telangana matches similar figures in vidarbha, punjab and other regions. but it is also true that yields per acre of paddy grown in karimnagar and other parts of telangana now equal or exceed yields in west godavari or guntur districts. mass migrations from mahbubnagar are also true, but so is the increasing number of students from telangana scoring well in board exams and highly competitive entrance tests. parts of nalgonda reel from the effects of high levels of fluoride contamination in the water they drink, but it is also true that other parts of nalgonda present a picture of economic vibrancy and prosperity. it is true that more young rural youngsters were killed in fake encounters than in many other 'naxal-affected' regions in the country, but it is also true that a large number of educated youth have also entered such modern professions as the the academia, law, media on the one hand and government, organized public and private sector industry and new age businesses like software on the other, over the last 2-3 decades.

across india, there are large pockets of distress in every village. rural india as a whole, 70% of the population, gets only 30% of the gdp. and even that small share of the pie gets divided very unevenly: probably 60-80% of it goes to 20% of the rural population. usually those with better and bigger landholdings, and of purer castes. so, there are always enough grounds for distress and anger and agitation. everywhere. i consider it a sign of the strength of the creative capacities of the growing middle class of fairly prosperous telanganis that they've managed to convert so successfully the deprivation and pain of the less fortunate majority into a movement designed to serve, solely, their own growing ambitions.

[ there is a large loony fringe among the separatists who dispute these kind of figures. many times even without looking at them. and dr.jayaprakash narayan's source of the data is probably the government of andhra pradesh, so more suspect in the eyes of the separatists'. but as these issues are discussed more, and at less acrimonious fora, i hope for their own sake that they would find other arguments to make their points in the future].

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

hello author

please go through this article

Anonymous said...

oops forgot to mention the url,here it is

http://sujaiblog.blogspot.com/2010/02/telangana-50-lies-damned-lies-and.html

Sridhar said...

Anon: The growth rate comparisons as quoted by JP were meant to drive home the point that Telangana did fare well in terms of rate of development compared to other regions in the state. Comparison between a Karimnagar and Kurnool is not so incongruent as comparing a Ethiopia and US. Hope Sujai and his sycophants understand this simple fact.

Kufr: Though the Telangana districts seem to show signs of growth in terms of GDP and also in some human devlp indicators it appears the GDP growth actually seem to be consumption driven with increased income and cash flows from sources in Hyderabad and to some extent due to massive government spending on roads and irrigation projects. Hard to conceive of significant spurt in domestic production activity in the Telangana districts that the govts can actually take credit of.

ved said...

Sridhar,

With capital centric development, isn't this true for entire AP?. Out of the top five districts with highest GDP, coastal andhra has only one and Telangana has three. As you eluded, the other two districts of T are getting benefited by Hyderabad. This is pretty much the story of entire India. Capital and its vicinities suck all the investment and growth from rest of the state.

kuffir said...

anon,

have you forgotten to use your own voice and mind? ethiopia if it grows at a higher rate, consistently, for fifteen years, it no longer remains ethiopia. that's what happened with china after 1970. that's what happened with s.korea after 1960s. i could go on..and you can't complain about 'discrimination'against telangana, your original argument, if it keeps growing consistently over 15 years.

sridhar,

'it appears the GDP growth actually seem to be consumption driven with increased income and cash flows from sources in Hyderabad and to some extent due to massive government spending on roads and irrigation projects.'

and coastal andhra doesn't get its own share of remittances?

jalayagnam started in 2004-05, not in 1884-95. please look at the study i linked to and these figures. consistent performance over 15 years makes it very hard for anyone to prove discrimination. and infrastructure is supposed to drive economic growth--what is the inconsistency that you see there?

i've also pointed out in this post and countless other posts over the last few years that distribution of wealth in india is very uneven.

lastly, there seem to be many people on either side, who look at telangana from a 1970s outlook.. that needs to change.

Sridhar said...

Kufr, Ved: I doubly agree that there is clear evidence of growth in T districts. But I am tempted to believe that the growth is so much tied to the economy of Hyd and massive govt spending on infrastructure projects. Income by means of remittances and revenues based in Hyd appears to be the major driver of elevated consumption levels. Govt spending on infrastructure is another thing.

In order for GDP stats to be meanigful, the domestic production and consumption should be within the geographic boundaries, roughly speaking. The amount of value-added by means of domestic production and services is the real indicator of GDP. In the T districts the consumption based GDP stats seem to overestimate the actual productive capacities. I may be wrong but is what appears to me!

