Book review: 'An Uncertain Glory: India and Its Contradictions'

Book: An Uncertain Glory: India and Its Contradictions
Author: Jean Dreze & Amartya Sen
Publisher: Penguin
Pages: 434
Price: Rs399

Remember the great grid failure last year that left some 600 million people powerless, enveloped half the country in darkness for nearly two days? To Jean Dréze and Amartya Sen, it's an apt indicator of the many ills plaguing India, not just energy planning or the lack thereof. Similar deficiencies can be seen in water supply, drainage, garbage disposal and public transport, among other areas.

The authors acknowledge the rapid economic growth inked in the last 20 years when India has started to appear 'young' again — a Picasso flourish — in stark contrast to the so called 'Hindu rate of growth' in the first three decades post Independence.

But the need for rapid growth is far from over since India, after two decades of rapid growth, remains one of the poorest countries in the world.

“India has been climbing up the ladder of per capita income while slipping down the slope of social indicators,” the authors rue.

Among these indicators are education, healthcare, poverty and the gamut of inequalities (caste, class and community; education; income; gender; disempowerment and deprivation, you name it).

“Human development in general and school education in particular are first and foremost allies of the poor, rather than only of the rich and affluent,” the authors note.

The irony is for all to see. Indian education, despite its huge limitations, often receives spectacular acclaim from abroad. Truth is, despite the great successes of the first boys, India’s education system is tremendously negligent in both coverage and quality.

Ditto with healthcare: “The 1990s were largely a lost decade for India as far as health is concerned, and much of the 2000s did little better.” What more can you expect in a country where public expenditure on health has hovered around 1 per cent of the GDP for most of the last 20 years?

According to the authors, India’s failure stems from the fact that it is chasing ‘growth’ rather than ‘participatory growth’. This 'participatory growth' involves doing precious little to ensure basic amenities for its citizens, particularly in the rural recesses, or to root out the ‘persistent ineptitude and unaccountability’, leave alone try to bridge the growing chasm between the privileged and those not, even among the states. “The dividing line of ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’ in India is not just a rhetorical cliché.”

Part of the blame falls on the media. Rather than engage with the “diagnosis of significant injustices and inefficiencies”, media celebrates only the rich and powerful, perhaps because it is an advertisement-driven business, the authors allege.

But change is possible: through provision of education and self-confidence; legislative and institutional change; better use of modern technology; decentralisation of power and decision making; changes in social norms, habit of thought and work culture; improving public sector accountability and transparency. Also, while market phobia has subsided greatly in India in recent years, it is important not to be gripped now by the market mania of wanting to marketise everything that can be handed over to the market, the authors conclude.

The venerable duo have the big picture, all right. However, their prescription that India should put the socialist agenda before market-driven economic growth, some would argue, is based on ideology rather than fact. Indeed, global poverty reduction in the last two decades has had much to do with economic growth, United Nations data show.

Besides, hasn't rapid economic growth been more a factor of private enterprise than public, often achieved despite the government rather than because of it?

The proposed welfare focus, on the other hand, though necessary, is a call to splurge — a populist proposition, particularly given the gaping fiscal deficit.

Put welfare before growth? Sure?