Book Review--- AN UNCERTAIN GLORY: INDIA AND ITS CONTRADICTIONS By Jean Dreze & Amartya Sen

AN UNCERTAIN GLORY: INDIA AND ITS CONTRADICTIONS

Jean Dreze & Amartya Sen

Published in: 2013, U.K.

Publisher: Allen Lane, an imprint of PENGUIN BOOKS.

Hard Cover, 287 Pages

An Uncertain Glory: India and its contradictions, is a joint work in development economics by two of India’s leading economists--scholars, Jean Dreze and Amartya Sen. It is primarily a detailed review of the socio- economic conditions prevailing in India till the year 2013. The title of the book itself is the raison d’etre of the book – in essence it aims to bring out the multifarious contradictions within India that make it such an interesting subject of socio-economic studies. The title, An Uncertain Glory, implies that while India has undergone considerable development in the form of economic and industrial expansion through the public- private partnership model, it considerably lags behind in a major area, namely, human development. Divided into a total of nine chapters, the book presents an in-depth analysis of multiple socio-economic concerns in our country. The chapters variedly throw light upon poverty, social support, economic growth and human development, accountability and the lack of it in the public sector at large, corruption in public life, India’s health care crisis, the need for impatience for reform in the population and ideas such as democracy, inequality, public reasoning and the centrality of education in India. Most importantly, the book analyses growth and development indicators with an aim to see the results upon the integration of the two. That India is a ‘land of contrasts’ where more often than not, what is preached, is not practiced, is the basic premise on which the authors have built important areas in the book where the contrast is most visible and made it comprehensive for the lay public.

 A collection of well- researched essays providing profound insight, An Uncertain Glory draws data from a vast array of literature and is lucidly and comprehensibly written. It is free of useless jargon and prejudices. The text gains traction due to being interspersed with the concluding observations of eminent scholars such as Ramamchandra Guha, Praful Bidwai and Pranab Bardhan. It follows a linear narrative structure and takes a doctrinal approach in looking at the sharp contradictions that have become a part and parcel of Indian life. Dreze & Sen have widely substantiated their observations on the multiple dimensions of India’s growth story with statistical analysis based on empirical data. The book is dotted with anecdotes revealing Indian contradictions. In one such example, the authors write about their alarm on finding out that in one of the NTPC run- power plant headquarters in Uttar Pradesh, a large number of air conditioners were switched on full blast throughout the day-- even in the deserted lobby of the guest house, while sweepers for the NTPC, belonging to the Dom community, languished in shacks without proper electricity just outside the boundary walls of the headquarters’ campus.

India is home to 111 billionaires (as of 2015) and 363,000,000 people below the poverty line according to official estimates. (29.5 per cent of India’s population was poor in 2011-12). This is just the beginning of economic contradictions, the causes and effects of which have been qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed in An Uncertain Glory. It observes that the idea of India is paradoxical to the reality of India.

The work is more than food for thought, in fact, a classic in its own right. It critically examines the historical perspective of public policy and the current regressive practices followed in India, such as caste-based discrimination and attitudinal barriers that prevent it from being one of the forerunners in South Asian politics. The call for integrating growth and development is seen to be an optimum solution for bringing India onto its much needed path of progress.

Chapter five of the book, The Centrality of Education successfully identifies education as the key to the liberation of our society from the clutches of oppression and exploitation. The chapter presents in detail the shambles that elementary education has been in, even after sixty-five years of independence (the book was written in the time period 2011-12). To quote, “About 20 per cent of Indian children between the ages of 6 and 14 years were not attending school even in 2005-06, and about 10 per cent of children of that age group had never been enrolled in any school at all. The neglect is particularly strong for Indian girls, nearly half of whom were out of school in large parts of India in the same year.”

India’s shockingly unequal past records of development, opine Dreze and Sen, are “making the country look more and more like islands of California in a sea of sub-Saharan Africa”. Despite several growth indicators denoting prosperity, most important of them being the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), (whose number remains to be unsteady), much of India’s population remains so disadvantaged that social indicators have hardly improved. The authors opine, “The history of world development offers few other examples, if any, of an economy growing so fast for so long with such limited results in terms of reducing human deprivations.”

