Sugar tax may be the bitter pill to cut obesity:-
After years of waiting, the World Health Organisation (WHO) finally took a stand on January 25 and urged governments to levy taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages to end childhood obesity. The recommendation was based on a new report commissioned by it. “The Commission believes that there is sufficient rationale to warrant the introduction of an effective tax on sugar-sweetened beverages,” the report notes.
Besides levying taxes, the WHO also recommends a host of other interventions such as increasing the amount of physical activity and improving access to health food.
The impact of taxation measures on purchasing behaviours has been well documented in the case of tobacco. However, in the case of sugar-rich drinks, the WHO acknowledged that strong evidence on the benefits is lacking but underlined that evidence will become available once countries that have been levying such taxes on unhealthy foods and sugar-laden drinks “monitor their progress”.
Hungary, France, Finland and Mexico are among the many countries that have taken to such measures.
While the risks of childhood obesity are greatest in lower socio-economic groups in the high-income countries, data from Brazil and Mexico, which are largely middle-income countries, confirm that levying taxes on sugar-rich drinks achieves the desired results in the target population.
The case of India:-
In the case of India, at the current rate of sales of sugar-sweetened drinks, a 20 per cent increase in taxes will reduce overweight/obesity by 3 per cent (11.2 million cases) and diabetes by 1.6 per cent (4,00,000 cases) between 2014 and 2023, a January 2014 modelling study published in the journal PLOS ONE said.
One of the reasons for the WHO recommending taxation measures to rein in consumption of unhealthy food is the burgeoning number of overweight and obese children younger than five years. In 2014, 41 million children in this age group were either overweight or obese across the world.
India may be one of the biggest contributors to the global pool as obesity in people in the age group of 15-49 has increased steeply during the last few years, as the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) 2014-2015 reveals.
India faces a double whammy of obesity and underweight children. Though with respect to the last NHFS survey the percentage of underweight children has reduced this time, it is still very high — from nearly 14 per cent in Sikkim to nearly 44 per cent in Bihar. This is a big concern as children who were born with low birth weight are at a greater risk of becoming overweight and obese when they consume energy-rich diets and have a sedentary lifestyle.
This singularly must be the reason why India should seriously consider introducing additional taxes on sugar-laden drinks, besides encouraging more physical activity in schools and other interventions.
Urban and Urbanism and the Imagination there in :-
Urbanisation, driven by the motto that ‘cities are the engines of growth’, has been a key tenet of India’s structural reforms. Since 1993, policymakers have pushed an aggressive urban upgradation and expansion programme through schemes such as the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission and the recently launched Smart Cities Mission and Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation; by 2030, if not earlier, over 40 per cent of India will be urban.
The City in transition :-
Global cities today find that they are no longer the cities of the organised working class or of that older notion of a bourgeoisie that finds in the city the place for its self-representation and projection of its power (including its civilising power).
In a world transformed by information technology and capital mobility, attracting global fixed capital investment in the form of corporate headquarters, production facilities and downtown skyscrapers, and circulating capital (as transportation, tourism and cultural events) through an international identity has become, as political scientist Darel E. Paul observes, ‘a nearly universal economic development strategy’. Earlier, the competition would have between nations but with privatisation, deregulation and growing decentralisation, cities have acquired greater significance.
The evidence is all around us in India. We see the galvanising force of the pursuit of a global identity in new towering office blocks, flyovers and public transportation systems, in the proliferation of cafes, nightclubs, boutiques, malls, convention centres and hotels, in the drive against slums and ageing buildings, in urban beautification projects and cultural festivals. The trend is pervasive, percolating from the metro to Tier II cities, small towns and even rural districts where one can see apartment blocks often built with the Non-Resident Indian in mind, sprouting next to paddy fields.
The phenomenon of urban gated communities, exclusive enclaves for the rich with their own security and essential supply systems, are now an integral part of cities everywhere.Punta del Este, a beachside city in Uruguay that has become a gated city for the uber-rich, described how the creation of menial jobs for the poor of the city had been accompanied by a steep hike in costs for basic food, clothing and transport.
The new urban landscape is particularly hard on the poor, as displacement, a familiar theme in India’s developmental trajectory since the dislodging of tribals from their habitats for the erection of dams, is now played out for the building of glossy towers and beautification projects. But the aesthetic demands of a global makeover throws up new, more minute, forms of displacement. The disappearance of lakes and the replacement of trees — that might have provided sustenance to the poor — with decorative plants are growing trends in Indian cities.
Internationally, there is the spread of ‘hostile architecture’ which includes “anti-homeless” spikes and the Camden bench — a sculpted grey concrete seat designed by a London borough in 2012 to discourage sleeping or skateboarding.
