Confederation of Indian Industry
Since 1895
Social – Development:
A Comparative Study
of Northern States
Confederation of Indian Industry (Northern Region)
Sector 31-A, Chandigarh 160 030
Phone: 91-172-2607228, 2605868, 2602365
Fax: 91-172-2606259, 2614974
Website: www.cii.in
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
1
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 3
1. Interdependence of Economic and Social Development ...................................... 4
2. State of Social Development in NR ......................................................................... 5
3. Healthcare ................................................................................................................. 9
4. Education ................................................................................................................ 14
5. Skill Development ................................................................................................... 17
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
2
“The real wealth of a nation is its people and the purpose of development is
to create an enabling environment for people to enjoy long, healthy and
creative lives”.
-The First Human Development Report, UNDP, 1990
Executive Summary
This paper is an attempt to analyse the progress made by various Northern Region (NR) States
(UT of Chandigarh and States of Delhi, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir,
Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand) on the social development front, as it has a
direct bearing on the economic well being of the people of the region. The key highlights of
analysis on Health, Education and Skill Development in the region are as follows:
•
NR performance on the Human Development Index (HDI) is far from satisfactory. The
UT of Chandigarh ranks 1st and Delhi ranks 4th on the HDI, and are the only two NR
States in the top ten. UP, the most populous State in the country ranks 34, and
Rajasthan another large State ranks 31.
•
What is more worrisome is the fact that the performance of NR States is not improving.
In terms of improvements in HDI scores between 1996 and 2006, Uttarakhand is the
only State amongst the top ten States.
•
The expenditure on health as a ratio of total expenditure varies across NR States. NCT
of Delhi has the highest spending on health- public health and welfare and stood in
2008-09 (RE) at 8.4 per cent to total expenditure of the State. Haryana has one of the
lowest spending of only 3.1 per cent of its total expenditure during the same period.
Spends by Haryana, Punjab and Uttarakhand on health is lower than the average of All
States.
•
The UT of Chandigarh has the highest number of beds available per ten thousand
population and on the other hand, Uttar Pradesh has only less than two beds. Some
States like Punjab, Rajasthan and Jammu & Kashmir need to improve their accessibility
in terms of availability of beds. Punjab has 16 doctors per 10,000 populations, whereas
in case of Himachal Pradesh it is only one doctor.
•
The poor performance of most of the northern region States on the Education
Development Index (EDI) is an indicator of the weak education infrastructure in the
northern States. Also there are significant variations in State-wise performance Delhi
ranks 2nd and Uttar Pradesh is almost at the bottom at 31. Only three States of the
region are in the top ten in the country.
•
On skill development viz number of technicians, engineers and doctors per million
population Northern Region States lag behind their Southern and Western counterparts.
•
Himachal has the highest share of population in age group of 15-24 with formal training
followed by Haryana, Punjab and Delhi. The States which are lagging on this skill
development indicator are Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Jammu & Kashmir.
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
3
1. Interdependence of Economic and Social Development
In a developing economy like India, social infrastructure plays a crucial role in spreading
the fruits of rapid economic growth to different sections of the society. It is a well
established fact that there is a direct positive correlation between the development of social
infrastructure, social sector performance and the level of economic development.
Figure 1.1: Impact of Social Infrastructure on Economic Development
Social
Infrastructure
Health
Education &
Skills Development
Better Accessibility
Higher
Economic
Development
Social Sector
Performance
Better Standard of Living
and Employability
Equity in
Growth Opportunities
Inclusive
Socio-Economic
Growth
Improvement in social sector performance facilitates a fair and equitable distribution of
wealth, income and hence economic assets. It improves accessibility to basic social
services like health and education. In this process, it makes the economic growth of a
country more inclusive and broad based. The Planning Commission of India recently
adopted the Tendulkar Committee's methodology for poverty estimate, which
1
includes spending on education and health besides food , again emphasizing the
linkage between social sector performance and the economic well being of the people.
This paper analyses the progress made by various Northern Region States (UT of
Chandigarh and States of Delhi, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab,
Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand) on the social infrastructure front, as it has a
direct bearing on the economic well being of the people of the region.
