achieving the sdgs in india: ensuring no state falls behind
TRANSCRIPT
1
Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in India: Ensuring no state falls behind
Shiladitya Chatterjee
99th Annual Conference of Indian Economic Association, Tirupati, 27-29 December 2016
2
Contents of Presentation
I. Introduction to the SDGsII. India’s performance on the MDGs and its lessons for the SDGsIII. Eight policy priorities for lagging states
3
The SDGs: Three pillars - economic, social and environmental GOAL 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhereGOAL 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agricultureGOAL 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all agesGOAL 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for allGOAL 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girlsGOAL 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for allGOAL 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for allGOAL 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for allGOAL 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovationGOAL 10. Reduce inequality within and among countriesGOAL 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainableGOAL 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patternsGOAL 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impactsGOAL 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable developmentGOAL 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity lossGOAL 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levelsGOAL 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development
4
India’s final performance on the MDGs was mixed
Source: S. Chatterjee, N.Kumar, M. Hammill and S. Panda (2016) [see References Slide 19]
5
Many states fell behind on the MDGs – this has to be avoided for the SDGs
GoaKerala
Tamil Nadu
Sikkim
Delhi
Tripura
Maharashtra
Himach
al Pradesh
Andhra PradeshPunjab
Manipur
Karnataka
Jammu & Kash
mir
Mizoram
Gujarat
West Bengal
Haryana
Uttarakhand
Meghalaya
Nagaland
Chhattisgarh
Rajasthan
Odisha
Assam
Madhya Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh
Arunachal P
radesh
Jharkhand
Bihar0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
0.8130.790
0.7360.719
0.6940.659 0.658 0.650
0.627 0.626 0.616 0.609 0.603 0.592 0.585 0.584 0.577 0.5650.530
0.506
0.466 0.464 0.452 0.4510.426
0.398 0.396
0.3420.313
Final ranking of states by MDG performance
Median
Source: S. Chatterjee et. al. (2016)
6
5 Main factors responsible for poor performance on MDGs – these are relevant for SDGs as well
• Lack of growth• Insufficient prioritization of resources for human development • Inefficient use of resources – poor service delivery• Lack of basic infrastructure• Lack of gender empowerment
7
Growth and MDG Performance
2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.00.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
AP
BR
CG
GA
GJHR
JH
KA
KL
MP
MH
OR
PB
RJ
TN
UP
WB
AR
AS
HP
JKMN
MLNL
SK
TR
UK
f(x) = 0.0458113271163345 x + 0.340237402112469R² = 0.293410355769989
Per Capita NSDP Average Growth Rate (1993-94 to 2012-13, constant prices)
MDG
Per
form
ance
Inde
x
Source: S. Chatterjee et. al. (2016)
8
More priority to human development yielded better outcomes – Example: investments in public health infrastructure and health outcomes
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 90000
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
KL
KAMH
TNHP APJKPBGJ
OR HR
ASCGWB
RJ MP
JH
BRUP
f(x) = − 0.0072104711718191 x + 64.8628569468434R² = 0.507788948904213
Persons per government hospital bed
Heal
th O
utco
me
Inde
x
Source: S. Chatterjee et. al. (2016)
9
Efficiency of public services delivery (proxy MNREGA performance) and overall MDG performance
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 5000.25
0.35
0.45
0.55
0.65
0.75
0.85
Andhra Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh
Assam
Bihar
Chhattisgarh
GujaratHaryana
Himachal Pradesh
Jammu & Kashmir
Jharkhand
Karnataka
Kerala
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Orissa
Punjab
Rajasthan
Tamil Nadu
Uttar Pradesh
Uttarakhand
West Bengal
f(x) = 0.000514788830303113 x + 0.444893227047285R² = 0.374307821019278
Performance of states on MNREGA 2012-13 and the MDG Performance Index
Proportion of rural households provided work as proportion of rural poor households (%)
MDG
Per
form
ance
Inde
x
Source: S. Chatterjee et. al. (2016)
10
Basic infrastructure crucial for MDGs – example: access to roads and attendance at births
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 3525
35
45
55
65
75
85
95
105
AP
AS
BR
CG
GJ
HR
JK
JH
KA
KL
MP
MH
OR
PB
RJ
TN
UP
WB
R² = 0.581436720196355
Kilometres of roads per 10,000 population
Proportion of births at -tended by skilled health
personnel
Source: S. Chatterjee et. al. (2016)
11
Dilemma of lagging states - daunting SDG challenges with large resource gaps for meeting them: example - Assam School Education Sector
Resource requirements and gaps (Rs. ‘000 crores)2016-2019 2019-2022 2022-2025 2025-2028 2028-2030
Total budget requirement 68.4 55.4 58.0 60.9 47.5
Resource gap 23.5 18.9 21.0 23.2 18.5
Selected school education indicators of AssamBaseline
2016-17 Target
2019-20 Target
2023-24 Target
2030-31Net Enrol. Rate (Upper Primary) 67.54 72.54 100.00 100.0Learning outcomes (Upper Primary) L-I Math Science
53.061.051.0
65.057.060.0
100.0100.0100.0
100.0100.0100.0
Net Enrol. Rate (Secondary) 53.5 66.3 76.3 100.0
Learning outcomes (Secondary) NAS 2015 Score (core subjects) 38.0 55.0 100.0 100.0
Source: Department of Education, Government of Assam. Preliminary estimates in draft Strategy Paper & Action Plan
12
Policy options of lagging states for catching up on SDGs
1. Focus on all of these constraints which affected MDG performance as they will also be relevant for SDGs —However, many of these will take time to be achieved (e.g. growth, basic
infrastructure, women’s development etc.)—What then are their policy options, in the medium term?
