TRANSFORMATIVE PLANNING
Legitimatization of Planning Bodies for Development
Gouri Pada Dutta Member, State Planning Board Central Council of Health & Family Welfare, Govt. of India 1/20/2011 12:48:12 AM
In pre-independent India, a National Planning Committee was instituted by the then Congress President Subhas Chandra Bose which was headed by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. This was initiated by poet Rabindra Nath Tagore who wrote to Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhas Chandra Bose to situate such body for India’s prospective development and planning1.
Debate about the mode of governance in any country is assuming a new dimension in recent times. Ancient method of monarchial rule was radically changed after Industrial Revolution in Western Europe. These countries needed colonies for cheap labour, raw materials for production and market for their finished goods. Old system of barter was replaced by finance capital to promote market economy. The colonies were ruled, not governed, by a steel-framed administration to serve the interest of the rulers.
Twentieth century witnessed two world wars. Both were fought to grab colonies. After the First World War a socialist State was established and exhibited remarkable progress in the field of economy and human development. This system promoted development, both socially and economically, by proper planning, initiated and regulated by the State.
The Second World War was also for colony but its hidden objective was to destroy the socialist system. Post Second World War period was the era of liberation of colonial countries. The seeds for destructions of socialist system were sown during the terminal phase of the war, through implementation of Marshal Plan in Europe and Dulles Plan for newly liberated colonial countries. The new rulers of the liberated countries were the product of colonial system and suffered from conceptual dilemma. Patriotism in one hand and aping the systems of the past foreign rulers on the other. These systems are intrinsically champions of capitalism through market economy. These rulers are opposed to State’s dominance for development. The market capital got upper hand after the fall of USSR in 1991 AD.
Indian Situation
After Independence new rulers of India were in a dilemma. The pro-people policy of the socialist system was suitable for them. But they could not free their mindset from the glamour of their previous rulers, specially the material benefits of industrial revolution and phenomenal progress of science and technology later on. Indian politicians decided to adopt a mixed economy for its development which was conceptually translucent. Their ancient heritage promoted by the illustrious sons like Rabindra Nath, Vivekananda, Shri Arabinda and Mahatma Gandhi was conceptually different from the ideas of Bengal/Indian renaissance. Raja Ram Mohan Roy who himself was an enigmatic character amorphously favoured the English Rule. This was supported by the new beneficiaries of permanent settlement and by the persons educated through British System.
Amidst this ambivalent position Indian political echelons adopted planned economy for its development. This exercise failed to recognise the multi-cultural ethnic and geographical variants of this country.
Now Planning Commission of India is an institution of Government of India. Its responsibility is to make assessment of all resources of the country, to augment deficient resources, to formulate plans for the most effective and balanced utilisation of country’s resources, to determine priorities etc. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was its first Chairman as the Prime Minister of India. Since then the Prime Minister of India is the Chairman of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission works under the overall guidance of National Development Council. The Deputy Chairman and the full time Members of the Commission as a composite body provide advice and guidance to Government for the formulation of Five Year Plans, Annual Plans, State Plans, Monitoring Plans Programmes, Projects and Schemes. The Planning Commission has its own in-house Resource Division and a dedicated structured set-up of qualified professionals for each of the subject-specific divisions2.
The Planning Commission was formed by an administrative order of Union Government in 1950 A.D. without any constitutional status3. The responsibilities & terms of reference of Planning Commission at the centre are as follows: One, to make an assessment of the country’s productive resources. Two, to formulate a plan for the most effective and balanced utilisation of these resources. Three, to determine national priorities of development and define the stages of growth and suggest allocation of resources. Four, to indicate factors tending to retard economic development and determine the conditions necessary for the successful execution of the plan. Five, to determine the nature of machinery required for implementation of each stage of the plan. Six, to appraise periodically the progress achieved in plan implementation; and, seven, to make recommendations for its own effective working.
The operative procedure is ill-defined in the implementation of these objectives. The Planning Commission and the Planning Boards have not been provided with adequate infrastructure to work of its own. The Union Government and State Government was administrating the country in the manner of British rulers by the traditional administrators of line departments. In 1956, Panchayati Bill was passed in the Parliament. During Freedom movement a nebulous idea of Panchayati Raj was one of the foremost demands to establish people’s prerogative in the administration. Ironically Panchayat from its inception was deprived of any regulatory power over the traditional administration. Its relation with Planning Commission was ill-defined and ineffectively operative.
To evaluate the effectivity of Panchayat System, Ashok Mehta Committee was set up in 19774. It also failed to recommend regulatory power to Panchayat and Panchayat lost its prerogative to become an instrument of self-governance by the people. It became only another department of the Union and State Governments.