1
Expert Group on Methodology for Estimation of Poverty : - Chaired By Prof. Suresh D. Tendulkar
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
4
2. State of Social Development in NR
2.1 Poverty, Income inequalities and Social sector spending
On an average the NR States have fared well as compared to all India averages on these
indicators.
Table 2.1: Social Sector Performance Indicators at a Glance
Poverty
Income Inequality
Spending on
Social Sector@
Gini Coefficient (Income
% of population
Social Sector Expenditure
inequality): 2004-05 (URP)
below poverty line:
(as % of GSDP)
2004-05 (URP#)
Rural
Urban
States/Indicators
Avg 2005-10
Haryana
14.0
0.32
0.36
4.9
Himachal Pradesh
10.0
0.30
0.32
11.7
Jammu and Kashmir
5.4
0.24
0.24
16.0
Punjab
8.4
0.28
0.39
4.4
Rajasthan
22.1
0.25
0.37
9.3
Uttar Pradesh
32.8
0.29
0.37
9.0
Uttarakhand
10.6
39.6
0.28
0.32
Delhi
14.7
0.26
0.33
na
Chandigarh
7.1
na
na
na
All State
27.5
0.30
0.37
5.8*
Note: #URP – Uniform Reference Period, @ includes poverty reduction interventions,
expenditures in the fields of health, education & nutrition and social assistance & social
welfare. * All States as % to GDP
Source: Planning Commission, Reserve Bank of India
2
•
According to the criterion used by the Planning Commission of India, in 2004–
2005, 27.5% of the population was living Below Poverty Line (BPL), down from
51.3% in 1977–1978, and 36.0% in 1993-1994. Among the NR States, Uttarakhand
(39.6%) had the highest level of poverty, as measured by percentage of people
below poverty line, followed by Uttar Pradesh (32.8%) whereas Jammu & Kashmir
(5.4%) had the lowest poverty level in the region.
•
Except UP and Uttarakhand all the percentage of BPL population in other NR
States is less than the all India average.
•
Income disparities measured by the Gini coefficient is high in India. Gini coefficient
in year 2004-05 was 0.30 and 0.37 for rural and urban respectively. Among the NR
States, Haryana (0.32) had the highest income disparity in rural area while in urban
area it was highest in Punjab (0.39).
•
Except Haryana in case of Urban poverty and Punjab incase of rural poverty, all
other NR States fare better than the all India average on income inequalities.
3
2
Criterion used by Planning Commission to determine the poverty level is – for Urban population it is
2100 calories per person per day and for rural areas it is 2400 calories per person per day. It is based
upon consumption basket that derives from 1973-74 Consumer Survey.
3
The Gini coefficient is a measure of the inequality of a distribution, a value of 0 expressing total
equality and a value of 1 maximal inequality
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
5
•
Social sector expenditure as percentage to GSDP is higher in special category
States, Jammu & Kashmir (16.0 per cent) and Uttarakhand (10.6 per cent) as
compared with other non-special category States in the Northern Region.
•
Except Punjab and Haryana, other NR States, for which data is available have
much higher spends on social sector as compared to all State average.
2.2 Human Development Index
As per the United Nations’ Human Development Report 2009, the Human Development
th
Index (HDI) for India in 2007 was 0.612, placing it at 134 position among 184 countries. In
this light, it is important to look at the intra-State disparities that have led to the dismal
performance of India on HDI.
