The Hindu Business Line : The Bihar mandate

THE NITISH KUMAR-LED National Democratic Alliance has won a decisive mandate from the Bihar public, ending, in the process, the 15-year-long sway of Mr Lalu Prasad over the State. Has Mr Lalu Prasad paid the ultimate electoral price for neglecting the economic and social development of Bihar, as is widely claimed? Or, is it a case of one alliance of parties working out the caste and communal equations better than the other? The truth, perhaps, is a little more complex.

Surprisingly enough, Bihar has fared no better or worse than the nation as a whole on the parameter of economic growth. Its State Domestic Product grew at a marginally higher rate than the national average between 1995-96 and 2002-03, the latest year for which such data are available. Even in relation to some of the States widely seen as economically more advanced, Bihar's record is not significantly different. It is another matter that the benefits of such growth did not percolate all the way down or that the State lagged woefully behind others in the matter of provision of public goods such as roads or electricity. But even keeping a State up there with the rest is no guarantee of being returned to power as the ruling party or combine usually comes up against the phenomenon of anti-incumbency — a euphemism for public aspirations far outweighing physical performance.

For a real stranglehold on the levers of power, the ruling party needs to achieve a significantly higher rate of economic growth than the national average. Witness the Left Front, which has had an even longer tenure at the seat of power in West Bengal and continues to do so even to this day, managing to keep the State growing at an average of 7 per cent annually — a good 1.4 percentage points higher than the national average. The Bihar election results are also a reminder of the need for a nuanced approach to this notion of growth with equity. The country has adopted, with good reason, a neo-liberal, market-driven model of economic growth post-1991. While this is not inconsistent with an emphasis on specific development initiatives that build capacities of the disadvantaged, it also underscores the need for policies that accelerate the process of economic growth inherent in such a model.

For the benefits of higher growth to trickle down to the masses in the form of greater disposable incomes, a critical mass of growth is needed in the system. The outcome has positive spin-offs in terms of an improved social cohesion as well. When people see consistent improvement in their own standards of income, they are less likely to compare themselves with those around. Let their incomes stagnate and they begin evaluating their situation vis-à-vis others. That is but a short step from reinforcing their social and religious identities with all their disastrous implications. Given the size of the victory, it is safe to say that Mr Nitish Kumar enjoys public support cutting across caste and religious affiliations. He has to create a policy environment that fosters a rate of economic growth well above the national average so that he not only meets his development goals but also delivers on his promise of promoting greater social cohesion.

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page