Demand for creation of New States in India - Political Management or Development Management?

By: Kirti Saini

India is a nation of different cultures and different religions. You move a few hundred kilometres and you feel the change in culture and language. Still it is united because of its citizens. But, the demand for creation of new States is recurring ever since Independence. Currently, there are demands for creation of at least 10 more new States. The basic questions which arise here are:

Why do demands for smaller states and bifurcation arise?

Emotional considerations play major role in this - like culture, language, religion and a sense of economic and regional deprivation.

Greed of politicians is also a factor. They envision additional posts of power as chief ministers or ministers, leaders of the opposition, Assembly speakers and so on. Similarly, government servants think of becoming chief secretaries or secretaries, DGs of police, chief-engineers, Directors and so on.

Apart from this a common notion is that a larger share of central funds would flow into a new state compared to when it is a region in a larger state, many believe that a new capital city would provide better living conditions. Arguments are set forth that a smaller state with less number of districts would diminish the span of control of state-level functionaries. And that reduced distances between the state capital and peripheral areas would improve the quality of governance and administrative responsiveness and accountability.

Another argument which comes in support of this demand is better Administration. When a democratically elected political party would lead a small area of people it would be administrated appropriately and without the scope of any flaws and also give people better exposure and a great chance to perform well in various fields.

Besides, it is believed that in the ever growing Indian economy if a state is small and then any government employee or law maker or politician does some fraud, immediately it will show the effect on the other projects as it will become very difficult for that chief minister to bring new funds or hide his black deeds. Small states will not give chances to their leader to hide his failure or fool the people by saying that this time we have given funds to west or north, as small state means the population will know in real what is happening in every part of his state.

Why these demands should be answered as a big NO?

Various problems which form the reasons for division can have alternate solutions without actually dividing. 

Better administration can easily be achieved with strong regional administrative units in larger states. Much more than the size of a state, it is the quality of governance and administration, the diverse talent available within the state’s population, the leadership’s drive and vision that determine whether a particular state performs better than the others.

Today technology can help make governing larger territories easier and bring even far-flung areas closer. In the recent times both large and small states have fared well and hence proved that poor performance is not necessarily linked to size.

Apart from that, a small state is likely to face limitations in terms of the natural (physical) and human resources available to it. Moreover, it will lack the kind of agro-climatic diversity required for economic and developmental activities. It would also be restricted in its capability to raise resources internally. All these factors would only make it more dependent on the centre for financial transfers and centrally-sponsored schemes. Further, increasing the number of states in the country would expand the span of control of the central ministries dealing with states and of party high commands dealing with state party units. A new small state may also find itself lacking in infrastructure (administrative and industrial), which requires time, money and effort to build.

These demands can not resolve issues faced by various regions and sections of society. Larger states are in fact, more economically- and financially-viable and better capable of serving people and achieving planned development.

Moreover, creation of small states will divide India into even more and more parts which can lead to hatred, internal problems and inter state cold wars as we see now days. Plus, there’s no guarantee that small states will lead to progress and development only.

What is to be taken care of?

Socially,  the new States should be provided with a healthy environment and standard of living, according to the past evidences a few new states excelled on health and literacy grounds compared with their parent States. But, after a decade, however, the pendulum swung in favour of the parent States. Therefore, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Uttaranchal fared worse than their parent States. In the case of education, too, the parent states have made relatively better progress in the last decade. However, the newly created States retained their initial advantage. Therefore, Uttaranchal had the best health and educational achievements of all the six States under consideration in 2011.

Economically, growth depends on a host of factors such as natural resources, availability of social and physical infrastructure, demographic characteristics and the political environment which Jharkhand did not possess. We can take an example of the output growth of Chhatisgarh and Uttarakhand, which exceeded that of their parent States, but in the case of Jharkhand it was the reverse because of these reasons.

Politically, a stable and well managed political atmosphere should be provided or else decisions may back fire. For example, Jharkhand has witnessed maximum political instability since its creation. Apart from Presidential rule being imposed twice, Jharkhand has been served by eight chief ministers between 2001 and 2012. The state has not achieved any major developmental outcome and is a failure whereas Chhattisgarh and Uttaranchal have changed for better.

The answer to the question whether this Division can be counted under Political Management or Development Management ranges and changes from person to person. A few objectives would fulfil the political greed and some would help the general public. Besides, Division is not a sure shot success formula for Development. The creation of a new state is a decision with far fetched consequences. Whether or not it should be taken is subjective but it must never only be a political decision.