The HDI captures human development in terms of three indicators: health (life expectancy),
education (literacy) and standard of living (per-capita income adjusted for inequality). The
following figures show the level of human development in each of the northern States:
Figure 2.1: Relative Positioning of NR States on HDI Scores 2006
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
Chandigarh, 0.784
Himachal Pradesh,
0.667
Punjab, 0.668
Delhi, 0.740
Uttarakhand, 0.652
Rajasthan, 0.541
Haryana, 0.643
Jammu & Kashmir,
0.590
Uttar Pradesh, 0.528
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
NR States/UTs
Source: Gendering Human Development Indices-2009, Ministry of Women & Child Development
Note: HDI was computed by UNDP and IIPA for Ministry of Women & Child Development
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
6
Figure 2.2: Performance on Human Development Index 2006 –
Rankings of NR States/UTs
Health
Education
Income
Human
S.No. States/Union Territories
Index
Index
Index
Development Index
1 Chandigarh
3
3
1
1
2 Delhi
14
1
3
4
3 Punjab
16
22
7
14
4 Himachal Pradesh
19
19
9
15
5 Uttarakhand
21
16
22
19
6 Haryana
23
24
5
21
7 Jammu & Kashmir
24
27
28
27
8 Rajasthan
30
34
31
31
9 Uttar Pradesh
33
30
34
34
Source: Gendering Human Development Indices-2009, Ministry of Women & Child
Development
Note: Health Index is the Index of ‘A long and healthy life’ based on Infant Mortality Rate
and Life Expectancy at age 1; Education Index is the Index of ‘Knowledge’ based on 7+
Literacy Rate and Mean Years of Education for 15+ age group; Income Index is the Index
of ‘A decent standard of living’ based on Earned Income and HDI is the ‘Human
Development Index’.
States/UT ranked between 1 to 10,
States/UT ranked between 10 to 20,
States/UT ranked between 20 to 35
Decadal rate of improvement in Human Development Index (2006 over 1996) for the NR
States/UTs reveal the following trend:
Figure 2.3: Rankings based on Improvement in HDI Scores
Health
Education
Income
Human Development
S.No. States/Union Territories
Index
Index
Index
Index
1
Uttarakhand
2
2
3
1
2
Himachal Pradesh
19
12
7
11
3
Haryana
17
13
12
15
4
Uttar Pradesh
13
8
33
16
5
Rajasthan
10
16
32
18
6
Chandigarh
29
27
6
22
7
Delhi
27
20
24
26
8
Jammu & Kashmir
18
28
35
29
9
Punjab
28
15
30
30
States/UT ranked between 1 to 10,
States/UT ranked between 10 to 20,
States/UT ranked between 20 to 35
Source: Gendering Human Development Indices-2009, Ministry of Women & Child Development
Note: Rankings are based upon the differential of HDI values for 2006 over 1996
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
7
The tables in the previous page throw up some interesting conclusions:
•
While the NR States have done reasonable well on the Economic Index, with 5
States being in the top ten rank, the performance on Health and Education indices
is not so good. The overall performance is also not very good with only Chandigarh
and Delhi being in the top ten. Two of the largest States in the region, Uttar
Pradesh and Rajasthan rank very low at 34 and 31 respectively.
•
The NR States have also not done well in terms of improvements in HDI scores,
with only Uttarakhand featuring in the top ten on the rankings based on
improvements in HDI scores between 1996 and 2006.
•
The relatively prosperous State of Delhi and UT of Chandigarh rank 4th and 1st
respectively on the overall HDI index, reaffirming the linkage between economic
prosperity and social development.
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
8
3. Healthcare
Inspite of the fact that healthcare industry in India is one of the fastest growing, India’s
healthcare infrastructure has not kept pace with the need. The physical infrastructure is
inadequate to meet today’s healthcare demands, in most States. For instance, India needs
74,150 community health centers per million populations but has less than half that
4
number .
As per the National Heath Account (NHA) (2004-05), the total health expenditure in India,
from all the sources, constituted 4.25 per cent of the GDP. Of the total health expenditure,
the share of private sector was the highest at 78.05 per cent, public sector at 19.67 per
cent and external flows contributed 2.28 per cent. The provisional estimates from 2005–06
to 2008–09 show that health expenditure as a share of GDP has came down to 4.13 per
5
cent in 2008–09 . Of all the dispensaries and hospitals 54 per cent and 73 per cent
6
respectively are privately managed along with voluntary organizations .