While citification has stirred much public anticipation, the privileging of the global in the new urban imagination needs to be reflected on in urbanising India. At a time when the issue of social justice has been thrown to the forefront, its potential for expanding inequality is of particular concern.
And this indeed throws up the question – Urbanisation – is it worth chasing and Sustainable city – a myth or reality ?
The Gandhian Way – Industrialization , Urbanization and the Machine :-
According to Gandhiji the industrialisation and urbanisation have created multiple problems and miseries for the modern man. In the process, we have tried to explain in detail as to how industrialisation, modern civilisation and rapid urbanisation have created chaos, lop-sided development, rapid depletion of natural resources and danger for natural environment.
Gandhi was critical of modern civilisation, rapid industrialisation and galloping urbanisation. In this context, we find the pertinence of Gandhian ideas.
Long before the modern environmentalists, Gandhi correctly realised that rapid industrialisation can not be the panacea to all ills. Increasing industrialisation in today’s world has not reduced social inequalities, but has rather resulted in further differentiations.
Increasing use of technology has led to greater heterogeneity, greater inequalities and greater un-altruistically oriented behaviour.
Gandhi regarded industrialisation detrimental to growth of a non-violent and eco-friendly society. In his ideal society, as in the classical anarchist model, there would be complete decentralisation of political and economic system and self-sufficient, barter type of village economy would be the desired model.
Machinery has, in his judgement; three-essential attributes. First, it can be duplicated or copied. Secondly, there is no limit to its growth or evolution. Thirdly, it appears to possess a will or genius of its own that operates as the inevitable law of displacement of the labour. Once the machine is created and allowed to operate, it goes more and more out of human control.
Ideally, Gandhi regards all machinery as thoroughly undesirable. Once he commented: “Today machinery merely helps a few to ride on the backs of millions. The impetus behind it all is not philanthropy to save labour but greed. It is against this constitution of things that I am fighting with all my might”.
His arguments against machinery can broadly be divided into two categories: ethical and economic. The arguments of the first category run as follows:-
(i) Labour is a value relative to non-violence and machinery tends to undermine it.
(ii) Machines are repugnant in his thinking to the good life.
(iii) The invention of machinery has led to the growth of the factory system which has reduced the masses of men to the condition of slaves.
(iv) The technological advancement has led to the growth of the monetary exchange system which is characterised by inequality and exploitation.
(v) Machinery has led to the growth of economic competition which undermines the process of cooperation.
The arguments falling in the second category are:
The displacement of human labour is an essential characteristic of a machine and a great argument against it, introductions of machines results in employment of a few and unemployment of many, it saves labour and provides leisure, leisure results in wastage of time, and potential cause of demoralisation.
Machines lead to the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few.
Machinery inevitably leads to mass production and mass production necessarily leads to over production, storage, transportation. Hence Gandhiji used to say that instead of mass production there should be production by masses.
The application of machinery in agriculture may destroy the fertility of the soil and lead to loss of production.
Machines lead to growth of congested, unhygienic cities, speed of travel, etc. which results in the loss of health.
Gandhi felt that the present industrialisation and use of large scale machinery was not very healthy and resulted in serious economic dislocation. Dead machinery must not be pitted against millions of living machines.
As Gandhi once commented:-
“Mechanisation is good when the hands are too few for the work intended to be accomplished. It is an evil when there are more hands than required for the work, as in India.“
Large scale industrialisation perpetuates war and many other evils and all the naturalness come to an end.
In conclusion, Gandhi rejected the modern industrial-urban concept of development for its anti-democratic, anti-humanitarian, and exploitative features. In its place Gandhi offers the ideal of the economically self-sufficient, politically self-governing and culturally non-violent village republic as the guarantee of genuine democracy, true humanism, civilising non-violence and lasting peace. Thus Gandhiji was in favour of technology and development of cottage and small scale industries at village level because these industries are localised, energy saver, job intensive and less polluting. According to him cities should as store and forwarding houses and no production in cities to prevent congestion and pollution.
Conclusion:-
Gandhi was beyond his times and a true visionary. In this context , it is indeed a dilemma who is right – the policy makers and thinkers of our times or Gandhi ? Is it worth chasing urbanisation ? And above all – can we try the Gandhian model and succeed in ensuring a better living condition and better life for the denizens ?
The questions are indeed mind-boggling and there can not be a compartmentalization of ideas and hence can the mix of two ideas in certain degree help us realize our goal as a society , and above all – What is the middle path in this regard ?