13
Possible state strategies for the medium term
2. Maximize efforts at revenue augmentation
3. Prioritize expenditures towards SDGs—Develop outcome focused
budgets based on SDG outcomes
Karnataka TNKerala MP
Andhra
Chattisgarh
Punjab UP All
Maharashtra
GujaratGoa
Haryana
J&K
Rajasthan
Himach
al
OrissaAssa
m
Uttarakhand
Bihar
Jharkhand
WB
Meghalaya
Tripura
Sikkim
Manipur
Arunachal
Mizoram
Nagaland0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Ranking of states by own tax revenue as percent of Gross State Domestic Product
(Average 2009-14)
Source: Planning Commission Data Tables
14
Possible state strategies for the medium term4. Tackle inefficiencies in service delivery
— Through knowledge of and adopting good practices
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.0055
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Andhra Pradesh
Assam
Bihar
Chhattisgarh
Delhi
Gujarat, Haryana
Jammu & Kashmir
Jharkhand
Karnataka
Kerala
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Orissa Punjab
Rajasthan
Tamil Nadu
Uttar Pradesh
West Bengal
Arunachal Pradesh
Goa
Himachal Pradesh
Manipur
Meghalaya
Mizoram
Nagaland Sikkim
Tripura
Uttarakhand
Spending on elementary education and literacy outcome
Per pupil public expenditure in elementary education (Rupees thousand) 2009-10
Lite
racy
201
1
Source: Ministry of Human Resources Development
15
Possible state strategies for the medium term5. Introduce policy,
organizational and institutional changes• Outcome focus rather than
sector focus—Requires new coordination
arrangements• Paying heed to
cross-cutting/thematic concerns—Effective decentralization of
service delivery—Heeding needs of poor, women,
deprived groups—Encouraging participation
• Private sector• Communities, civil society
16
Possible state strategies for the medium term
6. Foster innovation—Example: use of ICT for telemedicine; virtual classrooms etc.
7. Expand partnerships—With private sector
• Through better use of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) funds—Communities and civil society
17
Central Government support will also be critical for lagging states
8. Actively seek support from national level
• There is strong rationale for Central Government role—Unanimous commitment by all countries – including India - in the United
Nations to achieving SDGs by 2030• This implies responsibility of Centre to support states achieve SDGs also
—SDG Goal 10: Reduce inequality between and within countries• Inequality between states’ SDG achievements needs to be eliminated too
18
Several instruments exist at National level to assist lagging states 1. Support lagging states through Centrally Sponsored Schemes and Missions
in critical SDG areas—Similar to national missions in the MDG period such as NHM which proved quite
successful
2. Finance Commission should consider equalizing SDG achievements in deciding allocation formula
3. More Central allocation of borrowings from international development institutions (e.g. ADB, BRICS Bank, AIB, WB etc.) for lagging states
4. Central policy incentives for greater private sector participation in lagging states
5. Central support in capacity development for lagging states —Statistical capacity—Knowledge and good practices
19
References1. Shiladitya Chatterjee, Matthew Hammill, Nagesh Kumar and Swayamsiddha Panda. An Assessment of
India’s Aggregative and Comparative States’ Performance on the Millennium Development Goals and Identification of Key Drivers of Inter-State Variations. Indian Economic Journal 64 (1&2) 2016.
2. Shiladitya Chatterjee, Matthew Hammill, Nagesh Kumar and Swayamsiddha Panda. Assessing India’s Progress in Achieving the Millennium Development Goals: Key Drivers of Inter-State Variations. Development Papers 1502. ESCAP South and Southwest Asia Office, New Delhi. Sept. 2015.
3. Shiladitya Chatterjee. Achieving the MDGs in the Least Developed Countries of Asia and the Pacific: Importance of Cross-sectoral and Cross-thematic Impacts. United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. Bangkok. 2015. (Report prepared for UN-ESCAP)
4. Shiladitya Chatterjee. Achieving the MDGs in the Least Developed Countries of Asia and the Pacific: Policies to Improve Cross-sectoral and Cross-thematic Synergies. United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. Bangkok. 2015. (Report prepared for UN-ESCAP).
5. Shiladitya Chatterjee. Roadmap for Implementing the 2030 Agenda in the Asia-Pacific Region: Sub Regional Study for South and Southwest Asia, 2016. (Paper prepared for Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok).