Categories
Bigger
States
(Population
above 10
million)
Smaller
States
(Population
below 10
million)
India/States/
Union Territories
Delhi
Haryana
Jammu & Kashmir
Punjab
Rajasthan
Uttar Pradesh
Himachal Pradesh
Uttarakhand
Chandigarh
India
Table 3.1: Health Sector at a Glance
Performance Indicators
Health Infrastructure Indicators
IMR
MMR
CDR
Health
Doctors* Per
Beds per
(2008)
(2004-06)
(2008)
centers
10,000 People
10,000
(2008(2008)
people** (2008)
09)
35
NA
5
49
3
14
54
17
7
2939
2
3
49
NA
6
2367
10
4
41
14
7
3468
16
4
63
48
7
12594
5
5
67
53.8*
8
24726
3
2
44
NA
7
2593
1
12
44
NA
6
2059
NA
8
28
53
NA
21
4
7
16
1,73,770
NA
7
23
4
Source: Registrar General of India, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Medical Council of India
Note: * Allopathic Doctors with Recognised Medical Qualifications (under IMC Act) and Registered
with State Medical Councils in India, ** include only Govt. hospitals
CDR: Crude Death Rate
IMR: Infant Mortality Rate
MMR: Mother Mortality Rate
Health Centers: Includes sub centers, primary health centers & community health centers
It is interesting to note that the smaller States in general have done better on some of the
health indicators including IMR, CDR and beds per 10,000 people.
4
Health Status Indicators 2008-09, Central Bureau of health Intelligence India
Annual Report to the People on Health, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, GoI, September 2010
6
Healthcare in India, Emerging market report – 2007, PwC
5
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
9
3.1 Performance on key health indicators
Infant Mortality Rate: It denotes the number of deaths of infants under one year old in a
given year per 1,000 live births in the same year.
Figure 3.1: Estimates of Infant Mortality Rate (IMR)
Infant Mortality Rate (IMR), 2008
67
63
54
53
49
44
41
44
35
28
12
India
Kerala
Chandigarh
Uttarakhand
Pradesh
Himachal
Uttar
Pradesh
Rajasthan
Punjab
Kashmir
Jammu &
Haryana
Delhi
Source: Registrar General, India and SRS Bulletin, Volume 44, No.1 October 2009.
*IMR for smaller States (HP & Uttarakhand) and UTs (Chandigarh) are based on three years period
2006-08
As can be seen, the best performers among the Northern States on IMR are Chandigarh,
Delhi, Punjab, HP and Uttarakhand. The situation is alarming in UP & Rajasthan, where the
IMR is much higher than the all India average. There is a huge gap between the best
performing States in the region as compared to Kerala which has the lowest IMR.
Crude Death Rate: The Crude Death Rate measures the rate of deaths for every one
thousand people in a given population
Figure 3.2: Crude Death Rate (CDR)
Source: Registrar General, India and SRS Bulletin, Volume 44, No.1 October 2009.
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
10
In India, Crude Death Rate (CDR) has decreased from 25.1 in 1951 to 9.8 in 1991 and
further to 7.4 in 2008. The northern States have also shown the similar trend. However
Uttar Pradesh has a highest CDR as compared to all India average.
Maternal Mortality Rate
The maternal mortality rate is a measure of the number of maternal deaths per 100,000
women of reproductive age in same time period.
Figure 3.3: Maternal Mortality Rate (MMR)
Maternal Mortality Rate, 2004-06
54
48
17
21
14
5
India
Kerala
Punjab
Haryana
UP/Uttaranchal
Rajasthan
Source: Registrar General of India, Special Bulletin on Maternal Mortality in India 2004-06 SRS, SRS
Bulletin – April 2009
MMR = Maternal Death * 100,000 / Live Births
The MMR remains very high in India despite the expansion in health facilities in India. In
northern region, it ranges between 14 in Punjab to 54 in Uttar Pradesh. The high level of
mortality during childbirth or soon after childbirth indicates the inadequacy of facilities
available for antenatal care and deliveries across the country.