The spillover effects of Hyd on the T region appears more prominent that its effects on other regions of the state. One reason why other regions appear to be stagnated is that they probably did not make significant additions to their production facilities to keep pace with the state average. Clearly the focus has shifted to Hyd and all the skilled labor seem to have fled to the IT hubs.

Even after taking into account the Hyd-centric development and its influence on other districts of the state, which districts would be most deprived if one were to unplug Hyd?

Post-reforms the human resource capabilities, infrastructure, and income levels in T districts have significantly improved compared to other regions. And I think the indicators have to confine to these few than extrapolating to others that may not hold true at least for the moment. But in no way I attempt to project the gains by T districts as false or inferior.

gaddeswarup said...

Sudhir and others,
Here is a document explaining how State Domestic Product SDP (District Domestic Product DDP) etc are calculated:
http://www.and.nic.in/Know%20Andaman/Economic%20survey%20ANI/CHAPTER%20-%203.pdf

Krishna Chaitanya said...

Personally, I believe that development through separation is a misnomer. Separation only leads to de-centralization of power and better administration. History has thought us to be together. Great dynasties like Kakatiya and Vijayanagara have always tried to unite the Telugus. They believed in "Unity is strength". It is the British who tried to divide and rule us. Ironically, history seems to be repeating itself. Except that this time, it is our politicians trying to divide and rule us.

gaddeswarup said...

K.C.
Still there is no harm discussing various aspects of living together. There is a perception, which I think is true, of uneven development in which is resources are not shared equitably by all regions and communities. In complex issues like this, there are mant aspects whih I am ignorant; even about how SDPs are calculated. Perhaps, these discussions may indicate how to correct mistakes, intentional or unintentional, of the past. I feel that I am learning from the discussions ( I avoid some blogs which are polemical) in blogs like this.

Bhanu Prasad said...

--Except that this time, it is our politicians trying to divide and rule us.--

Chaitanya gaaru,

I cannot agree with this statement. As i see, success of andhrites, be it in education or busness, has caused envy among telangana people. They also hold us responsible for "colonizing" them i.e., settling in their lands in large numbers.

In this situation, I feel, we have gone beyond the level of being together in one state.

kuffir said...

sridhar,

i guess i'll have to repeat myself: the so-called 'massive govt' spending in infrastructure started in 2006-07.

please read the post before you jump to conclusions.

second: as for the quality of growth in telangana, please also read the bhandare/khare study i'd linked to earlier. metro regions are large drivers of growth.

third, i'd said this earlier, but i guess i've to repeat it again. remittances and consumption expenditure form a large part of gdp in such high per capita gdp areas as coastal andhra and kerala. that's known wisdom. please come up with any specific evidence on why you feel telangana districts are relying to a large extent on remittances and consumption to thrive.

four, remittances that fuel consumption means large numbers of telanganis fron villages have secured great jobs in hyderabad and have large sums of money to send back home and fuel the whole economy of rural telangana..do you have any evidence that only telanganis hold the best jobs in hyderabad?

five, i notice in all this concern about quality of growth in telangana an underlying disbelief that telanganis could actually work or do anything meaningful. if you've any relatives who know a little about farming in arid regions of india, please talk with them. farming in arid regions of india is one of toughest jobs in the world. i don't wish to say more on this.

five, i've said in my previous reply and i'm repeating the same point here: i've written countless posts about the uneven distribution of resources and growth in india. i was not talking about the *quality* of growth in telangana in this post. i was talking about relative growth across regions. in this post itself, i've said:

'across india, there are large pockets of distress in every village. rural india as a whole, 70% of the population, gets only 30% of the gdp. and even that small share of the pie gets divided very unevenly: probably 60-80% of it goes to 20% of the rural population. usually those with better and bigger landholdings, and of purer castes.'

not just telangana, i feel the quality of growth in coastal andhra and rayalaseema too is as poor. but let me again repeat, my focus in this post was to discuss 'relative' growth, not quality of growth. and we've all been moved from discussing quality of growth to mere relative growth in all regions because we had not discussed neither, over the decades.

kuffir said...

correction:

'i guess i'll have to repeat myself: the so-called 'massive govt' spending in infrastructure started in 2006-07..'

pl read 2006-07 as 2004-05.

kuffir said...

sridhar,

the last few years have made endless speculation without any evidence an acceptable currency in public discourse in andhra pradesh. i've talked about the dangers of this tendency in earlier posts too.. let's not go on that road. it steadily becomes more narrower as we follow it.

