Creation of smaller states and its administrative, economic & developmental implications.
Creation of smaller states and the consequent administrative, economic and developmental implications.
“India is a Union of states”- Article 1 of Indian Constitution. This means that states were created for administrative convenience. States have no right to secede from the union and hence state do not have a say in their creation. The demands for a separate state rose because of underdevelopment of certain regions of the country. But, it is not necessary that these demands are always justified. It is for national benefit that smaller states are formed.
We need to know, why should smaller states be formed in the first place, before under-standing its consequences. There are certain parameters for creation of a new state, these can be categorised as following. There should be a proper machinery set up in the state that can carry out administrative functions after formation of a new state. The re-gions which are taken for formation of the new state should have similarity, keeping heterogeneous culture under one label will create a problem. The state should have the resources which can make it economically viable to survive on its own revenue. Ulti-mately, the country belong to its people, so people’s aspiration should be given a due share in the making of a new state.
People ask for a separate state based on linguistic terms too, which is a disaster for de-mocracy. When India boast about unity in diversity, how can smaller states be created just on linguistic lines? Such creation will instigate demands for other smaller states. Just imagine, India has more than 700 local languages, dialects, etc. How can we divide and justify such demands? According to me, the creation of smaller state is farce in itself, leave alone its consequences.
It will be easier and better to administer a small region. It will have a direct eye from the head of state, i.e CM. Smaller region will get better control and grip on minute is-sues of development, more specificity in administration is possible then.
But, India being a union of states, for smooth working of centre-state relations, there is a bias of powers in the favour of centre. Such division is mentioned in the constitution.
The creation of smaller states will dilute the central’s control, as there will be numerous smaller units to keep a check on, and hence more work for already burdened centre. It will have serious consequences on federal structure of the country and ultimately lead to poor administration.
Also, we cannot always cure poor administration by making new states. Jharkhand, formed in 2000, has gone worse due to political instability.
However, I do not understand how it will create much difference at the ground level. In fact, there is already a proper system including Gram Panchayat, District Collector, etc. to administer the smaller regions within state. This machinery, which works at the ground level will still be the same and ultimately will be at the functional end of govern-ance. The creation of smaller states wont improvise much as the system of checks and balances is already in place.
Economic development need to be given its due share. Actually, liberal thinking explains it more clearly. Formation of states gives more funds to a smaller region, and hence people expect more development. But, there is no direct relation between formation of smaller state and improvement in the economic conditions. More funds give more leak-age in the system and hence corruption.
There can be better evaluation of natural resources, which was not present earlier. As seen during formation of Chattisgarh, it was the energy generating source of M.P. Chat-tisgarh benefitted a lot as now it was selling the same electricity to M.P. which was free earlier. But, mostly it depends on political will and the government. How much they want to utilise them for development, else a state can go down in smuggling of re-sources and environment issues due to improper regulation authority. Other resources like handicrafts, native culture of the place may get boost as a smaller state will get a different identity and more interest for its uniqueness. This may bring about develop-ment of the backward classes of the society too, as the focus will be on smaller number of people.
More avenues for employment will be open in the state with more infrastructure, as it has been formed recently.
Development will be a mixture of social, economic, political and other factors, it will be the end result. According to simple theory, it is easily concluded — smaller state—more funds—better spending—more vigilance—more development. But, reality does not work in the same manner.
Although, I do not believe that issue of development will get a remedy in small states.
Development is a big term and it will require participation of many actors. It could go either way, it may instigate demands across the country for formation of smaller state, hence creating unrest and disturbing society.
The smaller state may loose the benefit it was getting from the being a part of big state, like non-payment of certain duties, getting benefits of state schemes and getting re-sources unavailable within the smaller state from the bigger state, now it will have to buy them from other state. This may create burden on already strained new economy of the small state.
But at the same time it can be boon for the smaller region as it do not need to take load of the complete region. Now a small state can develop based on its own resources.
Or, it can be an irony for the country, that even after taking steps for balanced regional development, the most resource rich regions are the least developed.
It clearly shows that a lot of will and other ingredients are required for development and not just a spree of creating smaller regions.
States have been given ‘special status’ by the central government. States are provided monetary help irrespective of their size,but still they figure low on development. Reducing the size of states cant be a panacea for all problems concerning underdevelopment, language differences, regional identity, etc. of a people. Such a solution will only create differences between people. But it is also not easy to overcome these differences. It will require a strong commitment on both sides; of people and the government to devise other ways to solve these problems and to work for good of all.
- RE: Creation of smaller states and its administrative, economic & developmental implications. -Dileep (12/17/15)
- Too much negative view. It should be balanced. How can you say creation of linguistic states as a disaster?