Rarely do reports that contain dry economic statistics raise a stir but that's exactly what this one has done.
In one corner of this joust is a group of a group of economists at the Hyderabad-based Centre for Economic and Social Studies (CESS).
CESS is headed by agricultural economist and former planning commission member C H Hanumantha Rao.
More From This Section
Pitted against them in the other corner is C Rangarajan, governor of Andhra Pradesh, chairman of the next finance commission, former governor of the Reserve Bank of India and an economist of no mean repute himself.
CESS' "development Report" on Andhra Pradesh paints a dismal picture of Andhra Pradesh's economic progress and growth during the post liberalisation years.
CESS hasn't released the full report as yet (this is to be published in a journal), but it did release its highlights (it said that the report was still in a draft stage) at a seminar on 30 November. Rangarajan was the chief guest at the seminar. That's where the differences started.
The report broadly covers, first, macro issues of growth and the fiscal system; secondly, sectoral (agriculture, industry) issues; thirdly, the infrastructure (power, irrigation, information technology); fourthly, poverty-related issues ( income poverty, food security, health, education, women's groups); fifthly, the environment and, lastly, urban services.
Reports on each of these topics were written by different economists. On fiscal management, a report by J V M Sarma, professor of economics at Hyderabad Central University, noted that the reforms process, started in 1995-96, did not lead to a sustained revival of the fiscal position.
The major reasons were the state's inability to contain current expenditure, the proliferation of welfare schemes, and the government's failure to raise non-tax revenue.
On agriculture, the report said, among other things, that the crop output growth rate slowed down from 3.4 per cent per annum in the 1980s to 2.3 per cent in the 1990s.
The growth rate in yields of all important crops slowed down, even though the growth of irrigated area expanded in the 1990s.
But what really fuelled the controversy was an overview article by CESS director S Mahendra Dev and social economist C Ravi.
This concluded that while the state domestic product (SDP) in Andhra Pradesh in the 1980s grew at roughly the same rate as the rest of India did, it slipped to below the all-India level in the period between 1993-94 (the ruling Telegu Desam Party assumed power in 1994) and 1999-2000.
Dev and Ravi said that the growth rate was higher in the 1980s than in the post reform years, though per capita capita SDP grew in the post-reform years by 3.55 per cent a year, a higher rate than that of the pre-reform years rate of 2.98 per cent.
The CESS development report is exhaustive. Dev said the development challenges for Andhra Pradesh are to accelerate economic growth and improve human and social development.
Fiscal policy, the power sector, governance and institutions have to continue to be reformed to achieve these development challenges.
But, he argued, economic growth alone can not reduce poverty -- a labour-intensive pattern of growth, coupled with direct initiatives by the government to generate employment, are needed.
Agricultural growth is important to reduce poverty. In other words, the state should aim at achieving growth with equity.
The report's implicit message, even if not stated, was clear -- the TDP had not performed well.
Rangarajan pointed out that it was difficult to "reconcile" the CESS report data with data available from other sources on the state's development.
He quoted planning commission data and the state government's economic survey to show that the projections made in the development report had been rather off the mark a planning commission document indicated that Andhra Pradesh's SDP grew between 1980-81 and 1990-91 by 4.3 per cent; between 1993-94 and 1998-99 it grew by 4.9 per cent.
He suggested that CESS should further examine data from different sources before coming to a final conclusion on Andhra's growth rate.
Rangarajan noted that the SDP series of the states are not always consistent with the national accounts estimates of gross domestic product. Also, differences exist among states in the methods of estimating SDP.
The state government's economic survey puts the average annual growth rate for the period 1994-95 to 1999-2000 at 5.5 percent as against the national average of 6.6 per cent.
Rangarajan admitted that some differences could exist between the trend rate of growth and average annual rates of growth.
Moreover the cut-off date of 1993-94 (used in the state's economic survey) is also artificial, he said, except that the new series starts with that year.
Rangarajan said if the old time series is used, the trend rate of growth for 1992-93 to 1998-99 is 5.28 per cent -- a shade higher than the growth rate for the 1980s.
He conceded that the growth rate of Andhra Pradesh had fallen short of the 7 per cent essential for eliminating poverty over the next 15 years Rangarajan also found fault with the estimates on poverty reduction. No doubt, the debate is by no means over.
As economists battle it out, chief minister Chandra Babu Naidu could fret a bit -- he has to go to the hustings in two years and a report that suggests that his government has been less than successful will be grist for the opposition's mill.