Figure 3.4: Life Expectancy at Birth
Note: * UP includes Uttarakhand; the data for other NR States are NA. Life Expectancy of India for
2005-10 periods: Overall (64.7); Male (63.2) & Female (66.4) as per United Nations World Fact Book;
(September 17, 2009)
Source: SRS, Registrar General of India, 2002-06
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
11
According to the data released by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, life expectancy at
birth for Indians is 62 and 65 years for males and females respectively. Punjab has the
highest life expectancy amongst the NR States of which data is available, followed by
Himachal Pradesh and Haryana. Except Uttar Pradesh the female average is higher in all
the States than males. UP also has the lowest Life Expectancy (Male- 60.3 and Female59.5 years) both male and female compared to other States in northern region.
3.2 Healthcare Expenditure
Health outcomes are directly associated with public investment in the health sector. If we
look at health outcomes like Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) and life expectancy we find that the
change has been very slow. This is clearly linked to poor investments in the public health
sector.
Figure 3.5: Expenditure on Medical and Public Health and Family welfare
Source: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India
The expenditure on health as a ratio of total expenditure varies across NR States. NCT of
Delhi has the highest spending on health- public health and welfare and stood in 2008-09
(RE) at 8.4 per cent to total expenditure of the State. Haryana has one of the lowest
spending of only 3.1 per cent of its total expenditure during the same period. Spends by
Haryana, Punjab and Uttarakhand on health is lower than the average of All States.
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
12
3.3 Health Infrastructure
An important indicator of health infrastructure is the number of hospitals, beds and
dispensaries.
Figure 3.6: Number of Hospital Beds and Doctors per thousand population (2008)
Numbe r of Gov e rnme nt Hospital Be ds Av ailable Pe r
10,000 Population
India
4.3
Haryana
3.2
Rajasthan
5.1
Uttar Pradesh
1.8
4.0
Punjab
8.4
Uttarakhand
22.5
Chandigarh
14.1
Delhi
3.6
Jammu and Kashmir
12.3
Himachal Pradesh
Doctors pe r 10,000 Population
7
India
J&K
10
Uttar Pradesh
3
Rajasthan
5
Punjab
Himachal Pradesh
Haryana
Delhi
16
1
2
3
Source: Medical Council of India, IndiaStat
The above figures reveal large variations in health infrastructure (in terms of Government
managed hospitals) in NR States. The UT of Chandigarh has the highest number of beds
available per ten thousand population on the other hand, Uttar Pradesh has only less than
two beds. Some States like Punjab, Rajasthan and Jammu & Kashmir need to improve
their accessibility in terms of availability of beds. Punjab has 16 doctors per 10,000
populations, whereas in case of Himachal Pradesh it is only one doctor.
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
13
4. Education
Education acts as the catalyst for Human Resource Development. Education infrastructure
is one of the most crucial factors for rapid economic growth and improved quality of life.
The foundation of a robust education system stems from the strength of its elementary
education infrastructure. The effectiveness of the elementary education framework holds
the key for a successful future of an economy.
The increased direct involvement of the central Government in strengthening infrastructure
and delivery of elementary education has become a crucial element of the education
system in India. This is important as historically the State Governments have had almost
the complete responsibility for delivering public elementary education. Recently, the Right
of children to Free and Compulsory Education Act was also enacted. As per the Right to
Education (RTE) Act, every child in the age group of 6-14 years will be provided 8 years of
elementary education in an age appropriate classroom in the vicinity of his/her
neighborhood. With the Act being implemented, the State Governments need to get their
act together to deal with issues such as poor student-teacher ratio, poor infrastructure in
existing schools and spiraling dropout rates.
Both the Central Government and State Governments have also given significant
importance to the higher education. The drive for improving higher education infrastructure
stems from the fact that better higher education facilities widen the pool of skilled human
resources. Supplemented by the vocational training institutes, higher education
infrastructure provides means to strengthen the labour market delivery mechanism.
4.1 Education Development Index for Northern States
As per the Educational Development Index (EDI) of Indian States/UTs, the performance of
education sector in NR varies significantly.
The Education Development Index captures the status of education development in the
region across key variables. These variables include indicators measuring access to
education, infrastructure, teacher infrastructure and outcome or performance measures.
