Societies do not differ vastly in their ability to predict disasters, but their readiness to cope with them varies widely.
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]
New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, and the state of Kerala in India that stand out in their Covid-19 response are notable for their innovative actions and results on the ground. A common denominator in disaster readiness is the priority accorded to health and education investments, with which is also associated a good degree of people’s trust and citizen participation in institutions.
Over decades, Kerala has spotlighted basic education, public health, and social systems, involving the participation of local civic organizations—and these investments have been paying off as India struggles with a devastating second Covid-19 wave.
Despite high levels of recorded infection rates and spikes from periodic mismanagement, Kerala’s Covid-19 record remains a favourable outlier. The state showed strong resistance during 2019’s Nipah virus outbreak, and the massive floods of 2018 and 2019. The state has a country-wide low of 0.4% death rate from Covid-19 infections.
Singapore is ranked by Bloomberg as best among nations in building resilience against Covid-19, with a death rate from infections of 0.05%. Digital and technological applications responses have been high on the Republic’s agenda. Singapore’s new generation of apps and technologies like TraceTogether, a digital check-in system, SafeEntry, to trace and contain system for epidemics, ePlanner, to locate the vulnerable and their travel patterns. Digital technology is highly relevant for countries at all income levels. For example, Kerala’s responses have included the use of E-Sanjeevani, a telemedicine portal, offering psycho-social support for the sick.
New Zealand, ranked second by the Bloomberg index, makes intense use of scientific expertise, spanning public health, infectious diseases, genomics, modelling and immunology. Like Singapore, New Zealand has drawn on its lessons from SARS. Among its actions during the covid pandemic, a vaccine taskforce has been made responsible for ensuring access to safe and effective vaccines as a strategy for exiting the crisis. New Zealand cancelled all international flights, while rigorously adhering to public health guidance.
Facing a massive outbreak of the virus, South Korea installed drive-through tests, body sterilizers in public venues and thermal scanners. Health administration authorities developed mobile apps to track and monitor those under quarantines, overseas visitors and use drones to disinfect large public areas. South Korea’s high tele-density enabled dissemination of information to target population through information alerts sent to their mobile phones.
Noted for trust in institutions, South Korea has been able to gain from citizen participation as ICT’s reach was coupled with protection of people’s privacy.
Across the spectrum of calamities, investment in early warning and evacuation has proven to have among the highest benefits relative to costs. Note the dramatic fall in death rates related to these investments across South Asia.
Japan is showing how better warning can be strengthened with locating the vulnerable and enabling their escape to shelter. Following the bushfires of 2018 and 2019, the Australian Natural Disaster Resilience Index assesses risk profiles of communities faced with bushfires. Following the 2004 tsunami, Indonesia’s Aceh region built multipurpose evacuation centres.
As no country or state can have enough staff power and financial resources in exactly the places that are worst hit by a calamity, there needs to be better coordination to get resources to the right places at the right time. Following the Great East Japan Earthquake and the 2011 tsunami, Japan has been improving the relationship between the national government that oversees policy and local governments in charge of implementation. It pays the Indian states to establish inter-state pooling of technology, supplies and staff to manage deficits.
Underlying crisis preparedness are high investments in health and education, with which are also associated trust and community participation in policies. Singapore and South Korea have had striking economic growth rates in the past, but it is their high shares of health and education investments, including private sector, that seems to make a lasting contribution to building resilience.
Kerala has not enjoyed high economic growth as other states. Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh are ranked higher than Kerala on measures of doing business. But the Public Affairs Index 2020 ranked Kerala as the best-governed large state in 2019 on the basis of 50 indicators reflecting equity, growth, and sustainability. In health, Kerala’s infant mortality is one third of Gujarat’s, and life expectancy 10 years longer than Uttar Pradesh’s.
Per capita spending on health by state governments (which is the bigger component than the central government in India) varies widely. Kerala’s per capita outlay is more than twice that of Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, and Bihar.
Investments in health and education that bolster human capabilities, on the one side, and decentralized decision-making that empower those capacities with innovations, on the other, make a decisive difference to resilience and wellbeing during catastrophes. With the clear rise in extreme events, it is imperative that countries and states upgrade disaster resilience.
| State | Health Spending Per Capita |
| Himachal Pradesh |
233 |
| Tripura |
188 |
| Kerala |
125 |
| Chhattisgarh |
116 |
| Assam |
112 |
| Uttarakhand |
108 |
| Rajasthan |
106 |
| Haryana |
106 |
| Gujarat |
94 |
| Andhra Pradesh |
89 |
| Tamil Nadu |
88 |
| Punjab |
85 |
| Odisha |
83 |
| Karnataka |
82 |
| Maharashtra |
80 |
| West Bengal |
66 |
| Jharkhand |
64 |
| Madhya Pradesh |
62 |
| Uttar Pradesh |
61 |
| Bihar | 54 |
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)