|
on Central and Western Asia |
| By: | Dhas, Albert Christopher |
| Abstract: | Agricultue in India is undergoing a structural change leading to a crisis situation. The rate of growth of agricultural output is gradually declining in the recent years. The relative contribution of agriculture to the GDP has been declining over time steadily. The performance of agriculture by crop categories also clearly indicates the slowing down process of agriculture in India. The onset of deceleration in agriculture began from early nineties and it became sharp from the late nineties. The trends in the area, input use, capital stock and technology also reflect the agricultural downfall and the farmer’s response accordingly. It is alarming that India is moving towards a point of no return, from being a self-reliant nation of food surplus to a net importer of food. All these trends indicate that the agricultural sector in India is facing a crisis today. It is argued that the root cause of the crisis was that agriculture is no more a profitable economic activity when compared to other enterprises. It means that the income derived from these activities is not sufficient enough to meet the expenditure of the cultivators. And therefore, unless agriculture is made a profitable enterprise, the present crisis cannot be solved. The related factors responsible for the crisis include: dependence on rainfall and climate, liberal import of agricultural products, reduction in agricultural subsidies, lack of easy credit to agriculture and dependence on money lenders, decline in government investment in the agricultural sector and conversion of agricultural land for alternative uses. It is argued that the consequence of agricultural crisis in India is very vast and likely to hit all the other sectors and the national economy in several ways. In specific, it has adverse effects on food supply, prices of foodgrains, cost of living, health and nutrition, poverty, employment, labour market, land loss from agriculture and foreign exchange earnings. In sum, it revealed that the agricultural crisis would be affecting a majority of the people in India and the economy as a whole in the long run. And therefore, it can be argued that the crisis in agriculture is a crisis of the country as a whole. Ihe only remedy to the crisis is to do all that is possible to make agriculture a profitable enterprise and attract the farmers to continue the crop production activities. As an effort towards this direction, the government should augment its investment and expenditure in the farm sector. Investment in agriculture and its allied sectors, including irrigation, transport, communication, rural market, rural infrastructure and farm research, should be drastically increased, and the government should aim at integrated development of the rural areas. The solution of the problem is not in a few “packages” but in drastic changes in the present economic policies related to agriculture. No other sector’s growth and development must be at the cost of agriculture. All farmers, agricultural labourers, societies, Government and People’s Organisations should work collectively to revive agriculture and “Save India from Agriculture Crisis”. |
| Keywords: | Agriculture; Agriculture Crisis; Crisis; Agricultural Crisis; agriculture deceleration; slowdown; Farming Crisis; India; Causes; Consequences; impact; Foodgrains; Public Investment; Agriculural Credit; Agriculture performance; Contribution from Agriculture; Agricultural Situation; |
| JEL: | Q1 H50 P17 R5 |
| Date: | 2009–11–30 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:18930&r=cwa |
| By: | Das Gupta, Monica; Shukla, Rajendra; Somanathan, T.V.; Datta, K.K. |
| Abstract: | The central government’s policies, though well-intentioned, have inadvertently de-emphasized environmental health and other preventive public health services in India since the 1950s, when it was decided to amalgamate the medical and public health services and to focus public health services largely on single-issue programs. This paper discusses how successive policy decisions have diminished the Health Ministry’s capacity for stewardship of the nation’s public health. These decisions have introduced policies and fiscal incentives that have inadvertently enabled states to prioritize medical services and single-issue programs over broader public health services, and diminished the capacity of the public health workforce to deliver public health services. Diseases resulting from poor environmental health conditions continue to impose high costs even among the more affluent, and hinder development. There are many approaches to strengthening the public health system, and the authors suggest one that may require relatively little modification of existing structures and systems. They suggest establishing a focal point in the Health Ministry for public health stewardship, and re-vitalizing the states’ public health managerial cadres as well as the grassroots public health workers. The central government could consider linking its fiscal support to states with phased progress in four areas: (1) the enactment of state Public Health Acts; (2) the establishment by states of separate public health directorates; (3) the re-vitalization of grassroots public health workers; and (4) health department engagement in ensuring municipal public health. The central focal point could provide the needed support, oversight, incentives, and sanctions to ensure that states build robust public health systems. These measures can do much to help governments use public funds more effectively for protecting people’s health. |
| Keywords: | Health Monitoring&Evaluation,Health Systems Development&Reform,Population Policies,Disease Control&Prevention,Health Economics&Finance |
| Date: | 2009–11–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:5140&r=cwa |
| By: | Tidiane KINDA (Fonds Monétaire International); Patrick PLANE (Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches sur le Développement International); Mohamed CHAFFAI (Université Sfax) |
| Abstract: | Production frontiers and inefficiency determinants are estimated by using stochastic models. Textile manufacturing is considered for a sample of eight developing countries encompassing about one thousand firms. We find that the most influential individual inefficiency determinants relate to in-house organization. Both access to financing and infrastructural services (e.g. power supply, modern information technologies…) also matter. Information about determinants is then regrouped into three broad categories (e.g. managerial organization, economic environment, institutions) by using principal component analyses. Results do not reject the hypothesis that managerial know-how and the quality of institutions are the most important determinants. The impact of the external economic environment is of less importance although statistically significant. Sector-based simulations are then proposed in order to assess productivity gains which would occur if firms had the opportunity to evolve in most favorable environments within the sample. Domestic and international production contexts are considered, respectively. When referring to domestic benchmarks, the contribution of in-house organization prevails as the main source of gains for the eight countries. The role of institutions proves dominant for Egypt and India when focusing on international simulations. |
| Keywords: | Technical efficiency, external economic environment, firms, institutions, one step stochastic frontier method, organizational know-how, productivity, textile |
| Date: | 2009 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cdi:wpaper:1100&r=cwa |
| By: | Wan, Guanghua; Francisco, Ruth |
| Abstract: | This paper synthesizes factors that could contribute to the failure of basic service delivery to the poor. It also highlights successful projects and good practices from developing Asian countries which may help promote inclusiveness in providing basic social services in developing countries. While both demand and supply factors are discussed, special attention is given to noneconomic factors including institutional deficiencies, the lack of information or awareness, and the multiplicity of basic services. |
| Keywords: | service delivery; social services; poor |
| JEL: | H42 A1 H0 H30 |
| Date: | 2009–04 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:18861&r=cwa |