By Surjit S Bhalla
A typo right here, and a typo there, and quickly it can start to add up to a “story”, a point of view. All of us have created information errors in print—the editors let a “correction” post-publication and do so simply on the internet. I have had an occasion to appropriate my data—and everyone need to. We have been in an era of information-primarily based policy for some time now—not just in India, but about the globe. There are various “Fact-Check” web sites about the globe. This short article need to be observed mainly in that light.
But there is more, a lot more, to the current information release of the preliminary final results of the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) for 2019-20. These preliminary final results have been released for 2019-20 along with comparable information for the 2015-16 survey. Data are presented for 21 states (12 “big” and nine little) and population coverage of roughly 700 million. Tabular information for 131 variables have been released for 2019-20, along with comparable information for 2015-16. The information shows there has been considerable improvement in lots of of these 131 indicators of social welfare and that in quite couple of (you can count such situations in the fingers of 1 hand) there has been stagnation rather than a decline.
But that is not the 1st impression 1 obtains from the writings of distinguished scholars like Jean Dreze (IE, Dec 19) and Arvind Subramaniam (IE, Dec 22), as properly as editorials like Hunger Alarm (IE, Dec 15), as properly as pronouncements on worsening teenage pregnancy (The Hindu, Dec 15). Dreze begins his essay with the conclusion that “Leaving aside two or three countries like Niger and Yemen, India has the highest proportion of underweight children in the world…”, and adds, for impact, that this proportion is a lot larger than in neighbouring nations like “Bangladesh (22%) and Nepal (27%). Arvind Subramaniam, “After showing a slow but steady decline, especially between 2005 and 2015, there has been a disappointing reversal thereafter”.
Hunger Alarm editorial, “There have been several indicators of the slowing down of economic growth and employment distress, which are bound to have an effect on hunger and nutrition” (emphasis added). The Hindu’s (Dec 15) verdict on worsening India was reflected in the title “Rise in teenage pregnancy, higher anaemia rate in women: NFHS-5 phase data”.
The collective interpretation 1 obtains from reading these, and lots of other articles on the topic, is, soon after years of progress in overall health, nutrition, and kid welfare, items have actually worsened in the final 4 years, 2015/16 to 2019/20. Some authors are explicit, other folks indulge in nudge-nudge, wink-wink—these 4 years had been also the 1st-4 years of the altering political order in India—the starting of Modi as PM.
I have normally stated in my articles (beginning from “India, the Incomparable”, Economic Times, March 3, 1989) that Indians endure from a unique disease—we believe we are distinctive. To enable negate this falsehood, it is critical to examine India with the rest of the building globe, about 180 nations and a population of 6.5 billion. Thus, the accompanying graphic tries to place interpretation, and information, into each an absolute (e.g., what occurred in India) and a worldwide point of view (what occurred elsewhere in comparable economies). The World Bank (WB) gives these comparable information annually and the information are simply obtainable to all interested. Trends in hunger, nutrition, inequality, development, and so forth, can be assessed in a comparative point of view.
Let us appear at some of the typos, falsehoods, misinterpretation of the information. Dreze states that Bangladesh’s underweight percentage in 2015 was 22% WB information pins it at 30.1 %—some 4.7 percentage point (ppt) reduced than India’s, but not 12.8 ppt reduced as implied by Dreze. Hunger Alarm: “Exceptionally rare to see stunting gains being undone” with reference to India exactly where presumably Hunger Alarm observed the undoing. WB figures for all building nations with information on stunting (63 nations, population 2.5 billion): In 2000, stunting typical excluding India was 29.3% in 2010 23.8% and, in 2015, 28.7%. In other words, a lot of zig-zag, reversals, and no net improvement more than 20 years. In contrast, in India, it was 46% in 2000, 10 ppt reduced in 2015, and nevertheless reduced in 2019.
Teenage pregnancies on the rise? Really? In 2005, teenage pregnancies in India had been 19.9% in 2015, 8.7 %, and 1 ppt reduced in 2019. Net improvement—about 12 ppt in 15 years. Contrast this with a continual 10 ppt larger level in the building globe more than the identical period. The decline in teenage pregnancies in India is a genuine achievement story. India had the 10th lowest level in 2015, with Nepal nine positions reduced (16.7%) and Bangladesh (30.8% in 2014) with the ninth highest magnitude of teen pregnancies (ladies 15-19 years of age).
Wasting: Not 1 of the authors appear at the information on wasting (weight for height). A curious but revealing omission. The wasting percentage in India was 17.5% in 2000, and 3.3 ppt larger in 2015, and did not deteriorate additional in 2019. Contrastingly, in the identical time-period, wastage in the building globe enhanced by 1.6 ppt.
None of the information presented above shows Indian overall performance to have worsened post-2015. In other words, the pessimistic conclusion of “many” (or some) of deterioration is false. Further, according to a vast quantity of NFHS indicators, welfare enhanced “Big-Time” in between 2015 and 2019. A summary version of these information is as follows (comparable information for other nations not as but obtainable).
All information are for modify (distinction in percentages), as revealed by NFHS on an aggregate population-weighted basis, rather than an elevator economics basis as presented in lots of analyses, e.g., for X, Y states showed improvement and Z states showed decline.
Child mortality: Data on 3 indicators (neonatal, infant and beneath-5) shows an improvement in between 3 and 4 ppt. Immunisations: This is 1 large story of improvement for instance, hepatitis B vaccine percentage (for young children 12-23 months) enhanced from 64.8 % in 2015 to 83.6 % in 2019. Breast-feeding and eating plan of young children 6-23 months: Average obtain of 4 ppt for 4 indicators.
Negative trend in 26 young children indicators: Only two worsened. Children with fever taken to a overall health facility (71.3 % in 2019, vs 72.6 % in 2015) and young children beneath 5 years severely wasted—increase to 8.6 %, from 7.6 % in 2015.
Negative trend in seven young ladies indicators: Zero. Modern birth manage solutions, age at marriage, teenage pregnancies, and sexual violence show improvement—average improvement in these seven indicators: 3.9 ppt.
Negative trend in 15 adult indicators: Zero. Average obtain 4.1 ppt. Some indicators show an raise of 9 ppt and above: households with electrical energy (9.2 ppt), enhanced sanitation facilities (17.3 ppt), clean fuel for cooking (18 ppt) and ladies with bank account that they use (29.8 ppt raise, to 77.2% in 2019).
Why such a big divergence in between perception and reality? If there is an improvement in ~one hundred indicators and stagnation (not worsening) in quite couple of (significantly less than 5) then why editorials, unique shows on Television, and scholarly (but motivated) conjectures about the bigger “reality” that could be causing a non-existent worsening? The intelligentsia, domestic and international media got the Modi election, and his re-election, horribly incorrect. As I have argued earlier (The New Wealth of Nations and Citizen Raj) 1 constant explanation for this misreading is that the old elite has not come to grips with the reality that there is a modify in leadership on troubles relating to politics, economics, culture & society.
Executive Director IMF representing India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Bhutan. The views expressed are these of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the IMF, its Executive Board, or IMF management