PM IAS NOV 14 EDITORIAL ANALYSIS

Editorial 1: The perfect cocktail of layered discrimination

Context

Under the existing formulation of delimitation, there is a grave risk of some ‘unsuccessful’ States becoming the ‘owners of an imperial centre’, imperilling ‘successful’ States.

Introduction

Delimitation, the biggest elephant in the room called the Indian Union, is about to take centre stage. Statesmen such as Indira Gandhi and Atal Bihari Vajpayee appreciated the explosive potential of delimitation and kicked the can down the road, as it were, to be handled by a future generation. Here we are as that future generation. With few questions to ponder like:

• Do we kick the can further down the road?
• Do we detonate it?
• Or do we defuse it?
• We, the people of India, are at a historical crossroad.
• Will India remain a federal union?
• Or will it become an ethno-linguistic majoritarian mega state with minority ethno-linguistic mutinies?

Federalism in India

• Inviolable basic structure: Federalism is part of the inviolable basic structure of the Constitution of India.
  • The Indian Union is a federal union, where States are the federating units.
• Ethno-linguistic homelands: Most States find their basis in language.
  • Many States of the Indian Union are continuations of ethno-linguistic homelands that have existed for centuries or even millennia.
  • The Supreme Court of India has termed States as political units and not arbitrary administrative units.
• Indian unity: Indian unity was forged in the anti-imperialist struggle against British imperialism.
  • This unity continues in independent India through a delicate balance of power distribution between federating units and ongoing dialogue between diverse peoples of the Indian subcontinent.

What is Delimitation?

• Article 82 of the Indian Constitution: Article 82 of the Indian Constitution requires that the number of Lok Sabha seats per State is recalibrated after each Census by the Delimitation Commission, in accordance with the population.
• Historical context: Delimitation last happened based on the 1971 census, when in 1976, the Indira Gandhi government suspended the delimitation process for 25 years, until 2001.
  • It was further suspended for another 25 years by the A.B. Vajpayee government, and would lapse by 2026, unless another amendment is introduced.
• Reason for suspension: The freezing of delimitation was done in order not to disincentive States that were effective in population control.
• Future of delimitation: However, the Narendra Modi government has given hints about undertaking fresh delimitation before the elections in 2029.

Delimitation as a threat

• Definition of TFR: Total Fertility Rate (TFR) is a demographic indicator that estimates the average number of children a woman gives birth to during her reproductive years.
• TFR in Non-Hindi and Hindi heartland states: Even today, TFR of non-Hindi States such as Kerala, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal is in the 1.6-1.8 range, below the replacement level of 2.1.
  • The TFR of Hindi heartland States such as Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, at about 3.5, is well above the replacement level.
  • This has been true for many decades and thus by now, a recalibration via delimitation will mean a radical decrease in the proportion of non-Hindi State seats in the Lok Sabha.
• Impact of delimitation: For example, if delimitation takes place, the proportion of seats in Parliament for the southern States would be reduced from 25% to 17%.
  • The number of seats from Hindi heartland States where the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has electoral dominance would increase from 40% to 60%.
• Disparities in fund allocation: States such as Karnataka, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu already receive only about 30% of the total funds that contribute as direct taxes, while Bihar and Uttar Pradesh receive between 250% and 350% of their overall contribution.
• Finance Commission and disparities: The decision of 16th Finance Commission to include the 2011 Census instead of the 1971 Census to devolve funds to States will be even more discriminatory to developed States.
  • It is cause for worry that continuation of the same pattern would profoundly exacerbate the already existing bias against the non-Hindi States.

Fostering discrimination

• Conception of India: India was conceived as a permanent, multi-ethnic, multi-lingual federal union, and not as a mono ethno-linguistic majoritarianism territory.
• Comparison with China and Russia: The difference with states such as China and Russia is that they are only federal in name, the population being made of a ethno-linguistic group with a majority of upwards of 80% and several other small minority nationalities.
  • In India’s case, however, there never was a majority ethno-linguistic group.
  • India is a federation of various ethno-linguistic stakeholders, none of whom is a majority in India.
• Ethno-Linguistic groups and states: But the major ones among them form the basis of various linguistic States, where they are super majority.
  • But with long-term differences of TFR among States, and thereby, ethno-linguistic groups, this long-settled pattern faces the threat of being unsettled.
• Population changes since 1947: Since 1947, the population proportion of Bengali, Kannada, Malayalam, Marathi, Odia, Punjabi, Tamil and Telugu have all decreased while the population proportion of one language, Hindi, has massively increased, from 36% to nearly 43%; 43% is not too far away from the majority.