The Planning commission was set up recruiting experts to advise the Union Government. It had little power to dictate line departments and had no infrastructure for independent assessment of resources although it was empowered to allocate funds for line departments of the Centre and also of the States. In pre-independent period the freedom fighters demanded that the Union Government would receive one-fourth of the revenue collected by the States and the States would utilize the rest of the funds. Unfortunately, the ratio was reversed and the States were receiving only 25-30 % of the revenue. Fo the assessment of resources for human and material development, the Commission could utilize Panchayat and Nagar Palika for planning. This could only be done through participatory neighbourhood survey by the people. Instead Planning Commission and Planning Boards, across the nation, had to depend upon the secondary data provided by the line department which was collected by employees and not by the people5.
The developmental plans and projects thus bound to be formulated from top-down manner and were implemented as directives. The recipient and the grass root implementers were seldom taken into confidence. So, their participation became mechanical and casual.
West Bengal Scenario
The State Planning Board in West Bengal was formed in 19726. The first Planning Board undertook various activities in the field of agriculture, irrigation, animal husbandry, forestry, industry, power, transport, science & technology, education, planning and miscellaneous. These endeavours were not sustainable for the causes mentioned above. Planning from grass root was initiated in January 2002 on the basis of procedure prepared in 19857. The modality is
presented in modified form which is
as follows:
Collection of data through participatory neighbourhood survey on :
Human resources based on stratified socio-economic status and gender
Profile.
Education, Employment & Health
Special participation of marginalised people (Scheduled Tribes, Scheduled Castes & Minorities) was solicited.
Natural resource.
Land (along with its character) i.e. cultivable, fallow, marshy & rocky etc.
Water resources of different types.
Forest – character with assessment of forest products.
Shrubs – its scope of utilisation.
Agricultural diversification.
Animal resources including situation & scope of improvement.
Any other relevant information obtained during neighbourhood survey.
Identification of capabilities & efficiency of the local people to evaluate the available resources and their optimum utilisation. They can prioritise for implementation from these informations. People in the country were entrusted to work out the following aspects of development.
Maximum utilisation & prioritisation of the resources through their own planning process.
Assessment and optimisation of their own resources.
Financial supports through Gram Samsads, Gram Panchayats, Zilla Parishads, State and National Schemes and other financial agencies.
The State Planning Board organised several meetings in twelve districts and discussed the principle and modality of planning from the grass root with three-tier Panchayat system. A lot of enthusiasm was created but unfortunately this exercise could not be operationalised because Planning Board was only an advisory body and had little control over the line departments. Moreover, State Planning Board of India had no infrastructure of its own to conduct even a pilot study to collect primary data of resources and plan from the bottom.
Department of Development and Planning undertook the task of preparing Human Development Report of the State involving State Planning Board. The project was supported by UNDP. This exercise was done by collecting secondary data from different level of the administration. The informations were back dated. So, their effectivity for correction of the deficiencies was limited.
District Planning Committees (D.P.C.s) have constitutional authority. Here also planning virtually becomes disbursement of funds coming from State and Union government. The resource mapping at various levels was not done. Thus the exercise becomes mechanical and mostly beaurocratic. The elected members of D.P.C. are not trained for this exercise. The data is collected through National Resource Data Management System (NRDMS). The informations are collected as the investigators desire and not in a participatory manner.
In the first Planning Board of the State the Chief Minister was the Chairman. The Vice-President was a non-official person, who enjoyed the rank of a Cabinet Minister. The full time Members enjoyed the rank of Ministers-of-State. Vice-Chairman was the Minister-in-Charge of Development & Planning. The rank of honorary Members was ill-defined.
The Members of the State Planning Board were assigned to look after the planning process of different districts as well as the functioning of different departments. This became infructuous because there was no administrative order to link up the respective Members with the DPC in the process of planning. Departments were directed to take approval of the State Planning Board for any project costing more than 20 crores. This has become a post-facto approval because Departments seldom consult State Planning Board when the project is proposed. But when it comes to State Planning Board for approval, the project gets progressed to a considerable extent. It has become a ritual practice.
Many other instances may be cited which will explain the futility of this very important apparatus. If the Planning Commission and the Planning Board are to be of any relevance, the following measures should be adopted properly by the State Government as well as by the Union Government.
The Vice-president should be a non-official person with the rank of a Cabinet Minister as it is now at the Centre and the Members should enjoy the rank of Minister-of-State.
Members should be officially linked up with the respective DPC during the process of formulating District Plans.