To that end, An Uncertain Glory is easily one of the most invaluable social commentaries made on economic growth, human development, the persistence of inequality, human rights violation, the success of economic programmes like MNREGA, educational standards and the dismal condition of public health in India. It is quite pragmatic and optimistic in dealing with the issues of global and local poverty, without ignoring the serious consequences that poverty has, and still continues to bear upon societies and entire nations. Thus, there is both the acceptance of reality as well as the optimism that India can do far better in improving the lives of its citizens, that makes this book relevant to academic and public discourse. 

The ability of the authors to avoid playing on age-old clichés surrounding the underdevelopment of India, and the West’s equation of underdevelopment to the phenomenon of Orientalism works greatly in the book’s favour. The book has offered meaningful insight into some of the ongoing debates within the mould of India’s multicultural diversity. Dreze & Sen measurably blame the British for reducing the per-capita income growth of India to 0.1. per cent. They also bring the policies and programmes of the Indian government under the scanner while examining security threats to India in the form of terrorism. 

Dreze & Sen admit that the operational record of public enterprises in India is most often disastrous. They take an open stand against the absolute privatization of goods and services as they believe in its ill-effects, such as environmental degradation and development- induced displacement. Instead, they advocate the Public- Private Partnership (PPP) model, with government involvement in healthcare, nutrition, environment conservation and education for best results. The authors strongly recognize the need to weed out corruption from public life and make government institutions more accountable to all their stakeholders. They point out in their analysis that this will not occur in a fortnight, but gradually and with increased transparency in the system. The authors have been successful in painting a picture of the stark realities of an India that has sidelined and ignored its problems for too long.

An Uncertain Glory is however not devoid of slight gaps. The ‘trickle- down effect’ of the public distribution system and the loopholes in the administrative structure that hinders effective implementation of policies could be more elaborately addressed. The lack of a detailed evaluation of the performance of the Right To Information Act (RTI), 2005 in the chapters of the book creates a lacuna that deserves attention. This is especially since this fundamental right is very powerful and successful in bringing about much- needed administrative reforms. There is also the unaddressed question of agency responsibility. Dreze and Sen do not raise the concern as to which agency will take up the responsibility of transforming government policy to strike a balance between democracy, equity and economic growth. The impact of disinvestment on the Indian economy could be discussed.

This informative account of the harsh realities of Indian life is an eye-opener on multiple levels. The authors have championed the cause of democracy and highlighted the need for strengthening it. They have also been completely successful in retaining their optimistic spirit and belief in social change from the beginning of the book to the very end. This social change can be brought with adherence to B.R. Ambedkar’s thought – to ‘educate, agitate and organize’ which is sure to restore India on the path to achieving glory.

About the Authors:

Jean Dreze is a Belgium-born Indian economist who has contributed significantly to development economics and public economics, with special reference to India. He studied Mathematical Economics at the University of Essex in the 1980s and did his PhD (theoretical economics of cost-benefit analysis) at the Indian Statistical Institute, New Delhi. He taught at the London School of Economics in the 1980s. His work in India includes issues like hunger, famine, gender inequality, child health and education, and the NREGA. He had conceptualized and drafted the first version of the NREGA. He is currently an honorary Professor at the Delhi School of Economics, and Visiting Professor at the Department of Economics, Ranchi University. He was a member of the National Advisory Council of India in both first and second term.

He has co-authored another book with Amartya Sen titled Hunger and Public Action, on Indian famines. He has lived in India since 1979 and became an Indian citizen in 2002.

Amartya Sen is an Indian economist and philosopher, who has made ground-breaking contributions to welfare economics, social choice theory, economic theory of famines and economic and social justice. He was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 1998 and Bharat Ratna in 1999 for his work in welfare economics. He is currently the Thomas W. Lamont University Professor and Professor of Economics and Philosophy at Harvard University. He served as the chancellor of Nalanda University.

Born in 1933 in Manikganj (present-day Bangladesh), Sen went on to study economics in Presidency College (now Presidency University), Calcutta, and subsequently studied philosophy in Trinity College. His major works include The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture and Identity, The Idea of Justice, Development as Freedom, Poverty and Famines, Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny, Peace and Democratic Society. His capabilities approach focuses on positive freedom.  Sen's work in the field of development economics has had considerable influence in the formulation of the Human Development Report. He was granted honorary citizenship of Bangladesh in 1999.