Impact of Delimitation on Stakeholdership

• Stakeholdership index: The ratio of Lok Sabha seats allocated to a State to the total number of Lok Sabha seats represents the Stakeholdership Index of a State in matters of the Union.
• Effect of delimitation: Delimitation will reward the non-performers of population control policies that will effectively dominate and determine the policy of the Union.
  • The performers will have a declining say and will be reduced to being mere revenue contributors.
• Disparities in GDP and revenue: The proportion of GDP and revenue from non-Hindi States is much greater than their population percentage while the proportion of GDP and revenue from Hindi States is lesser than their population percentage.
• Post-delimitation impact: Post delimitation, States such as Bihar and Madhya Pradesh, where the BJP is dominant, will have their Stakeholdership Index nearly double, whereas States such as Kerala and Tamil Nadu where the BJP has one to zero seats will see it being reduced by 30%-40%.
  • Such a situation would skew Indian democracy in favour of the Hindi States, with other regions risking a loss of electoral dominance.
  • Without electoral dominance and representation in the Union, this would further alienate the non-Hindi states.

Consequences of Delimitation

• Layered discrimination: Thus, the implementation of delimitation will create the perfect cocktail of layered discrimination:
  • Non-Hindi States that have implemented population control measures successfully will lose a say in Union affairs.
  • Non-Hindi States that contribute a majority of GDP, resources, revenue and taxes will lose say in how their monies are used.
  • The ‘unsuccessful’ will create policies for the ‘successful’ with money from the ‘successful’.
• “No Taxation Without Representation”: No taxation without representation was the cry in the Boston Tea Party.
  • In a similar vein, delimitation will further shrink the representation of States that produce taxes.
  • This is a very risky and dangerous path to pursue.
  • There is no place for any system in India where some States increasingly look like owners of an imperial centre while others mimic colonies.
• Balancing constitutional values: Therefore, it is necessary to balance two competing constitutional values:
  • formal equality in voting
  • federalism.

Way Forward: Possible solutions

There can be many solutions.

• Extend the Freeze on Delimitation: Just follow what Mrs. Gandhi and A.B. Vajpayee did and extend the freeze by another 25 years and defer to a future generation.
• Permanently Freeze Delimitation: Permanently freeze delimitation as far as the India-wide redistribution of seats across States is concerned.
• Proceed with Delimitation, but with a New Federal Compact: Go through with delimitation as envisaged.
  • Supplement it with a long-due new grand federal compact:
    • Abolish the Concurrent List in favour of an expanded State list.
    • Vest all residual powers to the States.
    • Make a large-scale transfer of subjects from the Union list to the State list.
    • Keep external defence, external affairs, and currency in Delhi’s hands.
  • This would balance delimitation with decentralisation, softening the majoritarian blow inherent in delimitation.
• Increase the Number of Seats per State: Preserve the present seat proportion between States in the Lok Sabha.
  • Increase the number of seats in each State to partially offset the representational deficit of population explosion States.

Conclusion

India is a unique experiment. It is not an ethnic-linguistic majoritarian empire like Russia or China. It is not a mono-linguistic nation state such as Bangladesh and Thailand. India is like Africa or Europe, a tapestry of languages, ethnicities, cultures, civilisations and faiths, but with a crucial difference. It is bound in an inseparable political Union born in the crucible of anti-imperialist struggle with one, unified voice when speaking to others. India is the grandest experiment of plurality in modern human history. Majoritarianism and partisanship cannot be allowed to undo it and threaten its unity. History will not forgive us.

Editorial 2: The impact of Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana in Jammu and Kashmir

Context

Expanding the network of LPG distribution points in rural areas and extending financial support for refills could further increase clean fuel adoption.

Introduction

The International Energy Agency says about 681 million people in India rely on solid fuels for cooking. This poses series health and environmental concerns. The Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY) aims to promote the adoption of clean fuel by providing subsidised LPG connections to poor households. So far, the government has provided 10.3 crore LPG connections under this scheme. We studied the impact of the scheme in Jammu and Kashmir.

Key Details of The Study

• Survey overview: The study utilises primary survey data from 820 households across 48 villages in the districts of Kulgam and Rajouri, which are relatively disadvantaged.
• Sampling methodology: A systematic random sampling method was employed, with 24 villages selected from each district, ensuring coverage of all the tehsils within the districts.
  • The number of villages chosen from each tehsil was proportional to its population size.
• Representation of economic categories: The survey design ensures representation from different economic categories, including
  • Above Poverty Line (APL),
  • Below Poverty Line (BPL), and
  • Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY) households.
• Survey participants: Comprehensive questionnaires were administered to female household members who were responsible for cooking.