The question demands an immediate answer , yet it is far too difficult to provide one, and this will remain the dilemma of our times.
Indian Village and E-Commerce:-
One of the primary agendas of the liberalization which began in 1991 was to improve competitiveness and reduce the transaction costs which largely restricted India’s trade with the rest of the world. But a quarter century after economic reforms were initiated, this Coasean problem of transaction costs remains more relevant than ever. The World Bank’s latest World Development Report, or WDR, points to the potential of Internet and communication technology (ICT) in pruning these.
The Coase theorem (named after British economist Ronald Coase) states that if trade in an externality is possible and there are sufficiently low transaction costs, bargaining will lead to an efficient outcome regardless of the initial allocation of property. Since the digital revolution, the virtual world has increased the possibilities of trade in the real world, minimizing these transaction costs. Transaction costs include search and information costs, bargaining and decision costs, and policing and enforcement costs.
The WDR cites the example of the Taobao villages in China to show the extent to which the Internet can induce development. Taobao, a consumer-to-consumer portal established by Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba, allows entrepreneurs to open online stores and sell their products to interested consumers. A Taobao village is a cluster of rural e-tailers where at least 10% of village households engage in e-commerce.
It’s worth looking at the potential benefits of such a model in India. Over half of India’s population depends for its livelihood on an agricultural sector that cannot support it adequately. Structural reforms may improve the sector’s viability, but the only long-term solution is enabling the rural population’s access to other forms of economic activity. An e-retail model that aims at incorporating rural households could offer some utility here.
As matters stand, e-commerce in India is almost entirely an urban phenomenon. Clustering rural retailers as the Taobao model does creates the volume necessary for incentivizing at least some portion of the logistical and financial support urban retailers enjoy. And it could have the secondary benefit of providing a boost to artisans who lack access to a wider market, making traditional crafts unsustainable.
E-commerce ventures structured along similar lines such as ITC e-choupal, Craftsvilla and Kerala’s Kudumbashree have had moderate success in the past.
The major obstacle, of course, is the lack of rural Internet access. India has the ironic reputation of having the second largest number of Internet users and the largest offline population in the world. Internet usage is highly skewed in favour of men and urban households compared to women and rural households.
Digital India initiative aims at resolving this bottleneck. Its goal of connecting rural areas with high-speed Internet networks is laudable, as is its focus on digital literacy. How such a mammoth undertaking will play out remains to be seen. And to be successful—particularly in the context of the Taobao model—it must form robust linkages with other government initiatives that range from providing a cradle-to-grave digital identity to universal access to banking services.
Other hurdles wait further down the road. Judging by the government’s Start-up India push, the infant industry syndrome is an occupational hazard in the Indian policy environment. Rural e-commerce should not fall into the same trap. If the Internet has to become an effective catalyst for efficiency and innovation, competition is essential. Alibaba’s Taobao advanced so much on the efficiency frontier due to intense competition from eBay.
The last thing the rural economy needs to add to the protectionism the agricultural sector enjoys is a subsidized, protected retail segment.
ICT alone accounted for one-fifth of global growth from 1995 to 2014. In 1990, American economist Paul Michael Romer said, “Economic growth occurs whenever people take resources and rearrange them in ways that are more valuable… History teaches us that economic growth springs from better recipes, not just from more cooking.” Technological change is an endogenous factor in growth and Internet is technology at its best.
Recent Posts
- In the Large States category (overall), Chhattisgarh ranks 1st, followed by Odisha and Telangana, whereas, towards the bottom are Maharashtra at 16th, Assam at 17th and Gujarat at 18th. Gujarat is one State that has seen startling performance ranking 5th in the PAI 2021 Index outperforming traditionally good performing States like Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, but ranks last in terms of Delta
- In the Small States category (overall), Nagaland tops, followed by Mizoram and Tripura. Towards the tail end of the overall Delta ranking is Uttarakhand (9th), Arunachal Pradesh (10th) and Meghalaya (11th). Nagaland despite being a poor performer in the PAI 2021 Index has come out to be the top performer in Delta, similarly, Mizoram’s performance in Delta is also reflected in it’s ranking in the PAI 2021 Index
- In terms of Equity, in the Large States category, Chhattisgarh has the best Delta rate on Equity indicators, this is also reflected in the performance of Chhattisgarh in the Equity Pillar where it ranks 4th. Following Chhattisgarh is Odisha ranking 2nd in Delta-Equity ranking, but ranks 17th in the Equity Pillar of PAI 2021. Telangana ranks 3rd in Delta-Equity ranking even though it is not a top performer in this Pillar in the overall PAI 2021 Index. Jharkhand (16th), Uttar Pradesh (17th) and Assam (18th) rank at the bottom with Uttar Pradesh’s performance in line with the PAI 2021 Index
- Odisha and Nagaland have shown the best year-on-year improvement under 12 Key Development indicators.