The Supreme Court's Judgment to lift the ban on dance bars in Mumbai

It is ironical to note that in a country where the Constitution itself guarantees to every citizen, the fundamental right to practice any profession or carry out any occupation of choice, the State government in 2005 decided to impose a ban on dance bars, thereby rendering several bar dancers jobless. Only recently, this ban was lifted and bar owners and bar dancers could heave a sigh of relief.

The State government had apparently presumed that identical dance performance in eateries, and waterholes which bore less than three star marks was an exhibition of high immoral behavior, but not in establishments bearing more than three stars. The Supreme Court has thankfully ruled this assumption as totally unacceptable. The ban on dance bars had previously, firmly confirmed the absence of absolute freedom in our democracy. The state government of Maharashtra justified the ban by stating that dancing by female bar dancers aroused lust amongst men who frequented these bars. The bars then became the breeding ground for prostitution and thus the ban had to be placed for protecting vulnerable women.

  

The truth of the matter was that the government’s presumption was extremely ridiculous as the concept of a bar would not change depending upon its star ratings. Moreover, it would do nothing to changing bar dancing as a source of income, or the world of bar dancers in particular. The moral police in Mumbai have gone on similar rampages in the past, by reducing night club hours, forcing pubs to close down early and also curbed public displays of affection significantly. All this was done in a bid to maintain ‘law and order’ in the city.

The revocation of the ban has brought smiles to the unknown faces of many bar owners and bar dancers.  It is necessary to guarantee every individual his /her livelihood and by lifting this irrational ban, the Supreme Court has proved that there are other existing laws and methods that, if adequately implemented, would protect, if not completely eradicate, the society from the so-called dangers of immorality, vulgarity and depravity.

The Supreme Court rightly refused to acknowledge the so obviously inherent class divide too, that this situation brought with itself. A certain form of entertainment, in this case, watching female bar dancers dance, would be enjoyed equally and in the same manner by people across all economic classes. There is no superior and inferior class here but the State government, by imposing the ban, gave rise to several protests by bar dancers’ organizations in Azad Maidan and elsewhere. In a free flowing democratic country like ours, such a ban on a profession leads to a scary phenomenon of mass unemployment. More than 75, 000 women are consequently being forced into prostitution for lack of any other option. On the other hand, bar dancing has widely been considered to be a derogatory profession and many thus fear that lifting this ban will promote a disregard for the social decorum that is expected to be maintained in public places.

The judgment has, no doubt been a landmark, and has also brought in a lot of speculation from the conservatives of our society. Several eyebrows have risen as the question of morality has sparked off heated debates in various quarters. A profound distinction between different categories of dance performers and audiences has clearly been established and it is not very likely that after the lifting of the ban, bar dancers would dare to disclose to their families about dancing as their profession to support the family. But owing to the judgment, as of now, the worries of these bar dancers, many of whom are also single mothers, has been reduced considerably.

At one end, is the livelihood rights of the bar dancers and on the absolute other is the moral pressures that operate in multiple ways in public life. The Supreme Court will ideally have to order tighter regulations to make the working environment safer for bar dancers so that they get their deserved payments on time and also the respect that they have long been demanding.

Cinema @ CANNES v/s Glamour @ CANNES

This year, the 66^th Cannes International Film Festival was held from the 16^th-25^th of May and the run up to the festival called in the media to write about it celebrating 100 years of Indian cinema. While Nandita Das and Vidya Balan were on the jury this time, Amitabh Bachchan, Karan Johar, Sonam Kapoor, Zoya Akhtar and many popular faces of Bollywood became representatives of our country like every other year. There was nothing new in that. In fact, in the recent years the Cannes film festival has come to be associated more with glitz, glamour and showbiz rather than with what it started off as---- a show of sheer cinematic beauty from all over the world.

Gone are the days when Mrinal Sen’s  Khandahar, Satyajit Ray’s Pather Panchali (The Song of the Road) and Ritwik Ghatak’s Titash Ekti Nadir Naam ( A River named Titash) and other Indian films would be the show stealer  at Cannes year upon year. They made our country proud by winning the Palme D’Or on many occasions.  The Indian media has sadly shifted its focus from the movies to the glamorous world of who’s wearing what at the red carpet. The actors and actresses featuring in the movies are the show stealers today, and often the independent cinema that should have been the actual focus, takes a backseat. So today, we would all know what Sonam Kapoor wore at Cannes because she is on the front page of the entertainment supplement of every newspaper and fashion magazine; we would know why Sabyasachi Mukherjee designed something ‘unique’ and ‘truly Indian’ for Vidya Balan, but not many of us would know what ‘Monsoon Shootout’, a film by Amit Kumar, which was screened in the Midnight Projection section of the festival is all about. What an absolute contrast this is from the Cannes of the 50s, 60s and 70s!