Table 4.1: Educational Development Index for NR States/UTs
State / UTs
Score on EDI
Rank
Delhi
0.707
2
Chandigarh
0.690
5
Himachal Pradesh
0.668
7
Punjab
0.608
14
Uttarakhand
0.605
15
Jammu & Kashmir
0.597
16
Rajasthan
0.583
19
Haryana
0.556
23
Uttar Pradesh
0.482
31
Source: National University of Educational Planning and Administration (NUEPA) – 2005-06
There are significant variations in the performance of the northern States on this composite
nd
index. Delhi ranks 2 and Uttar Pradesh is almost at the bottom at 31. Only three States of
the region are in the top ten. The poor performance of most of the northern region States
on the EDI, is an indicator of the weak education infrastructure in the northern States.
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
14
4.2 Education Infrastructure and performance indicators for NR States
In terms of expenditure on education, as a percentage of respective State GDP, only
Chandigarh and Haryana are below the all State average. Chandigarh has the highest
literacy rate in the region while Jammu & Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have been lagging
behind significantly. 4 out of 9 States/UTs (Delhi, Uttarakhand, Rajasthan and Himachal
7
Pradesh) have a Gross Enrolment Ratio above the national average whereas in terms of
8
Pupil Teacher Ratio all NR States fare better than the all State average except UP.
Figure 4.1: Education Infrastructure & spending in the northern States-
Source: Selected Education Statistics, State Budget documents
Figure 4.2: Performance Indicators for Northern States
120
50
45
44
100
40
80
29
33
32
31
27
60
33
35
30
25
25
20
40
15
14
20
10
8
5
0
0
Haryana
Himachal
Pradesh
Jammu &
Kashmir
Punjab
Rajasthan
Uttar
Pradesh
Uttarakhand
Delhi
Chandigarh
All India
Literacy Rate
67.9
76.5
55.5
69.7
60.4
56.3
71.6
81.7
81.9
64.8
Gross Enrolment Ratio
84.8
112.7
88.8
83.6
104.4
96.4
109.3
105.5
90.3
100.5
29
8
14
31
27
44
25
32
33
33
Pupil-Teacher Ratio
Note: Gross Enrolment Ratio pertains to Classes I-VIII (2005-06), Pupil-Teacher Ratio pertains to Higher Secondary
Schools/Intermediate Colleges (2005-06), Literacy Rates (2001)
Source: Census of India 2001, Selected Education Statistics 2005-06
7
Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) is the total enrolment of pupil in grade or cycle or level of education,
regardless of age, expressed as percentage of the corresponding eligible official age group
population in a given school year.
8
Pupil-Teacher Ratio is the number of pupils enrolled in school divided by the number of school
teachers
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
Literacy
Rate
15
Gross
Enrolment
Ratio
PupilTeacher
Ratio
Figure 4.3: Higher Education Infrastructure
Higher Education Infrastructure in NR
1800
1637
1600
1400
1200
1137
1000
751
800
600
400
200
325
232 228
168 169
8
95 83
7
65
169
6
8
0
Haryana
Himachal
Pradesh
Jammu &
Kashmir
Punjab
43
25
Rajasthan
Uttar Pradesh
87
85
19
12 14 3
Uttarakhand
Chandigarh
Colleges for General Education
Colleges for Professional Education*
Universities/Deemed Universities/Institutions of National Importance/Research Institutions
Note:
Data pertains to 2005-06, General Education includes Arts, Science & Commerce Colleges
*Professional Educational includes Engineering, Technical, Arch., Medical, Teacher Training
Colleges and Polytechnics & Others (Law, Management, MCA/IT, Agriculture etc)
Source: Ministry of Human Resource Development, Abstract, Selected Educational Statistics 2005-06
Due to geographical size and higher population base, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan
dominate the other States in the region in terms of number of higher education institutions
including colleges for general education, professional education and universities.
Although the distribution of higher education institutions is concentrated in these bigger
States, but the proportion of colleges for professional education to colleges for general
education is relatively low.
