By Benjamin Lyngdoh
Meghalaya CM Conrad Sangma is good at marketing. That is alright if the marketing pitch is backed by proper infrastructure (like regular supply of electricity). Apparently, he is learning from his bosses in the NDA that the public is a mob who is easily swayed by anything said by the powers that be. Going by the current state of infrastructure, the US$ 10 billion gross state domestic product (GSDP) is nothing but a gimmick. For example, how would the income increase if the economy comes to a standstill during the peak hours of business because of load shedding? Plus, there is no need to feel so Americanised about the figure as it simply means that the GSDP of Meghalaya will double to Rs. 81750 crores by 2028.
There are many who are carried away by the ‘US$ 10 billion’ as if it is something great and that Meghalaya will suddenly turn into a developed economy. Wake up and smell the coffee. Research in development studies has underlined a number of determinants critical for GDP growth. To name a few, they include capital investment, human capital, infrastructure, natural resources, health and education, growth friendly regulation, politics and governance, etc. These are to function in tandem for any economy to grow and develop. If we look at the developed economies of today, we will mostly see a synergy of the determinants. The driving force of their development has been an efficient and effective human resource which is empowered through proper health and education. The education is contemporary to the times and supported with an infrastructural ecosystem which nurtures growth. The development regulations are progressive on the back of a stable and visionary government. If the determinants are in place then growth would be automatic. Instead of focussing on the US$ 10 billion it would be better to start by assessing the ground realities. Stop the vicious cycle of taking new loans to service the old ones. Invest the new loans on building infrastructure like roads and bridges and not on vanities such as festivals. For example, if a loan is used to build infrastructure then the benefit would be long-term, but, if it is used in festivals, etc the result would be over-heating of the economy (hyper-inflation).
The biggest limitation to Meghalaya’s US$ 10 billion economy is capital. Where will the money come from? It is no surprise that CM Conrad Sangma has approached and is planning to further approach the centre for more centrally sponsored schemes. The gimmick is at the mercy of the central government. While capital investment is the key, other areas of natural resources, education and governance are equally important. Tourism (contributing around 7% to the GSDP) is now seen as the driver of growth. As tourism in Meghalaya is nature-based, the manner in which the resources are destructed raises questions on how much and for how long it can continue to contribute towards growth. The natural resources are not being used effectively and sustainably. For example, the possible income from a river/water fall can be much more than mere entry and parking fees. The result is under utilization of potential with extensive destruction of environment. Education is critical for growth as once the people are educated the interface with the government improves. The people become more knowledgeable and aware of the policies and schemes. For example, it is found that the educated lot in the villages feel more empowered to visit the block offices for schemes. This is required to happen on a larger scale. Lastly, if governance in Meghalaya is to go as stated by Deputy CM Prestone Tynsong that schemes will be only for the ones who voted for the NPP then the gimmick is not only unsustainable but also feudalistic.
One of the drivers of growth is transportation. If we turn to Roman Empire, industrial revolution in UK (late 18th century) and industrial revolution in USA (mid 19th century), transportation played a critical role in the growth of economies. The ability to transfer goods at cheap rates was a key to progress in trade and commerce. In industrial revolution, the railways ensured supply of goods across the countries at economical rates. This stimulated entrepreneurship. It improved standard of living and this culminated into growth. The developed economies of today are primarily so due to transportation. In Meghalaya, it is a resounding no to railways. Is it simply due to the concerns over influx, or is it a case of some business houses in Shillong not wanting railways as it would then hit their returns hard? It is difficult to imagine that the state government is not aware of this dynamics! On the other hand, coal mining (so called scientific) is on the verge of resumption. This is nothing but hypocrisy. An intervention that would benefit the many (railways) is not pushed at all, whereas, coal mining which would benefit a few and at the cost of the environment and maybe more lives is hurriedly pushed along to completion. It is apparent that MDA 2.0 is only interested in achieving US$ 10 billion goal. How would it be achieved, would it be holistic, what would its impacts be, etc are not subject-matters of consideration.
There is inequality in Meghalaya which has stemmed from inequity. With 40% of the population being below the poverty line, a strategy is needed on how this doubling of GSDP would carry all in its fold. As of today it can be argued that it would include and benefit only a few. With big business people and politicians owning and controlling majority of the capital/resources, plus a government which is bent on benefiting only those who are in their good books, schemes only for those who voted for them, etc this US$ 10 billion gimmick might turn out as a disaster for the majority.
The way forward is to conduct a proper base-line assessment to understand the demographics and socio-economic status of the people. This is to be tagged with goals of sustaining and reclaiming the environmental resources. Start from the bottom-up. The top-down approach of policy making does not work. Make policies and schemes by interaction with all the grassroots stakeholders. They are the ones who can really give correct and tangible inputs on how a policy might be shaped. Then we may have a practical, workable and people friendly policy. Then only there would be equity whereby those who need more help will get more assistance and vice versa. Meghalaya development has to move from equal distribution of benefits to equitable distribution. For example, schemes with subsidy may be designed in such a way that the really poor may be entitled to a greater share of subsidy. Have more of an affirmative action in the entire process.
In the end, the talk so far by the government is only on economic growth, but, growth is not development. Development is holistic encompassing social, cultural, empowerment, etc aspects. MDA 2.0 is silent on this front.
(The writer teaches at NEHU; Email – [email protected])