The Indian media made a big deal about the screening of Bombay Talkies at Cannes as a tribute to the 100 years of Indian cinema but cared too less to write about the low key, simple and touching tale that was the focus of Ritesh Batra’s The Lunch Box which received a standing ovation after its screening. It is the sheer choice to report only the glamorous side of such an esteemed film festival that has left cine enthusiasts in India stunned and bewildered. Is it just the media’s bias or a conscious effort to make fashion the USP of Cannes? 

The media’s coverage of the festival has highly been one sided and even entertainment channels have not bothered to go beyond fulfilling the audience’s demands. It has been showbiz and entertainment all the way- entertainment for the predominantly Bollywood movie watching audience.  We saw the trend setters, the trend breakers and we saw who walked hand-in-hand with whom on the red carpet. Sadly, we didn’t get to see or read much about the absolutely brilliant films that were screened for 12 days at the festival. It makes me wonder if we would,  as consumers of various forms of media be able to wisely differentiate between the Cannes film festival, the Berlin International film festival, and the IIFA Awards in India any more.

  

The media can surely do better. Thus, it is a pity to see that serious Indian cinema at Cannes is dying a slow death in the hands of the media and making way for undeserving and unnecessary glamour.

D.U.’s Four Year Undergraduate Program : A reform for the better or worse?

Last week, I got to know that at least three of my cousins had struggled through the high cut offs of colleges under the Delhi University and successfully made it to the first list of three famous colleges under the university. And then it occurred to me that they would be the first batch of the Four-Year Undergraduate Program (FYUP) that the university has instituted this year onwards. My cousins were super- excited. Frankly, I had mixed reactions to this proposed reform.

The Delhi University, the most esteemed institution of higher education in India, has been open to radical reforms like the four years Bachelor of Elementary Education (BElEd), adopted 20 years ago. The FYUP, being another such radical transformation has raised many eyebrows and invited considerable speculation. It is true that the Indian education system is in dire need of reforms and the FYUP came as a bolt from the blue for students and academicians. With both its positives and negatives being abundantly weighed, this programme is by far one of the major reforms that any Indian university has incorporated. On one hand, students would have loads to take away from the detailed curriculum that has been drawn up. On the other, however, they might find much of what they are studying to be of a higher difficulty level than other universities. A major question in point would be the meticulous design of the syllabi of such a programme and the unique aspects of the courses which it would bring to the table. With 600 disciplinary, interdisciplinary and applied courses falling under the university’s jurisdiction, the curriculum would take at least one year to be implemented.

As a student studying under the University of Mumbai which does not have any opportunity of a FYUP as of now, I went two years back in time to that phase of my life when I had been struggling for admissions. My parents did not have to fear sudden changes in course structures back then as everything had been uniform across universities. They were not afraid of another student at some other university studying the same course as me learning more than me at the undergraduate level and getting better opportunities for research. The strong autonomy of DU has become a cause of apprehension for many students this year because they feel discriminated.

 It isn’t really an alien concept, since many foreign universities do follow this FYUP system; nevertheless this brand new concept has not been welcomed by most people. This reform is indeed an exception in the history of the university. It has created anguish across groups of teachers who have claimed that the syllabus is too random and they are not prepared to teach students in congruence with the contents of the new syllabus. Another question that I had been wondering about was if the FYUP has been implemented keeping in mind all kinds of students- the above average, the mediocre and the not-so- academically inclined one. What kind of students is this program being aimed at? I don’t know much about the syllabus it entails and hence I do have my own reservations about the necessity of such a programme at the undergraduate level. I feel that in a bid to delve deeper into various subjects of study, the course would toughen things up for the 0.5 million students who study under this university.

The FYUP would however, be a pleasant surprise and a huge gain in the long run for those who wish to pursue higher education abroad. Students under this program can complete a two year diploma, a three year general bachelors or a four year honors’ degree. They would become comfortable in a professional framework where covering heavy topics and exploring various avenues of every subject would be their path to success. Needless to say, the amount of knowledge gained would automatically increase and in the long run, that would help them in the pursuit of the social sciences, physical sciences and medicine.  The program would require much higher qualified professional teachers and the campus placement percentage would determine its actual success value.