Connected line departments should involve the responsible Members during the preparation of projects costing more than 20 crores.
State Planning Boards should renew the process of planning from grass root which was undertaken in 2006.
State Planning Board should be provided with adequate infrastructure & funds to undertake Pilot projects for planning & development.
The Planning Commission and the State Planning Boards are not comparable in respect of organizational structure, role and functions. As a matter of fact, an in-house meeting of the State Planning Board may be organized for the kind of role performed by the State Planning Board vis-a vis those of the Planning Commission before any reforms in this area is contemplated.
The plurality in the understanding of the planning process of District plan is an area where State Planning Board could take a meeting of its own, firm-up its common understanding and then sensitize the others.
The planning formulated from Gram Samsad at the rural area & booth committees of Nagar Palikas at urban situation should ensure the resource mapping by participatory neighbourhood survey as stated before. This should be transmitted to Block Planning Committees who will refer it to D.P.C. The State Planning Board being involved at every step would be able to prepare an optimum planning for the State which will be presented to the Planning Commission at the Centre. This proposal if accepted will legitimise the existence of Planning Commission and also the State Planning Boards.
Conclusion
India, like all developing countries, is in a cross-road for its developmental process. Planned development instituted by Socialist Russia had initial success particularly benefiting the erstwhile marginalised people. Subsequently this failed to deliver ultimate solution for human emancipation. The reasons of this failure have not yet been properly analysed.
Imperialism in the pretext of globalisation, Neo Liberalisation and imposition of market economy is bound to impose further misery over the poor countries. The poor people in every country, even in the developed ones, will also be severely affected. A rational solution may be found through a synthesis of both the systems e.g. planned and market economy. This will facilitate the proper function of the planning institution. The developed countries should abandon their aggressive greed for profit through commercialisation of basic human services like health, education & adequate amenities of life. In ancient period countries who achieved acme of glory learnt that material benefit alone fails to provide peace and perfection to the human beings. They taught people to sacrifice so that ultimate emancipation is achieved.
The planning procedure in India should welcome the phenomenal advancement of techno science but it should also pay equal importance on the social aspect of science. The planners at all levels should understand that complete eco-friendly development is impossible but the best planning should attempt to minimise the onslaught on Nature.
A synthesis between the knowledge of the experts and wisdom of a wise common man should provide the solution.
Endnotes
1 Personal communication from Prof. Nipen Bandyopadhyay (Former Researcher, Shantiniketan), Member, State Planning Board, Govt. of West Bengal
2 http://www.idianetzone.com/45/planning_commission_india.htm
3 Planning Commission (India), Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
4 Ashok Mehta Committee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
5 Formation of State Planning Board, West Bengal – The Calcutta Gazette Extraordinary dt. 13th May 1972.
6 wbplan.gov.in/docs/AnnualReport200809/Planning%20Sector.pdf
7 Planning from below by the villagers themselves in Bengali Language:
Published by Panchayat and Rural
Development Department, Governemt
of India.
References and Additional Thinking
• ‘Studies in Bengal Renaissance’, published by National Council of Education, Bengal, Kolkata – 32, 3rd Edition, March 2002.
• State Planning Board, West Bengal (1972-75) Published by State Planning Board, 6, Camac Street, Kolkata.
• ‘Being Indian’ by Pravin Kumar.World Bank Report on Health (1992).
• ‘Promised but not Implemented (Treatise of Health Policy)’ by Dr. Gouri Pada Dutta. Published by Asok Kumar Pal, 53, Creek Row, Kolkata–700014; April 2003.
• ‘People & Power’ (Devolution of power to people through Panchayat in West Bengal) by Dr. Gouri Pada Dutta. Published by West Bengal Voluntary Health Association, 19A, Dr. Sundari Mohan Avenue, Kolkata – 700014; Web:- www.wbvha.org
• ‘Social Issues of Health’ by Dr. Gouri Pada Dutta. Published by Suresh Bhadra, Pratyaya, 24/1B, Creek Row, Kolkata – 700014; April
• Jiboner Aaina (in Bengali) (i.e. Through the Mirror of Life) (collection of essays) by Dr. Gouri Pada Dutta. Published by Kanika Chakraborty, Effect Publication, DC – 116, Narayantala (West) Desh Bandhu Nagar, VIP Road, Kolkata – 700059; 2009 AD
(The views expressed in the write-up are personal and do not re?ect the official policy or position of the organization.)
<
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
*
|
| Name: |
* |
| Place: |
* |
| Email: |
* *
|
| Display Email: |
|
| |
|
| Enter Image Text: |
|
| |
|
