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 |
Receive Daily Updates
Recent Posts
Petrol in India is cheaper than in countries like Hong Kong, Germany and the UK but costlier than in China, Brazil, Japan, the US, Russia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, a Bank of Baroda Economics Research report showed.
Rising fuel prices in India have led to considerable debate on which government, state or central, should be lowering their taxes to keep prices under control.
The rise in fuel prices is mainly due to the global price of crude oil (raw material for making petrol and diesel) going up. Further, a stronger dollar has added to the cost of crude oil.
Amongst comparable countries (per capita wise), prices in India are higher than those in Vietnam, Kenya, Ukraine, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Venezuela. Countries that are major oil producers have much lower prices.
In the report, the Philippines has a comparable petrol price but has a per capita income higher than India by over 50 per cent.
Countries which have a lower per capita income like Kenya, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Venezuela have much lower prices of petrol and hence are impacted less than India.
“Therefore there is still a strong case for the government to consider lowering the taxes on fuel to protect the interest of the people,” the report argued.
India is the world’s third-biggest oil consuming and importing nation. It imports 85 per cent of its oil needs and so prices retail fuel at import parity rates.
With the global surge in energy prices, the cost of producing petrol, diesel and other petroleum products also went up for oil companies in India.
They raised petrol and diesel prices by Rs 10 a litre in just over a fortnight beginning March 22 but hit a pause button soon after as the move faced criticism and the opposition parties asked the government to cut taxes instead.
India imports most of its oil from a group of countries called the ‘OPEC +’ (i.e, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Russia, etc), which produces 40% of the world’s crude oil.
As they have the power to dictate fuel supply and prices, their decision of limiting the global supply reduces supply in India, thus raising prices
The government charges about 167% tax (excise) on petrol and 129% on diesel as compared to US (20%), UK (62%), Italy and Germany (65%).
The abominable excise duty is 2/3rd of the cost, and the base price, dealer commission and freight form the rest.
Here is an approximate break-up (in Rs):
a)Base Price | 39 |
b)Freight | 0.34 |
c) Price Charged to Dealers = (a+b) | 39.34 |
d) Excise Duty | 40.17 |
e) Dealer Commission | 4.68 |
f) VAT | 25.35 |
g) Retail Selling Price | 109.54 |
Looked closely, much of the cost of petrol and diesel is due to higher tax rate by govt, specifically excise duty.
So the question is why government is not reducing the prices ?
India, being a developing country, it does require gigantic amount of funding for its infrastructure projects as well as welfare schemes.
However, we as a society is yet to be tax-compliant. Many people evade the direct tax and that’s the reason why govt’s hands are tied. Govt. needs the money to fund various programs and at the same time it is not generating enough revenue from direct taxes.
That’s the reason why, govt is bumping up its revenue through higher indirect taxes such as GST or excise duty as in the case of petrol and diesel.
Direct taxes are progressive as it taxes according to an individuals’ income however indirect tax such as excise duty or GST are regressive in the sense that the poorest of the poor and richest of the rich have to pay the same amount.
Does not matter, if you are an auto-driver or owner of a Mercedes, end of the day both pay the same price for petrol/diesel-that’s why it is regressive in nature.
But unlike direct tax where tax evasion is rampant, indirect tax can not be evaded due to their very nature and as long as huge no of Indians keep evading direct taxes, indirect tax such as excise duty will be difficult for the govt to reduce, because it may reduce the revenue and hamper may programs of the govt.
Globally, around 80% of wastewater flows back into the ecosystem without being treated or reused, according to the United Nations.
This can pose a significant environmental and health threat.
In the absence of cost-effective, sustainable, disruptive water management solutions, about 70% of sewage is discharged untreated into India’s water bodies.
A staggering 21% of diseases are caused by contaminated water in India, according to the World Bank, and one in five children die before their fifth birthday because of poor sanitation and hygiene conditions, according to Startup India.
As we confront these public health challenges emerging out of environmental concerns, expanding the scope of public health/environmental engineering science becomes pivotal.
For India to achieve its sustainable development goals of clean water and sanitation and to address the growing demands for water consumption and preservation of both surface water bodies and groundwater resources, it is essential to find and implement innovative ways of treating wastewater.
It is in this context why the specialised cadre of public health engineers, also known as sanitation engineers or environmental engineers, is best suited to provide the growing urban and rural water supply and to manage solid waste and wastewater.
Traditionally, engineering and public health have been understood as different fields.
Currently in India, civil engineering incorporates a course or two on environmental engineering for students to learn about wastewater management as a part of their pre-service and in-service training.
Most often, civil engineers do not have adequate skills to address public health problems. And public health professionals do not have adequate engineering skills.
India aims to supply 55 litres of water per person per day by 2024 under its Jal Jeevan Mission to install functional household tap connections.
The goal of reaching every rural household with functional tap water can be achieved in a sustainable and resilient manner only if the cadre of public health engineers is expanded and strengthened.
In India, public health engineering is executed by the Public Works Department or by health officials.
This differs from international trends. To manage a wastewater treatment plant in Europe, for example, a candidate must specialise in wastewater engineering.
Furthermore, public health engineering should be developed as an interdisciplinary field. Engineers can significantly contribute to public health in defining what is possible, identifying limitations, and shaping workable solutions with a problem-solving approach.
Similarly, public health professionals can contribute to engineering through well-researched understanding of health issues, measured risks and how course correction can be initiated.
Once both meet, a public health engineer can identify a health risk, work on developing concrete solutions such as new health and safety practices or specialised equipment, in order to correct the safety concern..
There is no doubt that the majority of diseases are water-related, transmitted through consumption of contaminated water, vectors breeding in stagnated water, or lack of adequate quantity of good quality water for proper personal hygiene.
Diseases cannot be contained unless we provide good quality and adequate quantity of water. Most of the world’s diseases can be prevented by considering this.
Training our young minds towards creating sustainable water management systems would be the first step.
Currently, institutions like the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras (IIT-M) are considering initiating public health engineering as a separate discipline.
To leverage this opportunity even further, India needs to scale up in the same direction.