The financial aspect also has to be looked into with a lot of concern. Students coming from modest backgrounds and with sky high ambitions will obviously want an honors degree but might not be able to pay for the entire program. This phenomenon thus shuts the options that were previously open to them and they may thus veer towards other universities. The Delhi University chancellor and other authorities should thus aim at working towards a stronger and more theoretical curriculum at the post graduate level as this would really upgrade its stakes on the national and international front.

The program has to thus combine general and professional aspects of education to make it more holistic for its students. Most importantly, it has to ensure a healthy level of competition with other universities and guarantee employment across all streams.  It has to keep affordability at the forefront in its annual agenda and invite leading academicians to design the curriculum. It needs to be student friendly and less elitist on paper and also in action. Right now though, it looks a little bleak on the success meter, what with the majority rejecting it in the form of student unrests in various parts of India.

THE WEST BENGAL PANCHAYAT ELECTION FIASCO: Who is stronger: the State or the Election Commission?

The war sparked off even before the election procedure had begun. It was a battle between two of the most powerful institutions in the state of West Bengal- the State Election Commission led by State Election Commissioner Mira Pande and the State Government led by Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee.  While the initial debate centered on whether the elections should be held in three phases or two, it has come a long way since then with Mamata Banerjee putting her foot down on certain significant issues. Finally, the West Bengal Panchayat Elections are scheduled to be held in five phases from July 11^th. In the mean time, our respected Chief Minister’s ‘Ma, Mati, Manush’ slogan went for a toss as she began to concentrate more on getting her way with the Supreme Court and also winning the legal case so that she could do as she pleased.

It wasn’t about people’s welfare anymore as the dates of the Panchayat Election kept getting postponed. First it was the monsoons which were apparently said to become a deterrent to the election process going off smoothly. According to the fixed dates, the polls would begin by July 5^th. But can the government ever be happy? The Mamata Banerjee led Trinamool government kept on appealing to the Supreme Court to revise the poll schedule- an occurrence that was not only redundant but also ridiculous. I mean, is the State going through such severe political and economic turmoil that it cannot conduct simple Panchayat elections smoothly? The people have been waiting to vote and their time has, needless to say, not been valued by the government. Due to the uncertainties in the dates of the elections, the State Election Commission could not issue any poll notification. Considering the fact that elections are not daily occurrences in the livelihood of the people, the government has in this matter failed to plan beforehand. This crisis could easily have been avoided if the Chief Minister had prevented herself from engaging in verbal battles so regularly.

The State Election Commissioner in the light of this situation did predict that delaying the elections could mean an extension of the existing local governments and increased violence among the rural population in the state. But as usual, the choice was to turn a deaf ear to the advice. Due to this silly delay, the University of Calcutta has been forced to postpone its Part-I and Part-II examinations indefinitely, leaving students and their parents perplexed and irritated.

Another bone of contention between the SEC and the State Government was to bring or not to bring security forces from outside the state for conducting the election process smoothly. The WBSEC felt that the polls couldn’t be held properly unless adequate security cover was provided to the normal, sensitive and extra sensitive poll areas. There was a demand for 300 companies of Central armed police forces which the Centre previously declined, and agreed to later on. They would be coming into the states three days prior to the elections, on the 8th of July.

The monsoons have arrived in West Bengal but are yet to gain their usual force. The elections are well, sadly, still in the waiting. Power has neither been distributed judiciously not handled intelligently. The Supreme Court has had to take a firm stand because things were indeed getting out of hand.

The big question however is yet to be asked: Is the Trinamool government even a wee bit interested in consolidating rural support by participating in the Panchayat elections? Considering that in parts of South and North 24 Parganas and East and West Midnapore the Trinamool has a stronghold, it is strange to see how lethargic the government’s attitude has been towards reaching a consensus on the poll dates. Sadly, Kolkata isn’t West Bengal, like Mamata Banerjee believes it to be so. There needs to be some sort of awareness about the state of West Bengal in its entirety and in doing so, the Trinamool government must start at the grass root level. It has to delve deep into each and every area and be able to respond sensitively to various issues plaguing the state.