LPG connection adoption

• LPG connections: We found that in the rural areas of J&K, 85.07% of the households have official LPG connections.
  • Nearly 68% of these were procured under the PMUY.
  • Only 4.41% of households in rural areas, particularly in hilly regions such as Rajouri (in Jammu), do not have access to LPG.
  • 10.53% rely on unofficial connections.
• Traditional cooking methods and fuel stacking: Despite this substantial increase in LPG availability, traditional cooking methods remain pervasive:
  • About 92% of the households still maintain traditional chulhas.
  • 85% of the households engage in fuel stacking, using both solid fuels and LPG.
  • This pattern is reflective of cultural attachment to traditional cooking methods, as well as the problem of affordability, which limits exclusive reliance on LPG.

LPG Usage and Consumption Patterns

• Average LPG consumption: The average number of LPG cylinders consumed per household in the last six months is 3.56, which indicates moderate usage.
  • In Kulgam, the PMUY beneficiary households reported a higher adoption rate (3.54 cylinders) than eligible non-PMUY consumer households (3.21).
  • In Rajouri, the adoption rate among PMUY beneficiary households is lower than general consumer households.
• Solid fuel usage: The reliance on solid fuels such as firewood, with an average consumption of 226 kilogrammes per household in six months, reflects the dual-use cooking system.

Health Benefits of PMUY

• One of the primary objectives of PMUY is to alleviate the health burden on women by reducing their exposure to indoor smoke from traditional cooking fuels.
• The survey revealed significant health benefits for women in households that adopted LPG under the PMUY, in Kulgam.
  • Among BPL households, the incidence of respiratory problems, such as coughing, chest infections, and headaches, showed a marked reduction.
  • Non-PMUY beneficiary BPL households reported a 24% incidence of coughing during the one-month period immediately preceding the data collection, while PMUY beneficiaries saw a drop to 21%.
  • The reduction is even more significant in AAY households, where non-beneficiaries reported a 13% incidence of coughing, but beneficiaries saw it drop to 10%.
  • Similar trends were observed for headaches and chest infections.

Influence of Additional Appliances and Education on Health

• Households with additional appliances such as rice cookers, and educated members, also experienced better health outcomes:
  • For instance, PMUY beneficiaries with rice cookers reported a reduced incidence of coughing (20%) compared to non-beneficiaries.
• Households where the main cook had secondary or above education saw the incidence of chest infections drop to 4% among BPL households.

Barriers to exclusive LPG usage

• Lack of Awareness: However, certain barriers continue to hinder exclusive reliance on clean cooking fuel. The first is the lack of awareness about the health benefits of LPG.
  • In the survey, 47% of the households were unaware of the health risks associated with solid fuel use.
  • This is compounded by the fact that 64% of the households do not own a TV, and 33% of households reported that the female members responsible for cooking do not possess a mobile phone.
  • These gaps in communication highlight the need for targeted awareness campaigns.
• Financial Barrier: The second barrier is financial.
  • The cost of refilling LPG cylinders remains a burden for many households.
  • This often leads to fuel stacking, where households resort to cheaper but more harmful solid fuels.
  • Fuel stacking remains prevalent in 85% of the households, underscoring the need for more comprehensive financial support to make LPG refills more affordable.

Way Forward

Role of Awareness and Access to Modern Appliances

• Awareness of Health Benefits: The study highlights the importance of awareness and access to modern appliances in promoting clean fuels.
  • Households with greater awareness of health benefits of LPG reported higher LPG consumption (3.73 cylinders on average) and lower firewood consumption (216 kg) compared to those without such awareness.
• Perception of Taste Difference: Also, households that did not perceive a taste difference between food cooked on LPG and traditional fuels were more likely to rely solely on LPG, with an average consumption of 4.27 cylinders.
• Availability of Rice Cookers: The availability of rice cookers correlates with a higher LPG usage (3.59 cylinders) as compared to households without these appliances.

Conclusion

While we have seen that PMUY has improved LPG access in J&K, barriers like lack of awareness and financial constraints hinder the exclusive LPG use. Increased awareness, financial support, and better access to modern appliances are essential for further promoting clean fuel adoption and improving health outcomes.