How bihar became so backward and poor,…!

On 27 April 1987, there came a headline in ‘THE NEW YORK TIMES’ newspaper that talked about the poverty and misconduct in Bihar. Hari Charan, a labourer remarks that he hasn’t experienced anything other than poverty. A harijan (Dalit) says that he needs to bribe bank officials to take a loan. ‘India Today’ has described UP in the same manner in a magazine edition in terms of poverty and lack of law and order. In 1960, out of major states, Bihar was last and UP was third last on net domestic product. Bihar is still at the bottom while UP is in the second last position. If we take the multidimensional poverty index, Bihar and UP are similar to that of Congo and Malawi. These latter ones are two extremely poor African countries. Hunger is still common in UP and Bihar. So, let us talk why bihar is backward?

WHY IS BIHAR SO BACKWARD?

Unequal land distribution (permanent settlement act): The major reason behind the lack of development in UP and Bihar is the permanent settlement act that was introduced by the Britishers in 1793. Taxes that the farmer paid constituted the Britishers’ primary source of income. There existed three ways by which the taxes were collected: Zamindari system, Ryotwari system, Mahalwari system. Britishers had used the Zamindari system in UP and Bihar, under which the landlords collected taxes on behalf of Britishers. Because the agricultural output was falling, the tax collected by the British was also falling and they fixed the tax for each zamindar.

Due to calamities, many farmers failed to pay taxes to zamindars. In such cases, the zamindar would confiscate their lands. This started the class-caste conflict. In UP and Bihar, the tax was fixed but in other provinces like Bombay and Madras, the tax was not fixed. The zamindari system was abolished from India in 1947 but it has a negative mark on the progress of UP and Bihar. Zamindari system in 1870 and 1880 led to: Lower agricultural yields in the 1960s Lower literacy rates in the 1980s Higher infant mortality in the 1990s More crime (murder, kidnapping, and rapes in the 1990s).

Lack of investment in agriculture of bihar

In 2002-03, 33% of households in Bihar were landless and 15% of households had less than 400m square of land. This means that most of the land in India is owned by few landlords but people who farm these lands are farmers, smallholders, or laborers. This means that those who work on land have no money to invest and those with money have no reason to invest. And nobody invests in improving farming techniques and that’s why the agricultural sector is not developing. That’s the reason why only 50% of potential land is irrigated in Bihar and only 60% in UP. In the 1980s, many farmers in Bihar and UP started using groundwater for irrigation but it did not lead to a rise in productivity.

The agricultural sector is vital for UP and Bihar because of their heavy dependence on agriculture and the presence of fertile land. Bihar had an advantage over other states during British rule due to its mineral wealth. But the Indian government neutralized this by introducing a freight equalization policy in 1953. Due to this policy, the freight rates of minerals like coal, iron, steel, and cement were made equal all over India. This policy impaired the industrial sector. In 1991, the Indian government canceled this policy but Bihar had fallen behind in terms of development. Private investment had only been about 2% in Bihar while in major states it had been about 16%. With the lack of industrial sectors in UP and Bihar, their citizens have no other option but to work in the agricultural sector. Due to a lack of growth in the agriculture sector, people had to migrate.

Caste- politics of UP and Bihar:

After independence, high-caste elites gained power in UP and Bihar. They had economic and political power. Political parties couldn’t meet the demands of lower castes and weaker sections. So, after the 1970s, these weaker sections started organizing themselves with socialists. This led to the creation of several new political parties such as the Bahujan samaj party (BSP), Samajwadi Party (SP), and Janta Dal. But the political mobilization hasn’t improved the economic prospects of UP and Bihar. The states ranked lowest in the government index consistently. The politics in these two states is tangled in casteism. People give more importance to the caste of candidates rather than their performance. The two states have also suffered from political instability for decades. From 1991 to 2002, UP saw 8 governments and 3 president rules. This means that the governments focused more on surviving their terms rather than bringing ant reforms.

Lack of funds from the center

The central government of India often transfers funds to support the states. But UP and Bihar have received little support. From 1951 to 2012 UP and Bihar received the lowest development funds per capita whereas Haryana, Gujarat, and Maharashtra received double the funds. Lack of funds meant that the two states could not invest in education, health, agriculture, or the industrial sector. As the governments of these states had been unstable, they didn’t have the administrative capacity to collect taxes.

WHAT ARE THE SOLUTIONS TO THESE?

Government can increase land security through land redistribution or other reforms. Land reforms can not only improve the economic performance of these states but also reduce rural conflicts. Increased security of land would make people invest more in theri land. Once the land security improves, the agricultural sector will witness a rise in investment. The government can digitise land records and speed up legal cases.

● There should be greater support from the central government. The British government and Indian central government ignored these states for a long time. So, the government should approve Bihar’s special compensation package.

●Make state industry friendly by improving the investment climate and law and order.

● Use UP and Bihar diaspora working in other states and countries.

● Uttar pradesh should be split to make it more manageable because its population size is the same as that of brazil.

You May Like: https://universalcontent.org/classical-dances-of-india/