Share of NR in All India for Higher Education Infrastructure
Colleges for
General Education
Professional Education
Univ/Deemed
Univ/
Institutions
of
National
Importance/Research
Institutions
Total
All India
% in the North
11699
9219
26.6
25.5
492
21410
27.8
26.2
Note:
Data pertains to 2005-06, General Education includes Arts, Science & Commerce Colleges
Professional Educational includes Engineering, Technical, Arch., Medical, Teacher Training
Colleges and Polytechnics & Others (Law, Management, MCA/IT, Agriculture etc)
Source: Ministry of Human Resource Development, Abstract, Selected Educational Statistics 2005-06
Also the share of NR in all India Higher Education Infrastructures is much less as compared to its share
in population and expanse.
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
16
68
141
Delhi
18
5. Skill Development
In most developed countries nearly 95% of the youth between the ages of 15 to 25 years,
learn a trade or a skill, in a formal manner. This result in enhanced employability,
productivity improvement and higher efficiency. However, the importance and relevance of
Vocational Education & Training (VET) has not yet been established in India. In India this
figure is less than 1%. If this increases to 5% to 7% of the population (should be taking
some sort of VET program at any given time), it may result in about 50 million to 70 million
9
skilled people every year .
In India, most of the 300 million unemployed youth are not employable. This is because
they do not have skills training. VET will help them in starting small and medium
businesses as well as make them employable. The following table summarizes the current
status of Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs)/Industrial Training Centers (ITCs) in NR:
Table 5.1: Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs)/Industrial Training Centers (ITCs) in NR
Seating Number Seating
Total
Total
Number of
S. No. Name of State/UTs
Capacity of Pvt. Capacity
Seating
ITIs/ITCs
Govt. ITIs
(Govt.)
ITCs
(Pvt.)
Capacity
1 Chandigarh
2
952
0
0
2
952
2 Delhi
16
9,660
56
3,692
72
13,352
3 Haryana
81
19,656
77
6,808
158
26,464
4 Himachal Pradesh
60
6,324
54
4,252
114
10,576
5 Jammu & Kashmir
37
4,087
1
110
38
4,197
6 Punjab
94
19,236
123
10,736
217
29,972
7 Rajasthan
112
11,568
463
40,815
575
52,383
8 Uttar Pradesh
239
29,372
309
35,134
548
64,506
9 Uttarakhand
58
6,315
26
2,294
84
8,609
Total Northern Region
699 1,07,170
1,109 1,03,841
1,808
2,11,011
All India
1,987 4,05,944 4,847
5,26,568
6,834
9,32,512
Source: Planning Commission
As can be observed from the data above, the Northern Region (NR) has a share of 26.5
per cent in terms of total number of ITIs/ITCs in the country whereas in terms of seating
capacity its share is lower at 22.6 per cent.
Figure 5.1: Skill Development Indicators in NR as compared to other regions
North 335
938
1466
South
745
West
3968
No. of Technicians
(Per Mn Population)
No. of Engineers
(Per Mn Population)
1414
East 223 428
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Source: Making North India a Preferred Investment Destination, KPMG, June 2010
9
Social Infrastructure of India: Education & Training, Krishan Khanna, Chairman i Watch
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
17
The North lags the South and the West in terms of skilled professionals across categories
and the gap is significantly large.
Himachal has the highest share of population in age group of 15-24 with formal training
followed by Haryana, Punjab and Delhi. The States which are lagging at this indicator are
Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Jammu & Kashmir that leads to high unemployment rate in
these States.
Table 5.2: Skill Formation among youth 15 - 24yrs: North India
State
Share of State in those
% of youth in State
with Formal Training (%)
with formal training
Jammu & Kashmir
0.4
2
Himachal Pradesh
1
5.6
Punjab
2.8
4.1
Uttarakhand
0.8
3.9
Haryana
2.8
4.5
Delhi
1.7
4.1
Rajasthan
2.5
1.7
Uttar Pradesh
6.9
1.7
Source: National Skill Development Corporation
Disclaimer
The information presented in this document has been prepared by CII. This paper aims to
provide information to the user and care has been taken to make the information as
accurate as possible. However, CII does not make any representation or warranty
regarding the accuracy or completeness of the information and expressly disclaims any and
all liabilities based on such information.
Economic Research & Policy Division – CII (NR)
18