Sridhar said...

Kufr,

I come from a backward Telangana district and my grand parents are all farmers. What made you think that I would say that Telanganis can not work or do any thing! I was only commenting about technical aspects of GDP estimations and the possibility that the gauge of consumption alone could be overestimating the GDP (for e.g., the expenditure method sums up all the sales to consumers, businesses, government and exports less the imports. While it might be easy in case of a nation or state to accurately measure the imports and exports, not sure if that is possible in a district). It is my thinking that apart from increases in agricultural production over the years, the govt or private investments did not expand the production capacity (manufacturing or services base) further in these districts to significantly increase the gross domestic product. May be true for most of the districts in the state. And I do not have any empirical evidence to this hypothesis. I am only trying to give a different perspective and not contradict any of the observations you have made. Some of other useful things relevant are: The proximity of a big metro like Hyd can be a boon to the neighboring districts by being a supplier of various goods and services consumed in the city. How much of this demand is being met by the surrounding districts? May be a lot of agric. produce, electricity and few others. But I really do not how much. Is it trending upward, downward or flat – I do not know.

I am a Telangani but believe that there are greater opportunities to everybody in a united state. Nor do I believe that a separate state will be an answer to the lack of a scientific and practical approach to development and elimination of poverty. If there is anything that I detest about my Telangana friends it is their blind hatred to the people from other regions and that they feel it justified to claim Hyderabad and that it can be a panacea of all the perceived ills.

sravan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
gaddeswarup said...

There is a description of how GSP is calculated
here (after a quick google search; there will be many other expositions). It says that it is calculated using one or a combination of 3 approaches:
For the purpose of estimation of State Domestic Product, the state economy is broadly classified into Agriculture, Industries and Services sectors. Estimates of these sectors are prepared individually by adopting one or more of the following approaches.
(i)
Production.
(ii)
Income
Approach.
(iii)
Expenditure
Approach.
I think that remittances play a role in the third approach. I think that one has to enquire at the source what approach or a combination of approaches is used.
The chapter explains in more detail each approach.
I have no expertise on these matters, just trying to learn.

Sridhar said...

Thank you Swarup garu for the links. Remmitances will increase the amount of per capita income and stir up consumption. If the additional income is used to buy goods that are actually not manufactured within the state or district then GDP should remain unchanged. Expenditure on food is likely to come entirely from within. While those on automobiles, clothing, equipment etc., could depend on where they originate. Increased incomes could also be spent on various services likely to come entirely from local enterprises and thus contribute to GDP. Remmitances and savings could also be invested locally to build manufacturing, construction or services industries and which will also directly contribute to GDP based on value addition of the process. So how the money is put to use will have bearing on the magnitude of change in GDP. Increases in GDP will reflect in increases in local employment depending on how labor intensive the production process is.

Anonymous said...

Just see this, in rupees than percentages; Just providing for the highlighted districts only; AP 1300; Nalgonda 1028; Khammmam 1505; Warangal 1045; karimnagar 1248; Medak 1636; Hyderabad 1758; Ranga reddy 1667; Mahaboobnagar 976; Prakasam 1220; Krishna 1360; Vizag 2026 (from government of AP Website from its HDR)

Anonymous said...

Just see the following from HDR report of AP
Table : A3.1 Income Dimension of Human Development -
Per Capita District Domestic Product (DDP) in Constant (1993-94) Prices across
Districts of Andhra Pradesh

1993-94 2004-05
1 Srikakulam 4975 8845
2 Vizianagaram 5664 8316
3 Visakhapatnam 8265 17504
4 East Godavari 7840 12883
5 West Godavari 8161 12975
6 Krishna 8395 12249
7 Guntur 8501 12137
8 Prakasam 7554 11175
9 Nellore 8511 11588
10 Chittoor 7778 10774
11 Kadapa 7488 9642
12 Anantapur 7601 9578
13 Kurnool 7346 9877
14 Mahabubnagar 4766 8996
15 Rangareddy 9360 14948
16 Hyderabad 7686 15743
17 Medak 8838 14366
18 Nizamabad 6193 10082
19 Adilabad 7179 10067
20 Karimnagar 7126 11426
21 Warangal 5452 9598
22 Khammam 7766 13653
23 Nalgonda 6260 9301
Andhra Pradesh 7416 11756
i JUST provided you the details to let you know about the gimmicks of percentages;

kuffir said...

anon,

thanks for trying to educate me. now where do those figures say that telangana did not grow more?

 
Add to Technorati Favorites