Haryana proves small states work better

Independent India's first experiment with carving out smaller states has been a success overall

Fifty years ago, the Union government separated the Hindi-speaking region from the erstwhile Punjab to create Haryana. The decision was in response to demands of agitators who wanted a separate state for the Punjabi-speaking population.

Since the creation of Haryana on November 1, 1966, the Union government has created smaller states such as Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand and Telangana. These newer states are struggling for political stability, funds and growth, but the demand for more such states is only rising. The most recent being the call to trifurcate the poll-bound Uttar Pradesh. The fiftieth anniversary of Haryana serves as a useful point to evaluate whether the decision to create the state has actually borne fruit. Business Standard looked at Haryana’s journey of the past five decades through the lens of various socio-economic parameters.  
Agriculture

The contribution of both Punjab and Haryana in boosting agricultural production has been discussed threadbare in the past, what has often been glossed over in this conversation is how different the starting point was for these states.

  At the time of division, Punjab was better off than Haryana as the latter lacked irrigation facilities. For instance, in 1966, the net sown area in Haryana was 3.4 million hectares and it marginally increased to 3.5 million hectare over the course of the next five years (1970-71). Punjab had a slight advantage as it had 4 million hectares under cultivation in 1970-71, but its area under irrigation was much higher at 71 per cent compared to Haryana’s 43 per cent.

Over the next four decades Haryana built a strong irrigation system and by 2011-12 its area under irrigation doubled to reach 90 per cent. Punjab, on the other hand, has nearly 100 per cent area under cultivation irrigated.

SK Misra, a retired IAS officer from Haryana and who was principal secretary to three chief ministers, credits this success to former chief minister Bansi Lal for launching a lift irrigation project, which was an engineering challenge and had never been tried before.

“On the day former prime minister Indira Gandhi arrived to inaugurate the lift irrigation project, Bansi Lal received a letter from her government that this project was not feasible and the Centre would not able to fund it. Bansi Lal flashed the letter during his speech that how his government made an unfeasible project into reality,” Mishra recounts.

The Haryana government’s gamble with lift irrigation paid off and it has now managed to narrow the difference between the amounts of wheat produced in Punjab and Haryana.  In the early 1980s, Punjab produced nearly 2.2 times the wheat that Haryana did. Now it is down to 1.4 times.

But the increase in rice and wheat production has come with its fair share of problems, most notable is the drastic decline in the water table. Moreover, farmers in the states are refusing to shift to pulses cultivation, which require less water, in the absence of a minimum support price (MSP)-based procurement system.

Santosh Mehrotra, professor of economics at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, believes the shift to pulses is unlikely to materialise as long as the current system of procuring wheat and rice by the government continues.

Industry

The story of Haryana’s rapid industrialisation and urbanisation over the past decades can be traced back to the controversial Maruti project, which began in the mid-1980s. The project, the brainchild of Sanjay Gandhi, helped trigger an investment cycle in what was till then predominantly an agrarian state. The number of small industries grew from 4,500 in 1996 to 80,000 in 2009. Haryana also boasts of being the state with the highest per capita income.

The investment helped create an automobile hub, housing some of India’s most recognisable companies such as Bharat Forge. This growth, however, remained restricted to a few pockets such as Gurgaon and Manesar, which are close to Delhi.   “Gurgaon and Manesar grew on their own and without much help from the state government. The factors that made them popular were proximity to the Indira Gandhi International Airport and development of land by private builders,” says an IAS officer who once headed the industry department in Haryana. But despite its inherent advantage, economists contend that Haryana failed to build a labour-intensive manufacturing sector. “This is not enough to absorb the labour force moving out of agriculture,” contends Mehrotra.

“Gurgaon is the classic example of a city that could have provided millions of jobs if the basic infrastructure was put in place,” he adds. “Given the presence of a huge market (NCR), it should have become a magnet for small and medium enterprises. That there has not been a large increase in employment shows in the Jat agitation,” he adds.

Industrial development is yet to take off in Faridabad, Rewari and Sonipat, which are close to Delhi. “The Haryana government signed MoUs worth Rs 1.38 lakh crore during a recent investment summit, but not much is translating into reality,” the official quoted above said.

Urbanisation

At first blush it may seem that the state has done well on this front as urbanisation went up from 28.9 per cent in 2001 to 34.79 per cent by 2011, but dig a bit deeper and flaws in the model of urbanisation adopted begin to show. Experts see Gurgaon as an example of the wrong way to urbanisation.

Gurgaon is perhaps India’s first city to be largely privately built and lacks proper drainage and sewers. In contrast, Noida, on the other side of the NCR, has better roads and infrastructure. Here the state led the charge in providing basic amenities. The Gurgaon model of urbanisation is diametrically opposite to that of Noida. “Gurgaon raises an interesting question of what the role of the state is in urbanisation,” says Bhanu Joshi, a researcher at the Centre for Policy Research (CPR). “In Noida we see a very clear strategy where the state will provide the basic infrastructure. But in Gurgaon there is no clarity on whose job is it,” he adds.

Social sector

Haryana’s development indicators are mixed. The state has done well in shoring up its literacy rate and bringing it on a par with Punjab, which was ahead at the time of separation. Census data shows that Haryana’s literacy rate has gone up from 26 per cent in 1971 to 77 in 2011, whereas in Punjab it has risen from 34 per cent to 77 per cent over the same period.

Poverty, too, has fallen sharply and this is captured by the Lakdawala committee, which says rural poverty in Haryana declined from 34 per cent in 1973-74 to 13.6 per cent by 2004-05. In urban areas poverty fell from 40 per cent in 1973-74 to 15 per cent in 2004-05. But despite this improvement and its rapid economic advances, the state fares poorly on women empowerment.

In the past 50 years, the state has failed to change its negative perception built around honour killing, female foeticide, crimes against women, khap (kangaroo) panchayats and gender inequality. Haryana has one of the most skewed sex ratios in the country at 879 in 2011. This despite the fact that literacy, including female literacy, has gone up. “One thing that has not changed is the patriarchal society and feudal mindset,” says Jagmati Sangwan, a social activist who has been working in the state for the past 30 years.

According to the Planning Commission, the sex ratio and the literacy rate are inversely related in the state. For instance, the sex ratio in tehsils (blocks) like Punahana and Ferozepur are the highest despite having the lowest literacy rates. Haryana’s female labour force participation rates are also significantly lower than those of other states at similar levels of income. The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, which gives daughters right in ancestral property, has further fuelled the desire for baby boys in the state. Families in Haryana believe their sisters and daughters do not deserve a share in ancestral property because they already been given enough in dowry.