The Communist Party of China (CPC), which observed the centenary of its founding on July 1 with a very assertive speech by Xi Jinping, has much to celebrate and the world, even a divided one, has to acknowledge its accomplishments. A country which suffered oppression by multiple colonial powers and extreme poverty and frequent famines is today a global power with modern industrial strength. It has lifted nearly 800 million out of absolute poverty.
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]
The victory of the CPC-led revolution in 1949 and founding of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the launching of the economic reforms in 1978 are major landmarks in this story. That China has effectively handled the challenge of the pandemic, revived its economy and sent a mission to Mars makes the occasion more joyful for it. Xi announced the achievement of the goal of building a “moderately well-off society in all respects”, set at the 16th Party Congress in 2002, besides underlining, in strong terms, China’s determination to defend its territorial identity.
This is also a time to reflect on the nature of CPC’s century-old mission articulated with a fresh perspective from time to time. What seems to be the running thread, irrespective of leadership changes, is the commitment to building China into a modern industrial nation that competes with the West — a goal set by the late 19th century reformers who wanted a rich country and a strong nation. The CPC, born in the aftermath of the anti-imperialist May Fourth Movement of 1919, has turned out to be the most powerful instrument to accomplish that nationalist goal.
Xi has pursued a determined policy of establishing the party’s direct role in every aspect of decision-making, even encouraging an ideological line in his own name — the Xi Jinping Thought in a New Era. On democracy, he has a different position, defending China’s unique system, and that is bound to invite questions. His foreign and domestic policies — the Belt and Road Initiative and Cooperative, Comprehensive Security, refocusing the economy towards domestic consumption while continuing to produce selective goods for the global market under the Dual Circulation concept, orienting “Make in China” towards innovative fifth and sixth generation technology, and the new urbanisation and zonal development programmes — are all markers of the modernity mission.
At a time when Western industrialisation has come in for critical scrutiny due to the enormous damage it has wrought on the natural environment and generated social inequalities and regional disparities in all countries — fault lines that have become sharper in the wake of Covid-19 — China’s persistence with the Western path may be a disappointment.
For sure, every generation of CPC’s leadership has tried to make China’s path different from that of the West’s. Several analysts regard the Mao period from 1949 to 1976 as attempts to steer China on a different path. They highlight the Great Leap Forward, People’s Communes of 1958-1960 and the Cultural Revolution of 1966-1976 as experiments in radical socialist policies with seriously adverse consequences such as famine deaths, political persecution and killings.
But even during those turbulent years, building industrial and military strength and conducting scientific and technological research in collaboration with friendly foreign countries was an underlying theme in Chinese government policies.
After Deng Xiaoping invited Western financial capital and technological know-how and launched the Reform and Open Door Policy in 1978, this process got into full swing. Deng’s successor Jiang Zemin, who took over as CPC General Secretary in the wake of the suppression of the Tiananmen uprising in 1989, pursued this industrialisation policy with great vigour. The result of this strategy is China’s great economic success. From a per capita national income of about $250 in 1980, China has reached over $10,000 in 2020 even though it still remains a lower middle-income country.
China has emerged as not only the world’s second largest economy but seems poised to overtake the US in 2036 — it has, in fact, surpassed the US in many areas of high-tech. So much so that President Biden has announced a long-term strategy of maintaining US dominance in these concerned fields.
The urge to be different has always prompted CCP leaders to add new dimensions to the modernisation strategy. When Hu Jintao succeeded Jiang in 2002, the problem of rising income inequality and rural-urban gap as well as increasing environmental pollution in China was widely discussed in the country and abroad. China’s carbon emission surpassed that of the US around 2009 and the Gini coefficient has remained between 43 and 49 for the past decade.
The Hu Jintao regime took several initiatives, packaged as building a “Harmonious Society”. It also gave the slogan of turning China into a “Beautiful Country” by taking a large number of anti-pollution, energy-saving measures.
The industrialisation drive has, however, persisted and China remains the world’s top carbon emitter. Rural-urban income gap has increased — the average urban income being nearly five times that of the rural. While better living conditions have greatly benefitted the lives of women at home, the employment pattern and political representation in decision-making shows continuing patriarchal domination. China’s success story has taken it into a “success trap”.
Xi has taken this modernisation mission forward — with its successes, limitations and problems — by focusing on what he calls a “New Era”. Coming to power after the 2008 global economic crisis which brought the weakness of the Western system into sharp relief, he has affirmed that China’s economic success means that it’s a legitimate big player. The CPC’s centenary celebrations — as well as that of the founding of PRC in 2049 — have been imbued with concrete political and economic agenda. Xi’s policies have to be understood in this backdrop.
In the recent weeks, Xi has been emphasising the need for the Party’s 91 million members, especially the youth who constitute some 40 per cent of the membership, to recall the “original aspiration” of the founders. That vision of socialism and communism seems to have become a platform of nationalist mobilisation as China celebrated the gains of a “moderately prosperous society”. The commitment to modern industrialisation, and the larger process of “modernisation”, is even more explicit in the goal set for the second centenary in 2049 — building China into a “great modern strong prosperous socialist country”. Xi affirmed that goal on July 1.
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)