- In the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Goa and Tamil Nadu and, the bottom three performers are Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand and Bihar.
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers were Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Mizoram; and, the bottom three performers are Manipur, Assam and Meghalaya.
- Among the 60:40 division States, Orissa, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh are the top three performers and Tamil Nadu, Telangana and Delhi appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland; and, the bottom three performers are Jammu and Kashmir, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh
- Among the 60:40 division States, Goa, West Bengal and Delhi appear as the top three performers and Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Bihar appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Himachal Pradesh and Tripura were the top three performers and Jammu & Kashmir, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh were the bottom three performers
- West Bengal, Bihar and Tamil Nadu were the top three States amongst the 60:40 division States; while Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan appeared as the bottom three performers
- In the case of 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Assam and Tripura were the top three performers and Nagaland, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand featured as the bottom three
- Among the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa and the bottom three performers are Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand and Goa
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Mizoram, Sikkim and Nagaland and the bottom three performers are Manipur and Assam
In a diverse country like India, where each State is socially, culturally, economically, and politically distinct, measuring Governance becomes increasingly tricky. The Public Affairs Index (PAI 2021) is a scientifically rigorous, data-based framework that measures the quality of governance at the Sub-national level and ranks the States and Union Territories (UTs) of India on a Composite Index (CI).
States are classified into two categories – Large and Small – using population as the criteria.
In PAI 2021, PAC defined three significant pillars that embody Governance – Growth, Equity, and Sustainability. Each of the three Pillars is circumscribed by five governance praxis Themes.
The themes include – Voice and Accountability, Government Effectiveness, Rule of Law, Regulatory Quality and Control of Corruption.
At the bottom of the pyramid, 43 component indicators are mapped to 14 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that are relevant to the States and UTs.
This forms the foundation of the conceptual framework of PAI 2021. The choice of the 43 indicators that go into the calculation of the CI were dictated by the objective of uncovering the complexity and multidimensional character of development governance
The Equity Principle
The Equity Pillar of the PAI 2021 Index analyses the inclusiveness impact at the Sub-national level in the country; inclusiveness in terms of the welfare of a society that depends primarily on establishing that all people feel that they have a say in the governance and are not excluded from the mainstream policy framework.
This requires all individuals and communities, but particularly the most vulnerable, to have an opportunity to improve or maintain their wellbeing. This chapter of PAI 2021 reflects the performance of States and UTs during the pandemic and questions the governance infrastructure in the country, analysing the effectiveness of schemes and the general livelihood of the people in terms of Equity.
Growth and its Discontents
Growth in its multidimensional form encompasses the essence of access to and the availability and optimal utilisation of resources. By resources, PAI 2021 refer to human resources, infrastructure and the budgetary allocations. Capacity building of an economy cannot take place if all the key players of growth do not drive development. The multiplier effects of better health care, improved educational outcomes, increased capital accumulation and lower unemployment levels contribute magnificently in the growth and development of the States.
The Pursuit Of Sustainability
The Sustainability Pillar analyses the access to and usage of resources that has an impact on environment, economy and humankind. The Pillar subsumes two themes and uses seven indicators to measure the effectiveness of government efforts with regards to Sustainability.
The Curious Case Of The Delta
The Delta Analysis presents the results on the State performance on year-on-year improvement. The rankings are measured as the Delta value over the last five to 10 years of data available for 12 Key Development Indicators (KDI). In PAI 2021, 12 indicators across the three Pillars of Equity (five indicators), Growth (five indicators) and Sustainability (two indicators). These KDIs are the outcome indicators crucial to assess Human Development. The Performance in the Delta Analysis is then compared to the Overall PAI 2021 Index.
Key Findings:-
In the Scheme of Things
The Scheme Analysis adds an additional dimension to ranking of the States on their governance. It attempts to complement the Governance Model by trying to understand the developmental activities undertaken by State Governments in the form of schemes. It also tries to understand whether better performance of States in schemes reflect in better governance.
The Centrally Sponsored schemes that were analysed are National Health Mission (NHM), Umbrella Integrated Child Development Services scheme (ICDS), Mahatma Gandh National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SmSA) and MidDay Meal Scheme (MDMS).
National Health Mission (NHM)
INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (ICDS)
MID- DAY MEAL SCHEME (MDMS)
SAMAGRA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN (SMSA)
MAHATMA GANDHI NATIONAL RURAL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE SCHEME (MGNREGS)